Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 Apr 5;4(2):ofx066.
doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofx066. eCollection 2017 Spring.

Rotavirus Vaccine Schedules and Vaccine Response Among Infants in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

Joann F Gruber  1 , Lucinda M Gruber  2 , Rachel Palmieri Weber  3 , Sylvia Becker-Dreps  4 , Michele Jonsson Funk  1
Affiliations
Review

Rotavirus Vaccine Schedules and Vaccine Response Among Infants in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

Joann F Gruber et al. Open Forum Infect Dis. .

Abstract

Background: Rotavirus vaccine schedules may impact vaccine response among children in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Our objective was to review the literature evaluating the effects of monovalent (RV1) or pentavalent rotavirus vaccines schedules on vaccine response.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov for eligible trials conducted in LMICs comparing ≥2 vaccine schedules and reporting immunologic response or efficacy. We calculated seroconversion proportion differences and geometric mean concentration (GMC) ratios with 95% confidence intervals.

Results: We abstracted data from 8 eligible trials of RV1. The point estimates for seroconversion proportions difference ranged from -0.25 to -0.09 for the 6/10-week schedule compared with 10/14. The range for the 6/10/14- compared with 10/14-week schedule was -0.02 to 0.10. Patterns were similar for GMC ratios and efficacy estimates.

Conclusions: The commonly used 6/10-week RV1 schedule in LMICs may not be optimal. Further research on the effect of rotavirus schedules using clinical endpoints is essential.

Keywords: infant; rotavirus; vaccine; vaccine schedule; viral gastroenteritis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
One-month seroconversion proportion differences comparing different monovalent (RV1) rotavirus vaccine schedules from 5 trials conducted in low- and middle-income countries with concomitantly administered oral polio vaccines unless otherwise indicated. *RV1 viral concentration 105.6; †Estimated sample size used; ‡Concomitant inactivated polio vaccine; §2-month seroconversion difference. CI, confidence interval.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
One-month ratios of geometric mean concentrations comparing different monovalent (RV1) rotavirus vaccine schedules from 5 trials conducted in low- and middle-income countries with concomitantly administered oral polio vaccines unless otherwise indicated. *RV1 viral concentration 105.6; †Estimated sample size used; ‡Concomitant inactivated polio vaccine; §2-month ratio of GMCs. CI, confidence interval; GMC, geometric mean concentration.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Meeting of the immunization Strategic Advisory Group of Experts, April 2009--conclusions and recommendations. Wkly Epidemiol Rec 2009; 84:220–36. - PubMed
    1. Path. Rotavirus vaccines overview Available at: http://sites.path.org/rotavirusvaccine/country-introduction-maps-and-spr... Accessed 24 August 2016.
    1. GlaxoSmithKline. Highlights of Prescribing Information: Rotarix (Rotavirus Vaccine, Live, Oral. Available at: https://www.gsksource.com/pharma/content/dam/GlaxoSmithKline/US/en/Presc.... Accessed 9 May 2017.
    1. Merck & Co. Inc. Highlights of Prescribing Information: RotaTeq (Rotavirus Vaccine, Live, Oral, Pentavalent. Available at: https://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/r/rotateq/rotateq_pi.pdf. Accessed 9 May 2017.
    1. Madhi SA, Cunliffe NA, Steele D, et al. Effect of human rotavirus vaccine on severe diarrhea in African infants. N Engl J Med 2010; 362:289–98. - PubMed