The Impact of Differential Antiviral Immunity in Children and Adults

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Impact of Differential Antiviral Immunity in Children and Adults REVIEWS The impact of differential antiviral immunity in children and adults Andrew J. Prendergast1, Paul Klenerman2 and Philip J. R. Goulder3 Abstract | The course of immune maturation has evolved to favour survival at each stage of development in early life. Fetal and neonatal immune adaptations facilitate intrauterine survival and provide early postnatal protection against extracellular pathogens, but they leave infants susceptible to intracellular pathogens such as viruses that are acquired perinatally. This Review focuses on three such pathogens — HIV, hepatitis B virus and cytomegalovirus — and relates the differential impact of these infections in infants and adults to the antiviral immunity that is generated at different ages. A better understanding of age-specific antiviral immunity may inform the development of integrated prevention, treatment and vaccine strategies to minimize the global disease burden resulting from these infections. infancy Infancy The period from fetal development to early is one Antiretroviral drugs given to mother and infant The first year of life. of vulnerability to maternal transmission of viral infec- decrease transmission substantially. Nonetheless, more tions. Mother-to‑child transmission of viruses can occur than 1,000 infant infections occur daily, predominantly in utero, at birth (intrapartum) or postnatally. Viral in sub-Saharan Africa, as a result of suboptimal ante- infections acquired at this time are often characterized natal HIV testing, inadequate coverage of prevention by higher levels of viral replication, a greater risk of per- strategies for mother-to‑child transmission and the sistent (chronic) infection and more severe disease com- overall benefits of prolonged breastfeeding (that is, in pared with those acquired in later life. In this Review, we developing countries, breastfeeding reduces the risk of focus on chronic infections with three viruses — HIV, death from gastrointestinal and respiratory tract infec- hepatitis B virus (HBV) and cytomegalovirus (CMV) — tions, which is sufficient to outweigh the increased risk each of which can be acquired through mother-to‑child of death from HIV transmission by breast milk)1. transmission. These viruses cause a substantial burden HIV-infected infants progress to disease more rap- of disease globally and illustrate the differences between idly than adults (TABLE 1). Without treatment, the median the antiviral immune response in early life and in adult- times to AIDS and death in adults are approximately 10 3 1Centre for Paediatrics, hood. In each case, host control of the virus is highly and 11 years from infection, respectively . In infected chil- + Blizard Institute, Queen Mary dependent on age at acquisition. We discuss how differ- dren without treatment, the CD4 T cell count declines University of London, Newark ences in antiviral immunity between children and adults rapid­ly from birth, leading to severe infections and Street, London E1 2AT, UK. fundamentally influence the pathogenesis, time course delayed growth and neurological development. Mortality 2 NIHR Biomedical Research and clinical outcome of these infections (TABLE 1), and exceeds 50% by 2 years of age4. As with other chronic viral Centre and Nuffield Department of Medicine, we consider how knowledge of the differential immune infections, the timing of HIV acquisition affects disease University of Oxford, responses between early and later life might inform outcome. A recent pooled analysis of 12,112 infants born Peter Medawar Building, therapeutic strategies to improve the outcome of chronic to HIV-infected women estimated 1‑year mortality for South Parks Road, viral infections in childhood. perinatally infected children to be 52%, compared with Oxford OX1 3SY, UK. 5 3Department of Paediatrics, 26% for postpartum-infected children . In one cohort that University of Oxford, Viral transmission and disease burden distinguished between in utero, intrapartum and post­natal Peter Medawar Building, HIV. Approximately 34 million people are living with infections, the median times from infection to death were South Parks Road, HIV today, of whom 3.4 million are children1. Without 208, 380 and >500 days, respectively6. Viral loads are high Oxford OX1 3SY, UK. interventions to prevent mother-to‑child transmission, (with a median of 105–107 copies of viral RNA per ml Correspondence to P.J.R.G. e-mail: philip.goulder@ 30–40% of infants with HIV-positive mothers acquire plasma) in almost all HIV-infected infants, but they