Anti-Poliovirus type 3 Monoclonal antibody, Clone 402-08

Poliovirus and rotavirus share notable similarities. Although rotavirus is not amenable to eradication because of animal reservoirs, live, attenuated oral vaccines have been the bedrock of both prevention and control programs, providing intestinal and humoral immunity. Both programs have also encountered safety concerns and suboptimal immune responses to oral vaccines in low-income settings that have been challenges, prompting the search for alternative solutions. In this paper, we review the progress made by polio prevention and eradication efforts over the past six decades. Specifically, we discuss the roles of the oral polio vaccine (OPV) and the inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) in achieving polio eradication, and explore potential application of these lessons to rotavirus. Recent scientific evidence has confirmed that a combined schedule of IPV and OPV adds synergistic value that may give the polio eradication effort the tools to end all poliovirus circulation worldwide. For rotavirus, oral vaccine is the only currently licensed and recommended vaccine for use in all children worldwide, providing heterologous protection against a broad range of strains. However, parenteral rotavirus vaccines are in the pre-clinical and clinical trial stage and insight from polio provides strong justification for accelerating the development of these vaccines. While challenges for parenteral rotavirus vaccines will need to be addressed, such as achieving protection against a broad range of strains, the principle of combined use of oral and parenteral rotavirus vaccines may provide the necessary humoral and intestinal immunity necessary to close the efficacy gaps between developing and developed countries, therefore controlling rotavirus worldwide. This strategy may also potentially reduce risk of intussusception. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Infanrix-IPV (GSK, Belgium) is a diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, and inactivated poliovirus combination vaccine (DTaP-IPV) licensed in many countries including Korea. In accordance with Korean regulations, we conducted a post-marketing surveillance (PMS) to evaluate the safety of DTaP-IPV administered to Korean children in routine immunization schedules. Children aged <7 years receiving at least one dose of DTaP-IPV either as part of a primary (3-dose) vaccination series or as a subsequent booster were enrolled. Adverse events (AEs), adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and serious AEs (SAEs) were recorded after each dose during the 30-day post-vaccination follow-up period. Among a total of 639 children, 289 subjects (45.2%) experienced AEs, mostly (79.2%) assessed as being unlikely to be related to the vaccination. ADRs were reported in 13.0% of subjects. Fever was the most commonly reported expected AE (11.9% of subjects) and also the most commonly reported expected ADR (8.5% of subjects). No obvious association between AE incidence and vaccine dose sequence was apparent. An unexpected AE was seen in 32.9% of children, and unexpected ADRs were far less common (1.9%). Thirty-four SAEs were recorded in 26 subjects (4.1%), in two of whom a causal association with the vaccine could not be excluded, although both resolved quickly. Data from this PMS indicate that DTaP-IPV has an acceptable safety profile when given to Korean children in accordance with local prescribing recommendations in routine childhood immunization. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01568060