Vaccine最新文献

{"title":"Pediatric COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant and post-partum women: A mixed-method study","authors":"Tasmiah Nuzhath ,&nbsp;Brian Colwell ,&nbsp;Timothy Callaghan ,&nbsp;Peter Hotez ,&nbsp;Sabrina Mousum ,&nbsp;Ummul Wara Masud ,&nbsp;Annette K. Regan","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126420","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126420","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>This study aims to understand factors contributing to pediatric COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant and postpartum adults.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>The study used targeted intercept advertising on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram to recruit a panel of 3600 pregnant and postpartum US adults. Data were collected between December 2021 and April 2022 (i.e., before the introduction of pediatric COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S.). We used logistic regression to understand factors associated with pregnant and postpartum women's hesitancy towards getting children &lt;5 vaccinated against COVID-19. Poststratification weights were applied to analyses to promote the representativeness of the sample. We also conducted a qualitative thematic analysis to determine the reasons for pediatric vaccine hesitancy.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Nearly half (45.6 %) of pregnant or postpartum women were hesitant to vaccinate their child against COVID-19. Vaccine hesitancy was lower among those who had a high perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, had increased perceived severity of COVID-19, and increased perceived benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine. Perceived barriers related to long-term side effects of vaccines were positively associated with hesitancy to vaccinate children. Older women, women in urban areas, and those born outside the US were less likely to be hesitant to vaccinate children &lt;5 against COVID-19. Compared to respondents with a high school education or less, the odds of pediatric vaccine hesitancy were higher among respondents with some college. Pregnant and postpartum women who were hesitant about getting children &lt;5 vaccinated cited the following reasons for hesitancy: concerns about the vaccine, lack of evidence on vaccine safety, and the COVID-19 vaccine is not necessary for children.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Our findings suggest that public health messages to promote the COVID-19 vaccine for young children should focus on the risks and consequences of the disease and share data on the effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing severe COVID-19-related outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"42 26","pages":"Article 126420"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142446450","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"MVA-BN vaccine effectiveness: A systematic review of real-world evidence in outbreak settings","authors":"Lauren M.K. Mason ,&nbsp;Estefania Betancur ,&nbsp;Margarita Riera-Montes ,&nbsp;Florian Lienert ,&nbsp;Suzanne Scheele","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126409","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126409","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div><strong>Background</strong>: Mpox is a disease endemic to Central and West Africa. It caused outbreaks in non-endemic countries, mainly in 2022. The endemic Democratic Republic of Congo is currently experiencing its largest outbreak yet. The vaccine Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic (MVA-BN) is approved for active immunization against mpox and smallpox. Since the outbreak in 2022, real-world studies have assessed MVA-BN's vaccine effectiveness (VE) against mpox, and this systematic literature review aims to summarize the most current evidence.</div><div><strong>Methods</strong>: Medline (via PubMed), Embase, and LILACS were searched, as well as grey literature sources and publications' bibliographies to identify observational studies published between 1/Jan/2022 and 28/Feb/2024 that estimate the VE of MVA-BN against mpox or provide risk measures that allow calculation of these VE estimates. Data were presented descriptively in tables and text; the methodological quality of included records was assessed using NHLBI/NIH quality assessment tools.</div><div><strong>Results</strong>: The literature search identified 16 records that fit the inclusion criteria. The studies took place in high-income countries and were heterogeneous in design, setting, and definition of at-risk populations. MVA-BN VE estimates against mpox infection were assessed. Where the study population was exclusively or primarily those receiving pre-exposure prophylactic vaccination, the adjusted VE estimates ranged from 35 % to 86 % (<em>n</em> = 8 studies) for one dose and from 66 % to 90 % (<em>n</em> = 5) for two doses. Where only post-exposure prophylactic vaccination was assessed, adjusted VE estimates were reported for one dose only at 78 % and 89 % (<em>n</em> = 2). Additionally, MVA-BN reduced the risk of mpox-related hospitalization in one study and the severity of mpox clinical manifestations in two studies.