Comparing the antibody titers of sequential program of Sabin strain-based inactivated poliovirus vaccine followed by bivalent types 1 and 3 oral poliovirus vaccine in different dosage forms
10.16462/j.cnki.zhjbkz.2019.04.007
- Author:
Zhi-mei ZHAO
1
;
Teng HUANG
;
Guo-liang LI
;
Xiao-lei YANG
;
Rui-ju JIANG
;
Hui YE
;
Ting ZHAO
;
Jing LI
;
Xiao-chang LIU
;
Yu-ting FU
;
Hong-yuan SHI
;
Hai-jun ZHOU
;
Zhao-jun MO
;
Yan-chun CHE
;
Jing-si. YANG
Author Information
1. Corresponding authors: Yang Jing-si, E-mail: yjs@imbcams.com.cn
- Publication Type:Research Article
- Keywords:
Poliomyelitis;
Inactivated vaccine;
Attenuated vaccine;
Sequential schedule;
Dosage forms
- From:
Chinese Journal of Disease Control & Prevention
2019;23(4):402-406
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the antibody titer distributions after primary vaccination by different sequential schedules of Sabin strain-based inactivated poliovirus vaccine(sIPV) and bivalent oral attenuated live poliomyelitis vaccine against types 1 and 3 (bOPV) in Drug Candy(DC) form or liquid dosage form. Methods Eligible infants of 2 months old selected in Liuzhou were assigned randomly in a ratio of 1:1:1:1 to 4 groups as following: sIPV+2bOPV(DC), sIPV+2bOPV(liquid), 2sIPV+bOPV(DC), 2sIPV+bOPV(liquid), and were vaccinated at 0, 28, 56 days. Polio neutralizing antibody titers against poliovirus types 1, 2 and 3 were tested prior to Dose 1 and at 28 days after Dose 3. Results The antibody titer distribution for type 1 was statistically different between sIPV+2bOPV(DC) and sIPV+2bOPV(liquid) (Z=-2.589, P=0.010) while no significant differences were detected between the two groups for type 2(Z=-0.331, P=0.741) and type 3(Z=-1.556, P=0.120). There were no significant differences between 2sIPV +bOPV(DC) and 2sIPV+bOPV(liquid) for the distributions(All P>0.05) (type 1: Z=-1.249, P=0.212; type 2: Z=-1.658, P=0.097; type 3: Z=-1.436, P=0.151). In the same dosage forms with different sequential schedules, the antibody titer distributions were significantly different between 2 doses sIPV and 1 dose sIPV groups(All P<0.05)(sIPV+2bOPV(liquid) vs 2sIPV+bOPV(liquid): type 1: Z=-2.766, P=0.006; type 2: Z=-9.137, P<0.001; type 3: Z=-5.529, P<0.001. sIPV+2bOPV(DC) vs 2sIPV+bOPV(DC): type 1: Z=-3.748, P<0.001; type 2: Z=-7.660, P<0.001; type 3: Z=-6.030, P<0.001). Conclusions Different dosage forms have similar immune effects, so appropriate dosage forms should be selected for vaccination according to the effectiveness, characteristics of subjects and the population density. In the case of sufficient supply of sIPV, 2 doses sIPV sequential program should be the first choice to complete the primary immunization.