paediatrics.ox.ac.uk HIV, and this can occur in utero (5–10%), intrapartum tend to be lower in postnatally infected infants com- doi:10.1038/nri3277 (15%) or postnatally through breastfeeding (15%)2. pared with those infected in utero or intrapartum, which 636 | SEPTEMBER 2012 | VOLUME 12 www.nature.com/reviews/immunol © 2012 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved REVIEWS Active immunization indicates that immune maturation after birth might The clinical presentation of HBV infection ranges 7,8 The induction of immunity by improve viral control and slow disease progression . from asymptomatic infection to fulminant hepa­titis, immunogens that activate and However, viral loads do not typically reach adult levels and age at acquisition determines the likelihood of expand the endogenous (~104 copies per ml) until perinatally infected children symptoms (TABLE 1). Perinatally infected infants are immune repertoire. Such 9 (FIG. 1) immunogens induce antibodies reach 3–5 years of age . usually asymptomatic until late adolescence or early and cell-mediated immunity, as adulthood, whereas later acquisition of HBV leads to well as immunological memory Hepatitis B virus. More than 350 million people are symptoms such as fever, abdominal pain and jaundice that might last for decades. infected with HBV worldwide, and HBV infection in 5–15% of children aged 1–5 years and in 33–50% of accounts for almost half of all cases of cirrhosis, end-stage adolescents and adults15. Liver damage arises from CD8+ Passive immunization 10 Immunity that is provided liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma . In regions T cell-mediated destruction of infected hepatocytes (dis- rapidly by the transfer of with high endemicity, the major time of infection is early cussed below). The immune response to HBV therefore immunoglobulins, the maximal childhood, with mother-to‑child transmission at birth determines the risk of both viral persistence and clini- activity of which lasts for having a crucial role10. Perinatal HBV acquisition leads to cal disease. Perinatally infected infants have high viral approximately 2–3 weeks (FIG. 1) before it wanes owing to persistent infection in ~90% of cases, whereas equivalent loads and a greater risk of persistence , but a much 11 catabolic destruction. exposure in adults leads to persistence in ~5% of cases . longer asymptomatic period (‘immunotolerant disease’) The incidence of mother-to‑child transmission is mark- compared with older children and adults. However, a edly reduced by active immunization and passive immu- younger age at infection carries a greater long-term risk nization of the child at birth, providing short-term and of developing hepatocellular carcinoma16. long-term protection, respectively, against HBV infec- tion12. However, rare cases of intrauterine trans­mission Cytomegalovirus. Congenital CMV infection is the do occur13, depending on the viral load, and effective most common congenital infection in the developed treatment with antiviral drugs such as lamivudine can world and an important cause of childhood disabil- reduce this risk further14. ity17. Congenital CMV infection occurs in 0.2–6.2% Table 1 | Differential clinical outcomes of chronic viral infections in early and later life Virus Perinatal infection Adult infection HIV • Rapid disease progression, with a typical time to symptomatic • Slower disease progression, typically with many years of clinical disease of several months in sub-Saharan Africa4 latency; median time to AIDS is 10 years3 • Clinical presentation with pneumonia, septicaemia, • Clinical presentation with pneumonia, septicaemia, skin infections, gastroenteritis, opportunistic infections (such as CMV infection oral candidiasis and tuberculosis, or with AIDS-defining illnesses or Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia), failure to thrive, oral such as toxoplasmosis, Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia, CMV candidiasis, persistent diarrhoea and encephalopathy retinitis, disseminated nontuberculous mycobacterial infections and • More than 50% mortality within 2 years in the absence of ART4 malignancy • A small minority (<5%)180 become long-term non-progressors, • Approximately 40% mortality within 10 years in the absence of ART3 with stable CD4+ T cell counts, low viral loads and minimal • 5–15% become long-term non-progressors; <1% become ‘elite clinical disease, and may only be diagnosed in adolescence controllers’, who control the virus to undetectable levels in the absence of ART181 HBV • Acute infection: almost always asymptomatic15 • Acute infection: may have a prodromal phase with fever, rash and • Chronic infection (>90% of individuals): generally a long arthralgia; infection is asymptomatic or mild in two-thirds of adults; ‘immunotolerant’ phase (up to 20–30 years) with high viral loads one-third develop symptomatic hepatitis with fatigue, nausea and but minimal histological changes in the liver; some individuals jaundice; 1% develop ‘fulminant’ hepatitis with acute liver failure125 develop flares of
