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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2018 Jun;18(6):657-665.
doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30113-0. Epub 2018 Mar 20.

Immunogenicity of type 2 monovalent oral and inactivated poliovirus vaccines for type 2 poliovirus outbreak response: an open-label, randomised controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Immunogenicity of type 2 monovalent oral and inactivated poliovirus vaccines for type 2 poliovirus outbreak response: an open-label, randomised controlled trial

Khalequ Zaman et al. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Monovalent type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (mOPV2) and inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) are used to respond to type 2 poliovirus outbreaks. We aimed to assess the effect of two mOPV2 doses on the type 2 immune response by varying the time interval between mOPV2 doses and IPV co-administration with mOPV2.

Methods: We did a randomised, controlled, parallel, open-label, non-inferiority, inequality trial at two study clinics in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Healthy infants aged 6 weeks (42-48 days) at enrolment were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive two mOPV2 doses (each dose consisting of two drops [0·1 mL in total] of about 105 50% cell culture infectious dose of type 2 Sabin strain) at intervals of 1 week, 2 weeks, 4 weeks (standard or control group), or 4 weeks with IPV (0·5 mL of type 1 [Mahoney, 40 D-antigen units], type 2 [MEF-1, 8 D-antigen units], and type 3 [Saukett, 32 D-antigen units]) administered intramuscularly with the first mOPV2 dose. We used block randomisation, randomly selecting blocks of sizes four, eight, 12, or 16 stratified by study sites. We concealed randomisation assignment from staff managing participants in opaque, sequentially numbered, sealed envelopes. Parents and clinic staff were unmasked to assignment after the randomisation envelope was opened. Laboratory staff analysing sera were masked to assignment, but investigators analysing data and assessing outcomes were not. The primary outcome was type 2 immune response measured 4 weeks after mOPV2 administration. The primary modified intention-to-treat analysis included participants with testable serum samples before and after vaccination. A non-inferiority margin of 10% and p=0·05 (one-tailed) was used. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02643368, and is closed to accrual.

Findings: Between Dec 7, 2015, and Jan 5, 2016, we randomly assigned 760 infants to receive two mOPV2 doses at intervals of 1 week (n=191), 2 weeks (n=191), 4 weeks (n=188), or 4 weeks plus IPV (n=190). Immune responses after two mOPV2 doses were observed in 161 (93%) of 173 infants with testable serum samples in the 1 week group, 169 (96%) of 177 in the 2 week group, and 176 (97%) of 181 in the 4 week group. 1 week and 2 week intervals between two mOPV2 doses were non-inferior to 4 week intervals because the lower bound of the absolute differences in the percentage of immune responses were greater than -10% (-4·2% [90% CI -7·9 to -0·4] in the 1 week group and -1·8% [-5·0 to 1·5] in the 2 week group vs the 4 week group). The immune response elicited by two mOPV2 doses 4 weeks apart was not different when IPV was added to the first dose (176 [97%] of 182 infants with IPV vs 176 [97%] of 181 without IPV; p=1·0). During the trial, two serious adverse events (pneumonia; one [1%] of 186 patients in the 1 week group and one [1%] of 182 in the 4 week group) and no deaths were reported; the adverse events were not attributed to the vaccines.

Interpretation: Administration of mOPV2 at short intervals does not interfere with its immunogenicity. The addition of IPV to the first mOPV2 dose did not improve poliovirus type 2 immune response.

Funding: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests

MSO reports grants from Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and royalties to institution for licensing of enterovirus and parechovirus strains for redistribution as reagents or controls from Zeptometrix outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:. Trial profile
mOPV2=monovalent oral poliovirus vaccine type 2. IPV=inactivated poliovirus vaccine.
Figure 2:
Figure 2:. Reverse cumulative distribution and boxplot of poliovirus type 2 titres following varying schedules of mOPV2 with or without IPV
(A) Titres following two doses of mOPV2 given at a 1 week or 2 week interval versus a standard 4 week interval. Inset of boxplot compares median and IQR of type 2 titres. (B) Titres following two doses of mOPV2 (4 week group) versus two doses of mOPV2 with one IPV dose (4 week plus IPV group). Inset of boxplot compares median and IQR of type 2 titres. (C) Titres following one dose of mOPV2 (4 week group) versus one dose of mOPV2 with one IPV dose (4 week plus IPV group). Inset of boxplot compares median and IQR of type 2 titres. (D) Titres following one dose of mOPV2 versus following two doses of mOPV2 administered at a 4 week interval in the same participants (4 week group). Inset of boxplot compares median and IQR of type 2 titres. y axes show proportion of participants with antibody titres equal to or greater than that represented on the x axis. mOPV2=monovalent oral poliovirus vaccine type 2.

Comment in

References

    1. Dowdle WR, Cochi SL. Global eradication of poliovirus: history and rationale. In: Semler BL, Wimmer E, eds. Molecular biology of picornaviruses. Washington, DC: ASM Press, 2002: 473–80.
    1. Sutter RW, Kew OM, Cochi SL, Aylward RB. Poliovirus vaccine—live. In: Plotkin SA, Orenstein WA, Offit PA, eds. Vaccines 6th edn. China: Elsevier, 2013: 598–645.
    1. Caceres VM, Sutter RW. Sabin monovalent oral polio vaccines: review of past experiences and their potential use after polio eradication. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33: 531–41. - PubMed
    1. Birmingham ME, Aylward RB, Cochi SL, Hull HF. National immunization days: state of the art. J Infect Dis 1997; 175 (suppl 1): S183–88. - PubMed
    1. Cochi SL, Linkins RW. The final phase of polio eradication: new vaccines and complex choices. J Infect Dis 2012; 205: 169–71. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

Associated data