...
首页> 外文期刊>The Lancet >Immunogenicity of bivalent types 1 and 3 oral poliovirus vaccine: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.
【24h】

Immunogenicity of bivalent types 1 and 3 oral poliovirus vaccine: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.

机译:二价1型和3型口服脊髓灰质炎病毒疫苗的免疫原性:一项随机,双盲,对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BACKGROUND: Poliovirus types 1 and 3 co-circulate in poliomyelitis-endemic countries. We aimed to assess the immunogenicity of a novel bivalent types 1 and 3 oral poliovirus vaccine (bOPV). METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial to assess the superiority of monovalent type 2 OPV (mOPV2), mOPV3, or bOPV over trivalent OPV (tOPV), and the non-inferiority of bivalent vaccine compared with mOPV1 and mOPV3. The study was done at three centres in India between Aug 6, 2008, and Dec 26, 2008. Random allocation was done by permuted blocks of ten. The primary outcome was seroconversion after one monovalent or bivalent vaccine dose compared with a dose of trivalent vaccine at birth. The secondary endpoints were seroconversion after two vaccine doses compared with after two trivalent vaccine doses and cumulative two-dose seroconversion. Parents or guardians and study investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Because of multiple comparisons, we defined p0.01), to poliovirus type 2 was 21% (35 of 170) for mOPV2 compared with 25% (42 of 168) for tOPV (p>0.01), and to poliovirus type 3 was 12% (20 of 165) for mOPV3 and 7% (11 of 159) for bOPV compared with 4% (7 of 168) for tOPV (mOPV3 vs tOPV p=0.01; bOPV vs tOPV; p>0.01). Cumulative two-dose seroconversion to poliovirus type 1 was 90% (151 of 168) for mOPV1 and 86% (136 of 159) for bOPV compared with 63% (106 of 168) for tOPV (p<0.0001), to poliovirus type 2 was 90% (153 of 170) for mOPV2 compared with 91% (153 of 168) for tOPV (p>0.01), and to poliovirus type 3 was 84% (138 of 165) for mOPV3 and 74% (117 of 159) for bOPV compared with 52% (87 of 168) for tOPV (p<0.0001). The vaccines were well tolerated. 19 serious adverse events occurred, including one death; however, these events were not attributed to the trial interventions. INTERPRETATION: The findings show the superiority of bOPV compared with tOPV, and the non-inferiority of bOPV compared with mOPV1 and mOPV3. FUNDING: GAVI Alliance, World Health Organization, and Panacea Biotec.
机译:背景:脊髓灰质炎流行国家的1型和3型脊髓灰质炎病毒共同流行。我们旨在评估新型二价1型和3型口服脊髓灰质炎疫苗(bOPV)的免疫原性。方法:我们进行了一项随机,双盲,对照试验,以评估单价2型OPV(mOPV2),mOPV3或bOPV相对于三价OPV(tOPV)的优越性,以及二价疫苗与mOPV1和mOPV3相比的非劣效性。该研究在2008年8月6日至2008年12月26日之间在印度的三个中心进行。随机分配以10个为单位进行排列。主要结果是一剂单价或二价疫苗接种后与出生时的三价疫苗剂量相比血清转化。次要终点是两次疫苗接种后的血清转化,而两次三价疫苗接种后和累积的两剂血清转化。父母或监护人以及研究者被掩盖了治疗方案。由于进行了多次比较,我们将p 0.01),而3型脊髓灰质炎病毒对mOPV3的12%(165中的20)为bOPV的7%(159中的11)而tOPV则为4%(168个中的7个)(mOPV3 vs tOPV p = 0.01; bOPV vs tOPV; p> 0.01)。到两型脊髓灰质炎病毒,累积两次剂量血清脊髓灰质炎病毒转化为1型脊髓灰质炎病毒的90%(168的151)和bOPV的86%(168的136中的)的bOPV转化为2型脊髓灰质炎病毒(p <0.0001)的63%(168的106)。对于mOPV2,tOPV为90%(170的153),而对tOPV为91%(168的153)(p> 0.01),对于3型脊髓灰质炎病毒,mOPV3为84%(165的138)和74%(159的117)与bOPV相比,tOPV为52%(168个中的87个)(p <0.0001)。疫苗耐受性良好。发生了19起严重不良事件,包括1例死亡;但是,这些事件并非归因于试验干预。解释:研究结果表明,bOPV与tOPV相比具有优势,而bOPV与mOPV1和mOPV3相比则具有非劣效性。资金:全球疫苗和免疫联盟,世界卫生组织和万灵药Biotec。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号