Recommended publications
  • COVID-19 Natural Immunity
    COVID-19 natural immunity Scientific brief 10 May 2021 Key Messages: • Within 4 weeks following infection, 90-99% of individuals infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus develop detectable neutralizing antibodies. • The strength and duration of the immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 are not completely understood and currently available data suggests that it varies by age and the severity of symptoms. Available scientific data suggests that in most people immune responses remain robust and protective against reinfection for at least 6-8 months after infection (the longest follow up with strong scientific evidence is currently approximately 8 months). • Some variant SARS-CoV-2 viruses with key changes in the spike protein have a reduced susceptibility to neutralization by antibodies in the blood. While neutralizing antibodies mainly target the spike protein, cellular immunity elicited by natural infection also target other viral proteins, which tend to be more conserved across variants than the spike protein. The ability of emerging virus variants (variants of interest and variants of concern) to evade immune responses is under investigation by researchers around the world. • There are many available serologic assays that measure the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection, but at the present time, the correlates of protection are not well understood. Objective of the scientific brief This scientific brief replaces the WHO Scientific Brief entitled “’Immunity passports’ in the context of COVID-19”, published 24 April 2020.1 This update is focused on what is currently understood about SARS-CoV-2 immunity from natural infection. More information about considerations on vaccine certificates or “passports”will be covered in an update of WHO interim guidance, as requested by the COVID-19 emergency committee.2 Methods A rapid review on the subject was undertaken and scientific journals were regularly screened for articles on COVID-19 immunity to ensure to include all large and robust studies available in the literature at the time of writing.
    [Show full text]
  • Outbreak of SARS-Cov-2 Infections, Including COVID-19 Vaccine
    Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 Infections, Including COVID-19 Vaccine Breakthrough Infections, Associated with Large Public Gatherings — Barnstable County, Massachusetts, July 2021 Catherine M. Brown, DVM1; Johanna Vostok, MPH1; Hillary Johnson, MHS1; Meagan Burns, MPH1; Radhika Gharpure, DVM2; Samira Sami, DrPH2; Rebecca T. Sabo, MPH2; Noemi Hall, PhD2; Anne Foreman, PhD2; Petra L. Schubert, MPH1; Glen R. Gallagher PhD1; Timelia Fink1; Lawrence C. Madoff, MD1; Stacey B. Gabriel, PhD3; Bronwyn MacInnis, PhD3; Daniel J. Park, PhD3; Katherine J. Siddle, PhD3; Vaira Harik, MS4; Deirdre Arvidson, MSN4; Taylor Brock-Fisher, MSc5; Molly Dunn, DVM5; Amanda Kearns5; A. Scott Laney, PhD2 On July 30, 2021, this report was posted as an MMWR Early Massachusetts, that attracted thousands of tourists from across Release on the MMWR website (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr). the United States. Beginning July 10, the Massachusetts During July 2021, 469 cases of COVID-19 associated Department of Public Health (MA DPH) received reports of with multiple summer events and large public gatherings in an increase in COVID-19 cases among persons who reside in a town in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, were identified or recently visited Barnstable County, including in fully vac- among Massachusetts residents; vaccination coverage among cinated persons. Persons with COVID-19 reported attending eligible Massachusetts residents was 69%. Approximately densely packed indoor and outdoor events at venues that three quarters (346; 74%) of cases occurred in fully vac- included bars, restaurants, guest houses, and rental homes. On cinated persons (those who had completed a 2-dose course July 3, MA DPH had reported a 14-day average COVID-19 of mRNA vaccine [Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna] or had incidence of zero cases per 100,000 persons per day in residents received a single dose of Janssen [Johnson & Johnson] vac- of the town in Barnstable County; by July 17, the 14-day cine ≥14 days before exposure).