</div><div><strong>Conclusions</strong>: Despite heterogeneity in study design, setting, and at-risk populations, the reported VE estimates against mpox infection demonstrated the effectiveness of one or two doses of MVA-BN in the context of an outbreak across multiple countries.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"42 26","pages":"Article 126409"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142441711","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cancer fatalism is associated with HPV vaccine uptake among Hispanic emerging adult women in the US","authors":"Tanjila Taskin ,&nbsp;Angelica M. Roncancio ,&nbsp;Miguel Ángel Cano ,&nbsp;Matthew Valente ,&nbsp;Abir Rahman ,&nbsp;Erika L. Thompson","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126417","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126417","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Despite the availability of the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, only a small percentage of Hispanic emergent adults in the United States have actually had the vaccination. Due to cancer fatalism, some Hispanic emerging adults may perceive fewer benefits from the HPV vaccine, regardless of its positive health effects. The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between cancer fatalism, knowledge of HPV-associated cancers, and HPV vaccination among Hispanic emerging adult women.</div></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><div>Between August and December of 2020, a cross-sectional study was conducted among Hispanic college women aged 18 to 26. A complete case study was conducted with 689 participants. Using an adjusted logistic regression model, the potential factors associated with HPV vaccine uptake were identified. The current research was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of the participating universities.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Only 55.6 % of the study population had received at least one dose of the HPV vaccine. The study found that HPV vaccine uptake was positively associated with HPV associated cancer knowledge (aOR = 1.32; 95 % CI = 1.18, 1.47) and was inversely associated with cancer fatalism (aOR = 0.97; 95 % CI = 0.94, 1.00).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>According to the results of our study, the HPV vaccination rate among Hispanic emerging adult women is low, and it is necessary to identify the factors that influence vaccination rates. There is a critical, unmet need for innovative approaches to improve HPV vaccination in this population and mitigate the incidence of HPV-related cancers.</div></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><div>Multiple intervention strategies are required to increase vaccination rates among this population. This study suggests implementing culturally tailored health promotion initiatives that reduce fatalistic beliefs among this population. Furthermore, developing a culturally tailored, age-specific HPV vaccine education and promotion program to increase HPV-associated cancer knowledge among Hispanic emerging adults.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"42 26","pages":"Article 126417"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142441827","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Participant-reported neurological events following immunization in the Canadian National Vaccine Safety Network-COVID-19 vaccine (CANVAS-COVID) study","authors":"Karina A. Top ,&nbsp;Hennady P. Shulha ,&nbsp;Matthew P. Muller ,&nbsp;Louis Valiquette ,&nbsp;Otto G. Vanderkooi ,&nbsp;James D. Kellner ,&nbsp;Manish Sadarangani ,&nbsp;Michael A. Irvine ,&nbsp;Allison McGeer ,&nbsp;Jennifer E. Isenor ,&nbsp;Kimberly Marty ,&nbsp;Phyumar Soe ,&nbsp;Gaston De Serres ,&nbsp;Julie A. Bettinger ,&nbsp;for the Canadian Immunization Research Network Investigators","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126445","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126445","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>The Canadian National Vaccine Safety Network (CANVAS) conducted active participant-based surveillance for adverse events following immunization during the COVID-19 vaccine campaign. This study evaluated the association between COVID-19 vaccination and neurological adverse events.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Participants were invited to complete online surveys to report health events that prevented daily activities and/or required medical attention within 7 days after COVID-19 vaccination or 7 days prior to the survey (unvaccinated controls); follow-up surveys were sent 7 months later. Neurological events were health events where the most severe symptom reported was ≥1 of: numbness/tingling, loss of taste or smell, vision loss, facial weakness/paralysis, seizure, weakness/paralysis of arms or legs, confusion, change in personality or behavior, or difficulty with urination or defecation. Data were extracted from the CANVAS-COVID database for analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Completed survey responses were received from 15,273 unvaccinated controls, 758,619 dose 1 recipients, 406,884 dose 2 recipients, and 126,586 dose 3 recipients. Rates of neurological events ranged from 15.9 (95 % CI 13.6–18.4) per 10,000 dose 1 ChAdOx1 recipients to 8.4 (6.5–10.8) and 7.9 (5.7–11.0) per 10,000 dose 3 mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 recipients, respectively. Multivariable regression adjusted for age, sex, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and baseline health status showed an increased risk of neurological event among ChAdOx1 dose 1 recipients versus controls (adjusted OR 2.3, 95 % CI 1.2–4.3), but not among mRNA vaccine recipients after any dose. Risk of anaesthesia/paresthesia were increased following ChAdOx1 dose 1 (aOR 4.7, 1.7–13.1), and consistently but not statistically significantly higher following any dose of either mRNA vaccine. Risk of loss of smell/taste was decreased among recipients of any dose of either mRNA vaccine versus controls.