Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Effectiveness of pentavalent and monovalent rotavirus vaccines in concurrent use among US children <5 years of age, 2009-2011.
Clin Infect Dis 2013; 57(1):13-20CI

Abstract

BACKGROUND

We assessed vaccine effectiveness (VE) for RotaTeq (RV5; 3 doses) and Rotarix (RV1; 2 doses) at reducing rotavirus acute gastroenteritis (AGE) inpatient and emergency department (ED) visits in US children.

METHODS

We enrolled children <5 years of age hospitalized or visiting the ED with AGE symptoms from November 2009-June 2010 and from November 2010-June 2011 at 7 medical institutions. Fecal specimens were tested for rotavirus by enzyme immunoassay and genotyped. Vaccination among laboratory-confirmed rotavirus cases was compared with rotavirus-negative AGE controls. Regression models calculated VE estimates for each vaccine, age, ethnicity, genotype, and clinical setting.

RESULTS

RV5-specific analyses included 359 rotavirus cases and 1811 rotavirus-negative AGE controls. RV1-specific analyses included 60 rotavirus cases and 155 rotavirus-negative AGE controls. RV5 and RV1 were 84% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78%-88%) and 70% (95% CI, 39%-86%) effective, respectively, against rotavirus-associated ED visits and hospitalizations combined. By clinical setting, RV5 VE against ED and inpatient rotavirus-associated visits was 81% (95% CI, 70%-84%) and 86% (95% CI, 74%-91%), respectively. RV1 was 78% (95% CI, 46%-91%) effective against ED rotavirus disease; study power was insufficient to evaluate inpatient RV1 VE. No waning of immunity was evident during the first 4 years of life for RV5, nor during the first 2 years of life for RV1. RV5 provided genotype-specific protection against each of the predominant strains (G1P[8], G2P[4], G3P[8], G12P[8]), while RV1 VE was statistically significant for the most common genotype, G3P[8].

CONCLUSIONS

Both RV5 and RV1 significantly protected against medically attended rotavirus gastroenteritis in this real-world assessment.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Division of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA. dvp6@cdc.govNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Language

eng

PubMed ID

23487388

Citation

Payne, Daniel C., et al. "Effectiveness of Pentavalent and Monovalent Rotavirus Vaccines in Concurrent Use Among US Children <5 Years of Age, 2009-2011." Clinical Infectious Diseases : an Official Publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, vol. 57, no. 1, 2013, pp. 13-20.
Payne DC, Boom JA, Staat MA, et al. Effectiveness of pentavalent and monovalent rotavirus vaccines in concurrent use among US children <5 years of age, 2009-2011. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57(1):13-20.
Payne, D. C., Boom, J. A., Staat, M. A., Edwards, K. M., Szilagyi, P. G., Klein, E. J., ... Parashar, U. D. (2013). Effectiveness of pentavalent and monovalent rotavirus vaccines in concurrent use among US children <5 years of age, 2009-2011. Clinical Infectious Diseases : an Official Publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 57(1), pp. 13-20. doi:10.1093/cid/cit164.
Payne DC, et al. Effectiveness of Pentavalent and Monovalent Rotavirus Vaccines in Concurrent Use Among US Children <5 Years of Age, 2009-2011. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57(1):13-20. PubMed PMID: 23487388.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Effectiveness of pentavalent and monovalent rotavirus vaccines in concurrent use among US children <5 years of age, 2009-2011. AU - Payne,Daniel C, AU - Boom,Julie A, AU - Staat,Mary Allen, AU - Edwards,Kathryn M, AU - Szilagyi,Peter G, AU - Klein,Eileen J, AU - Selvarangan,Rangaraj, AU - Azimi,Parvin H, AU - Harrison,Christopher, AU - Moffatt,Mary, AU - Johnston,Samantha H, AU - Sahni,Leila C, AU - Baker,Carol J, AU - Rench,Marcia A, AU - Donauer,Stephanie, AU - McNeal,Monica, AU - Chappell,James, AU - Weinberg,Geoffrey A, AU - Tasslimi,Azadeh, AU - Tate,Jacqueline E, AU - Wikswo,Mary, AU - Curns,Aaron T, AU - Sulemana,Iddrisu, AU - Mijatovic-Rustempasic,Slavica, AU - Esona,Mathew D, AU - Bowen,Michael D, AU - Gentsch,Jon R, AU - Parashar,Umesh D, Y1 - 2013/03/13/ PY - 2013/3/15/entrez PY - 2013/3/15/pubmed PY - 2013/12/16/medline KW - New Vaccine Surveillance Network KW - RotaTeq KW - rotavirus KW - vaccine SP - 13 EP - 20 JF - Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America JO - Clin. Infect. Dis. VL - 57 IS - 1 N2 - BACKGROUND: We assessed vaccine effectiveness (VE) for RotaTeq (RV5; 3 doses) and Rotarix (RV1; 2 doses) at reducing rotavirus acute gastroenteritis (AGE) inpatient and emergency department (ED) visits in US children. METHODS: We enrolled children <5 years of age hospitalized or visiting the ED with AGE symptoms from November 2009-June 2010 and from November 2010-June 2011 at 7 medical institutions. Fecal specimens were tested for rotavirus by enzyme immunoassay and genotyped. Vaccination among laboratory-confirmed rotavirus cases was compared with rotavirus-negative AGE controls. Regression models calculated VE estimates for each vaccine, age, ethnicity, genotype, and clinical setting. RESULTS: RV5-specific analyses included 359 rotavirus cases and 1811 rotavirus-negative AGE controls. RV1-specific analyses included 60 rotavirus cases and 155 rotavirus-negative AGE controls. RV5 and RV1 were 84% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78%-88%) and 70% (95% CI, 39%-86%) effective, respectively, against rotavirus-associated ED visits and hospitalizations combined. By clinical setting, RV5 VE against ED and inpatient rotavirus-associated visits was 81% (95% CI, 70%-84%) and 86% (95% CI, 74%-91%), respectively. RV1 was 78% (95% CI, 46%-91%) effective against ED rotavirus disease; study power was insufficient to evaluate inpatient RV1 VE. No waning of immunity was evident during the first 4 years of life for RV5, nor during the first 2 years of life for RV1. RV5 provided genotype-specific protection against each of the predominant strains (G1P[8], G2P[4], G3P[8], G12P[8]), while RV1 VE was statistically significant for the most common genotype, G3P[8]. CONCLUSIONS: Both RV5 and RV1 significantly protected against medically attended rotavirus gastroenteritis in this real-world assessment. SN - 1537-6591 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/23487388/Effectiveness_of_pentavalent_and_monovalent_rotavirus_vaccines_in_concurrent_use_among_US_children_<5_years_of_age_2009_2011_ L2 - https://academic.oup.com/cid/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/cid/cit164 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -