Acellular pertussis vaccines effectiveness over time: A systematic review, meta-analysis and modeling study

Ayman Chit, Hossein Zivaripiran, Thomas Shin, Jason K H Lee, Antigona Tomovici, Denis Macina, David R Johnson, Michael D Decker and Jianhong Wu

PLOS ONE, 2018, vol. 13, issue 6, 1-11

Abstract: Background: Acellular pertussis vaccine studies postulate that waning protection, particularly after the adolescent booster, is a major contributor to the increasing US pertussis incidence. However, these studies reported relative (ie, vs a population given prior doses of pertussis vaccine), not absolute (ie, vs a pertussis vaccine naïve population) efficacy following the adolescent booster. We aim to estimate the absolute protection offered by acellular pertussis vaccines. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of acellular pertussis vaccine effectiveness (VE) publications. Studies had to comply with the US schedule, evaluate clinical outcomes, and report VE over discrete time points. VE after the 5-dose childhood series and after the adolescent sixth-dose booster were extracted separately and pooled. All relative VE estimates were transformed to absolute estimates. VE waning was estimated using meta-regression modeling. Findings: Three studies reported VE after the childhood series and four after the adolescent booster. All booster studies reported relative VE (vs acellular pertussis vaccine-primed population). We estimate initial childhood series absolute VE is 91% (95% CI: 87% to 95%) and declines at 9.6% annually. Initial relative VE after adolescent boosting is 70% (95% CI: 54% to 86%) and declines at 45.3% annually. Initial absolute VE after adolescent boosting is 85% (95% CI: 84% to 86%) and declines at 11.7% (95% CI: 11.1% to 12.3%) annually. Interpretation: Acellular pertussis vaccine efficacy is initially high and wanes over time. Observational VE studies of boosting failed to recognize that they were measuring relative, not absolute, VE and the absolute VE in the boosted population is better than appreciated.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0197970 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 97970&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0197970

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197970

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().