Sur Dipika, Ochiai R Leon, Bhattacharya Sujit K, Ganguly Nirmal K, Ali Mohammad, Manna Byomkesh, Dutta Shanta, Donner Allan, Kanungo Suman, Park Jin Kyung, Puri Mahesh K, Kim Deok Ryun, Dutta Dharitri, Bhaduri Barnali, Acosta Camilo J, Clemens John D
National Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases, Kolkata, India.
N Engl J Med. 2009 Jul 23;361(4):335-44. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0807521.
Typhoid fever remains an important cause of illness and death in the developing world. Uncertainties about the protective effect of Vi polysaccharide vaccine in children under the age of 5 years and about the vaccine's effect under programmatic conditions have inhibited its use in developing countries.
We conducted a phase 4 effectiveness trial in which slum-dwelling residents of Kolkata, India, who were 2 years of age or older were randomly assigned to receive a single dose of either Vi vaccine or inactivated hepatitis A vaccine, according to geographic clusters, with 40 clusters in each study group. The subjects were then followed for 2 years.
A total of 37,673 subjects received a dose of a study vaccine. The mean rate of vaccine coverage was 61% for the Vi vaccine clusters and 60% for the hepatitis A vaccine clusters. Typhoid fever was diagnosed in 96 subjects in the hepatitis A vaccine group, as compared with 34 in the Vi vaccine group, with no subject having more than one episode. The level of protective effectiveness for the Vi vaccine was 61% (95% confidence interval [CI], 41 to 75; P<0.001 for the comparison with the hepatitis A vaccine group). Children who were vaccinated between the ages of 2 and 5 years had a level of protection of 80% (95% CI, 53 to 91). Among unvaccinated members of the Vi vaccine clusters, the level of protection was 44% (95% CI, 2 to 69). The overall level of protection among all residents of Vi vaccine clusters was 57% (95% CI, 37 to 71). No serious adverse events that were attributed to either vaccine were observed during the month after vaccination.
The Vi vaccine was effective in young children and protected unvaccinated neighbors of Vi vaccinees. The potential for combined direct and indirect protection by Vi vaccine should be considered in future deliberations about introducing this vaccine in areas where typhoid fever is endemic. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00125008.)
伤寒热仍是发展中国家疾病和死亡的重要原因。Vi多糖疫苗对5岁以下儿童的保护效果以及该疫苗在计划免疫条件下的效果存在不确定性,这限制了其在发展中国家的使用。
我们进行了一项4期有效性试验,根据地理区域将印度加尔各答贫民窟中2岁及以上居民随机分为两组,分别接种单剂量Vi疫苗或甲型肝炎灭活疫苗,每个研究组有40个区域。然后对受试者进行2年的随访。
共有37673名受试者接种了一剂研究疫苗。Vi疫苗区域的疫苗接种平均覆盖率为61%,甲型肝炎疫苗区域为60%。甲型肝炎疫苗组有96名受试者被诊断为伤寒热,而Vi疫苗组为34名,且无受试者出现多于一次的发病情况。Vi疫苗的保护效力水平为61%(95%置信区间[CI],41至75;与甲型肝炎疫苗组比较,P<0.001)。2至5岁接种疫苗的儿童保护水平为80%(95%CI,53至91)。在Vi疫苗区域未接种疫苗的人群中,保护水平为44%(95%CI,2至69)。Vi疫苗区域所有居民的总体保护水平为57%(95%CI,37至71)。接种疫苗后1个月内未观察到任何归因于两种疫苗的严重不良事件。
Vi疫苗对幼儿有效,并保护了Vi疫苗接种者未接种疫苗的邻居。在未来关于在伤寒热流行地区引入该疫苗的讨论中,应考虑Vi疫苗直接和间接联合保护的潜力。(ClinicalTrials.gov编号,NCT00125008。)