Safety and immunogenicity of a measles, mumps, rubella and varicella vaccine given with combined Haemophilus influenzae type b conjugate/hepatitis B vaccines and combined diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis vaccines.

University of California School of Medicine, San Francisco, USA.
The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal (Impact Factor: 3.14). 04/2006; 25(4):287-92. DOI: 10.1097/01.inf.0000207857.10947.1f
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A study was conducted to assess administration of a combination measles, mumps, rubella and varicella vaccine (MMRV) with other childhood vaccines.
In this open, multicenter trial, 1915 healthy children ages 12-15 months were randomized into 3 groups: group 1, MMRV, combined Haemophilus influenzae type b conjugate-hepatitis B vaccines (Hib/HepB) and combined diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis vaccines (DTaP) concomitantly; group 2, MMRV followed by Hib/HepB and DTaP 42 days later; group 3, MMR and varicella vaccine followed by Hib/HepB and DTaP 42 days later.
Antibody responses to measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, Hib, HepB, diphtheria and tetanus were similar between groups 1 and 2 (all >95%, except varicella, 89.7% in group 1 and 90.9% in group 2). Pertussis toxin and filamentous hemagglutinin responses were significantly lower in group 1 than in group 2 (group 1, 74.1 and 67.1%; group 2, 90.4 and 86.8%, respectively). An exploratory analysis suggested that the difference in and pertussis toxin and filamentous hemagglutinin responses was likely the result of study design rather than interference among vaccine components because the groups differed in age of receipt of DTaP (group 1, approximately 12 months; group 2, approximately 13.5 months). When the groups were matched for age, sample size was sufficient for comparison only in children > or =13.5 months old. Pertussis toxin and filamentous hemagglutinin responses were similar in these children. The safety profiles for each vaccination regimen were comparable.
The immunogenicity data support concomitant administration of MMRV with Hib/HepB. Limited data from an exploratory analysis indicate that MMRV can be administered concomitantly with DTaP. Concomitant administration of MMRV, Hib/HepB and DTaP is well-tolerated.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We assessed the immunogenicity and safety of a combination measles, mump, rubella, and varicella vaccine (MMRV) (ProQuad [Merck & Co, Inc, West Point, PA]) administered to healthy children concomitantly with a pneumococcal 7-valent conjugate vaccine (PCV-7) (Prevnar [Pfizer, Philadelphia, PA]). Healthy 12- to 15-month-old children who lacked vaccination and clinical histories for measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, and zoster but had written documentation of receipt of a 3-dose primary series of PCV-7 were randomly assigned in a 2:1:1 ratio to receive either the MMRV and PCV-7 (group 1), PCV-7 followed 6 weeks later by MMRV (group 2), or MMRV followed 6 weeks later by PCV-7 (group 3). The primary safety analysis was 56 days (28 days after each visit). Immunogenicity was evaluated 6 weeks after each vaccination. A total of 1027 children were enrolled (group 1: 510; group 2: 258; group 3: 259). For all 3 groups, the antibody response rate was ≥96.8% for measles, mumps, and rubella, ≥88.0% for varicella-zoster virus, and ≥98.3% for all of the 7 Streptococcus pneumoniae serotypes. The immune responses to all antigens present in MMRV and PCV-7 were similar whether administered concomitantly or sequentially. The incidence of local and systemic adverse experiences (AEs) was comparable between group 1 and groups 2 and 3 combined. No vaccine-related serious AEs were reported. Concomitant administration of the MMRV and PCV-7 is highly immunogenic and generally well tolerated. Similar immune responses between the groups support concomitant administration of the MMRV and PCV-7 to healthy children 12 to 15 months of age.
    PEDIATRICS 12/2011; 128(6):e1387-94. · 5.30 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Since vaccinia virus was first used to protect against smallpox in the eighteenth century, live attenuated vaccines have proved to be highly effective in reducing the morbidity and mortality caused by many human viral pathogens. Contemporary live viral vaccines are designed using several different strategies to achieve attenuation. These basic principles and approaches are illustrated by vaccines to prevent rotavirus, influenza and varicella-zoster virus infections that are described in this chapter. As shown from the experience with these three vaccines, contemporary live attenuated viral vaccines have had a major impact on disease caused by these ubiquitous human pathogens.
    12/2010: pages 15-46;
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Live attenuated varicella vaccines for the prevention of varicella (chickenpox) has been demonstrated both in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and in population-based immunisation programmes in countries such as the United States. However, many countries do not routinely immunise children against varicella, and exposures continue to occur. Although the disease is often mild, complications such as secondary bacterial infection, pneumonitis and encephalitis occur in about 1% of cases, usually leading to hospitalisation. The use of varicella vaccine in persons who have recently been exposed to the varicella zoster virus has been studied as a form of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). To assess the efficacy and safety of vaccines for use as PEP for the prevention of varicella in children and adults. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2008, Issue 1); MEDLINE (1966 to February 2008); and EMBASE (January 1990 to February 2008). RCTs and quasi-RCTs of varicella vaccine for PEP compared with placebo or no intervention. The outcome measures were efficacy in prevention of clinical cases and/or laboratory-confirmed clinical cases and adverse effects following vaccination. Two review authors independently extracted and analysed data using Review Manager software. Three studies involving 110 healthy children who were siblings of household contacts were identified as suitable for inclusion. The studies varied in quality, study design, vaccine used, and outcomes measured and, as such, were not suitable for meta-analysis. Overall, 13 out of 56 vaccine recipients (18%) developed varicella compared with 42 out of 54 placebo (or no vaccine) recipients (78%). Of the vaccine recipients who developed varicella, the majority only had mild disease (with less than 50 skin lesions). In the three studies, most subjects received PEP within three days following exposure; too few subjects were vaccinated four to five days post exposure to ascertain the efficacy of vaccine given more than three days after exposure. No included studies reported on adverse events following immunisation. These small trials suggest varicella vaccine administered within three days to children following household contact with a varicella case reduces infection rates and severity of cases. No RCTs for adolescents or adults were identified. However safety was not adequately addressed.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 01/2008; · 5.94 Impact Factor