    [Show full text]
  • SARS-Cov-2 Vaccine Breakthrough Infections Are Asymptomatic Or Mildly Symptomatic and Are Infrequently Transmitted
    medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.29.21259500; this version posted July 3, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC 4.0 International license . SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic and are infrequently transmitted. Francesca Rovida1, Irene Cassaniti1, Stefania Paolucci1, Elena Percivalle1, Antonella Sarasini1, Antonio Piralla1, Federica Giardina1, Jose Camilla Sammartino1, Alessandro Ferrari1, Federica Bergami1, Alba Muzzi2, Viola Novelli2, Alessandro Meloni2,6, Anna Maria Grugnetti3, Giuseppina Grugnetti3, Claudia Rona2, Marinella Daglio2, Carlo Marena2, Antonio Triarico4, Daniele Lilleri1*, Fausto Baldanti1,5 1Molecular Virology Unit, Microbiology and Virology Department, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy; 2Medical Direction, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy; 3Health Professions Direction, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy; 4Direzione Sanitaria, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy; 5Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy; 6 Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, Section of Hygiene, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy; *Correspondence to: Daniele Lilleri; [email protected] World count: Abstract: 148 Text: 1900 NOTE: This preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.29.21259500; this version posted July 3, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Vaccination and of Prior Infection on Infectiousness of Vaccine Breakthrough Infections and Reinfections
    medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261086; this version posted July 30, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Effect of vaccination and of prior infection on infectiousness of vaccine breakthrough infections and reinfections Laith J. Abu-Raddad, PhD1,2,3,4*, Hiam Chemaitelly, MSc1,2, Houssein H. Ayoub, PhD5, Patrick Tang, MD PhD6, Peter Coyle, MD7,8,9, Mohammad R. Hasan, PhD6, Hadi M. Yassine, PhD8,10, Fatiha M. Benslimane, PhD8,10, Hebah A. Al Khatib, PhD8,10, Zaina Al Kanaani, PhD7, Einas Al Kuwari, MD7, Andrew Jeremijenko, MD7, Anvar Hassan Kaleeckal, MSc7, Ali Nizar Latif, MD7, Riyazuddin Mohammad Shaik, MSc7, Hanan F. Abdul Rahim, PhD4, Gheyath K. Nasrallah, PhD8,10, Mohamed Ghaith Al Kuwari, MD11, Adeel A. Butt, MBBS MS3,7, Hamad Eid Al Romaihi, MD12, Abdullatif Al Khal, MD7, Mohamed H. Al-Thani, MD12, and Roberto Bertollini, MD MPH12 1Infectious Disease Epidemiology Group, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Cornell University, Doha, Qatar 2World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Disease Epidemiology Analytics on HIV/AIDS, Sexually Transmitted Infections, and Viral Hepatitis, Weill Cornell Medicine–Qatar, Cornell University, Qatar Foundation – Education City, Doha, Qatar 3Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, Cornell University, New York, New York, USA 4Department of Public Health,
    [Show full text]
  • Differences in the Concentration of Anti-SARS-Cov-2 Igg Antibodies Post-COVID-19 Recovery Or Post-Vaccination
    cells Article Differences in the Concentration of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibodies Post-COVID-19 Recovery or Post-Vaccination Andrzej Tretyn 1,† , Joanna Szczepanek 2,*,† , Monika Skorupa 1,2 , Joanna Jarkiewicz-Tretyn 3, Dorota Sandomierz 3, Joanna Dejewska 1,3, Karolina Ciechanowska 3, Aleksander Jarkiewicz-Tretyn 3,4, Wojciech Koper 5 and Krzysztof Pałgan 6 1 Faculty of Biological and Veterinary Sciences, Nicolaus Copernicus University, 87-100 Torun, Poland; [email protected] (A.T.); [email protected] (M.S.); [email protected] (J.D.) 2 Centre for Modern Interdisciplinary Technologies, Nicolaus Copernicus University, ul. Wilenska 4, 87-100 Torun, Poland 3 Non-Public Health Care Centre, Cancer Genetics Laboratory, 87-100 Torun, Poland; [email protected] (J.J.-T.); [email protected] (D.S.); [email protected] (K.C.); [email protected] (A.J.-T.) 4 Polish-Japanese Academy of Information Technology, 02-008 Warszawa, Poland 5 The Voivodeship Sanitary-Epidemiological Station in Bydgoszcz, 85-031 Bydgoszcz, Poland; [email protected] 6 Department of Allergology, Clinical Immunology and Internal Diseases, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University, 85-067 Bydgoszcz, Poland; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +48-056-665-6080 † These authors contributed equally to this work. Citation: Tretyn, A.; Szczepanek, J.; Skorupa, M.; Jarkiewicz-Tretyn, J.; Abstract: At the end of 2020, population-based vaccination programs with new generation mRNA- Sandomierz, D.; Dejewska, J.; based vaccines began almost all over the world. The aim of the study was to evaluate the titer of Ciechanowska, K.; Jarkiewicz-Tretyn, anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies against the S1 subunit of the virus’s spike protein as a marker of the A.; Koper, W.; Pałgan, K.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021.07.01.450676V1.Full.Pdf
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.01.450676; this version posted July 2, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. Title: Neutralization of Delta variant with sera of Covishield vaccinees and COVID-19 recovered vaccinated individuals Running title: Neutralization of Delta variant Authors: :1#Gajanan N. Sapkal, Ph.D, *#1Pragya D. Yadav, Ph.D, 1Rima R. Sahay, M.D., 1 Ph.D, 1Gururaj Deshpande, Ph.D, 2Nivedita Gupta, M.D, Ph.D., 1Dimpal A Nyayanit, 1Deepak Y. Patil, Ph.D, 3Sanjay Kumar, M.Ch, 1Priya Abraham, M.D, Ph.D, 2Samiran Panda, M.D, 2Balram Bhargava, D.M. #Equal first author Affiliations: 1Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Virology, Pune, Maharashtra, India, Pin-411021 2Indian Council of Medical Research, V. Ramalingaswami Bhawan, P.O. Box No. 4911, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India Pin-110029 3Department of Neurosurgery, Command Hospital (Southern Command), Armed Forces Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India, Pin-411040 *Corresponding author Dr. Pragya D. Yadav, Scientist ‘E’ and Group Leader, Maximum Containment Facility, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Virology, Sus Road, Pashan, Pune, Maharashtra, India Pin-411021. Phone: +9120-26006111, Fax No. 91-20-26122669 Email: [email protected] 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.01.450676; this version posted July 2, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
    [Show full text]
  • “Breakthrough” Infection?
    What should define a SARS-CoV-2 “breakthrough” infection? John S. Schieffelin, … , Elizabeth B. Norton, Jay K. Kolls J Clin Invest. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI151186. Viewpoint In-Press Preview Recently there have been several reports of SARS-CoV2 “breakthrough” infections that have occurred in recipients of the FDA approved SAR-CoV-2 vaccines. The use of the term “breakthrough” infections implies that the virus broke through a protective barrier provided by the vaccine. However, is this what happened in these cases? In most cases, the answer is no, and this answer lies in the fundamental understanding of the mucosal immune system. Here we suggest a more precise definition of what a true breakthrough case is. Find the latest version: https://jci.me/151186/pdf What should define a SARS-CoV-2 “breakthrough” infection? John S Schieffelin1, Elizabeth B. Norton2, and Jay K. Kolls3# 1 Tulane Department of Pediatrics 2 Tulane Department of Microbiology and Immunology 3 Center for Translational Research in Infection and Inflammation Tulane School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA #Corresponding Author: Jay K. Kolls, MD Professor of Medicine and Pediatrics John W Deming Endowed Chair in Internal Medicine Director, Center for Translational Research in Infection and Inflammation Tulane School of Medicine JBJ 375 333 S. Liberty St New Orleans, LA 70112 Ph. 504-988-0456, [email protected] Conflict of Interest Statement: Drs. Kolls and Norton are named inventors on patent application PCT/US20/25518. Dr. Kolls is a named inventor on a biologic that may have utility in treating or preventing COVD-19 in high risk groups (PCT/US21/29121).
    [Show full text]
  • Natural History of SARS-Cov-2 Infection
    July 09, 2021 Edition 2021-07-09 (97) *** Available on-line at https://www.cdc.gov/library/covid19 *** Section headings in the COVID-19 Science Update align with the CDC Science Agenda for COVID-19. Natural History of SARS-CoV-2 Infection PEER -REVIEWED Age-related immune response heterogeneity to SARS-CoV-2 vaccine BNT162b2. Collier et al. Nature (June 30, 2021). Key findings: • SARS-CoV-2 virus neutralization after 1 dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) drops off precipitously at age 80 years (Figure A). • Following 2 doses, persons <80 years (n = 15) and ≥80 years (n = 24) show detectable neutralizing titers against B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.351 (Beta) and P.1 (Gamma) variants of concern (VOCs). o Serum neutralization against wild-type, B.1.1.7, and B.1.351 was lower among persons ≥ 80 years compared to <80 years (Figure B). Methods: UK community members and healthcare workers receiving 1st dose of BNT162b2 (n = 140, median age 72 years) were recruited December 14, 2020–February 10, 2021 and followed for up to 3 weeks after 2nd dose (n = 39). Antibody levels, serum neutralization and T-cell function were compared for persons <80 and ≥80 years of age after 1st and 2nd doses. Limitations: Results were limited to the BNT162b2 vaccine; study only considered 3 VOCs (B.1.1.7, B.1.351, and P.1); small number of participants may limit generalizability. Implications: It is unknown how serum neutralization correlates with protection from infection. BNT162b2 has been found to prevent symptomatic COVID-19 in persons ≥80 years (Bernal et al.).
    [Show full text]
  • Systematic Review of Available Evidence on Effectiveness and Duration of Protection of Varicella Vaccines
    Systematic review of available evidence on effectiveness and duration of protection of varicella vaccines Table of Contents 1. OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................... 3 2. METHODS ........................................................................................................... 3 2.1. Search strategy ............................................................................................... 3 2.1.1. Search strategy for vaccine effectiveness .................................................. 3 2.1.2. Search strategy for duration of protection ................................................. 4 2.1.3. Search strategy for varicella vaccine in immunocompromised individuals 5 2.2. Study selection and data collection process ..................................................... 6 3. RESULTS ............................................................................................................. 6 3.1. Vaccine effectiveness ..................................................................................... 6 3.1.1. Search results ........................................................................................... 6 3.1.2. Single dose vaccine effectiveness ............................................................. 7 3.1.3. Two dose vaccine effectiveness ................................................................ 7 3.2. Duration of protection ................................................................................... 14 3.2.1. Search
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 22: Varicella; Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine
    Varicella Adriana Lopez, MHS; Theresa Harrington, MD, MPH&TM; and Mona Marin, MD Varicella is an acute infectious disease caused by varicella- zoster virus (VZV). Primary varicella infection (chickenpox) Varicella was not reliably distinguished from smallpox until the end of ● Acute infectious disease caused the 19th century. In 1875, Rudolf Steiner demonstrated that by varicella-zoster virus (VZV) chickenpox was caused by an infectious agent by inoculating ● Distinguished from smallpox at volunteers with the vesicular fluid from a patient with acute the end of the 19th century varicella. In 1954, Thomas Weller used cell culture to isolate VZV from vesicular fluid of patients with varicella or zoster. A ● Live, attenuated varicella vaccine developed in 1970s live, attenuated varicella vaccine was developed in Japan in the 1970s. The vaccine virus was developed from virus isolated ● Varicella and MMRV vaccines by Michiaki Takahashi from vesicular fluid from an otherwise licensed for use in the U.S. in healthy child with varicella disease. Varicella vaccine was 1995 and 2005, respectively licensed for general use in Japan and Korea in 1988, and in the United States in 1995 for persons age 12 months or older. In 2005, a combination measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (MMRV) vaccine was licensed in the United States for persons Varicella-Zoster Virus (VZV) age 12 months through 12 years. ● Herpesvirus (DNA) ● Primary infection results in varicella (chickenpox) Varicella-Zoster Virus ● Reactivation of latent infection VZV is a DNA virus and is a member of the herpesvirus results in herpes zoster group. Like other herpesviruses, VZV persists in the body as a (shingles) latent infection after the primary (first) infection; VZV persists ● Short survival in environment in sensory nerve ganglia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Importance of MMR Immunization in the United States Olivia Perrone, MD, H
    The Importance of MMR Immunization in the United States Olivia Perrone, MD, H. Cody Meissner, MD Despite the established safety and efficacy of the measles-mumps-rubella abstract vaccine after almost 50 years of widespread use, the United States is encountering higher levels of measles and mumps disease than has occurred for years. Return of disease threatens the health of those who remain unimmunized by choice as well as those who are immunized appropriately but experience loss of vaccine-induced immunity. The solution to continued threats of illness caused by these untreatable but readily preventable diseases is compliance with recommendations for administration of the measles- mumps-rubella vaccine. Here we examine trends in the epidemiology of measles, mumps, and rubella in recent years and consider the consequences of loss of protective immunity within our country. Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Tufts University and Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts Growing concern among health care ∼97% effective in prevention of clinical Drs Perrone and Meissner conceptualized and designed the study, drafted the initial manuscript, professionals and the public regarding disease and is considered to provide fi 2 reviewed the revised manuscript, approved the nal the severity and the contagiousness of lifelong protection against rubella. In manuscript as submitted, and agree to be measles and mumps, 2 previously view of the availability of MMR, a safe accountable for all aspects of the work. controlled diseases in the United States, and effective vaccine, why does disease DOI: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2020-0251 has focused attention on the role of the still occur, and what can be done to Accepted for publication May 5, 2020 measles-mumps-rubella vaccine control the spread of measles, to (MMR).
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-/Post Licensure Assessments of COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy Against Infection & Transmission
    Pre-/Post Licensure Assessments of COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy Against Infection & Transmission With time to address updates from the prior COVAX workshop on Nov 19 Clinical Development & Operations SWAT Team | Thursday December 17, 2020 Workshop Agenda Time (CET) Topic Speaker(s) 15:00 – 15:10 Welcome & Meeting Objectives Jakob Cramer Part 1: Correlates of Protection Update 15:15 – 15:40 Correlates of Protection Update Peter Dull & Ivana Knezevic Part 2: What can we learn from pre-licensure trials? SARS-CoV-2 natural course of infection, viral shedding, virus detection and quantification using 15:45 – 16:00 Christian Drosten PCR and rapid diagnostic tests: Current knowledge and gaps 16:00 – 16:15 Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses in the context of natural infection Viviana Simon Pre-clinical animal studies: evidence from different vaccine platform technologies on infection / 16:15 – 16:30 William Dowling duration of viral shedding 16:30 – 16:40 Planned assessments of infection in phase 2/3 trials Amol Chaudhari 16:40 – 16:50 Experience from using weekly PCRs to detect asymptomatic infections Andrew Pollard Part 3: Additional approaches, evidence / post-licensure studies Modelling: impact of vaccine efficacy against disease versus transmission on public health and 16:55 – 17:10 Neil Ferguson pandemic curves 17:10 – 17:25 Observational studies: what can we learn from other vaccines? Natasha Crowcroft 17:25 – 17:35 Statistical approaches to studying transmission Ira Longini 17:35 – 17:45 Household transmission studies Adam Finn Phase
    [Show full text]