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The results support the safety of COVID-19 vaccines while confirming reported associations between ChAdOx1 dose 1 and neurological events. Participant-based AEFI surveillance is a useful component of post-market surveillance programs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"42 26","pages":"Article 126445"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142441826","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination or intent to be vaccinated across three U.S. states","authors":"Robert Cockerill ,&nbsp;Jennifer A. Horney ,&nbsp;Samantha C. Penta ,&nbsp;Amber Silver ,&nbsp;Lauren Clay","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126457","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126457","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Objectives: Vaccine hesitancy represents an important challenge to the effective control of the COVID-19 pandemic. In prior research on seasonal influenza, childhood vaccination, and emergency vaccination programs, hesitancy has been associated with a wide range of demographic, psychological, and compliance factors.</div><div>Methods: In January 2021, an online survey was distributed using the Qualtrics (Provo, UT) platform to a proportional quota sample of individuals in three states: Louisiana, New York, and Washington. Crude and adjusted risk differences and 95 % confidence intervals were calculated to describe the relationship between vaccination or intent to be vaccinated and demographic, psychological, compliance, and pandemic impact variables.</div><div>Results: Of 812 respondents, 696 indicated their vaccination status or intent to be vaccinated. Sixty-six percent indicated they were vaccinated or intended to be when available (<em>n</em> = 457) and 34 % were not vaccinated and did not intend to be vaccinated (<em>n</em> = 239). In bivariate analysis, respondents who were older, male, married, white, and reported higher household incomes were more likely to be vaccinated or intend to be. Those who complied with mask wearing, social distancing, and avoided gatherings with people outside their household were also more likely to report vaccination or intention. In the multivariable model, backward elimination resulted in a model that retained sex, race, household income, and avoiding large gatherings.</div><div>Conclusion: There are important demographic, behavioral, and other factors that influence vaccine acceptance. Identifying those factors is vital for targeted and effective messaging, education, and engagement to reach those most hesitant, increase vaccination coverage, and effectively address the COVID-19 pandemic.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"42 26","pages":"Article 126457"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142446455","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cellular and humoral immunity and IgG subclass distribution after omicron XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccination in Japan","authors":"Kaori Sano ,&nbsp;Takayuki Kurosawa ,&nbsp;Kazuo Horikawa ,&nbsp;Yayoi Kimura ,&nbsp;Atsushi Goto ,&nbsp;Akihide Ryo ,&nbsp;Hideki Hasegawa ,&nbsp;Hideaki Kato ,&nbsp;Kei Miyakawa","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126452","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126452","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Up to seven doses of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2) were administered to Japanese healthcare workers, until February 2024. The monovalent Omicron XBB.1.5 vaccine (hereafter called XBB.1.5 vaccine) was used for dose 7.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Although the XBB.1.5 vaccine has been reported to induce a robust increase in neutralizing antibodies against the currently circulating Omicron variant BA.2.86, little is known about its serological effects in Japan, where the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine is the most frequently administered in the world.</div></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><div>Twenty-five recipients of the XBB.1.5 vaccine, categorized as seronegative (<em>n</em> = 18) or seropositive (<em>n</em> = 7) based on their recent history of COVID-19, were analyzed. Neutralizing antibody titers against Omicron subvariants, receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG levels, IgG subclass distribution, and T-cell responses were assessed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We found a significant increase in neutralizing antibody titers against XBB.1.5 and BA.2.86 variants following XBB.1.5 vaccination, particularly in seropositive individuals. No significant change in total RBD IgG levels was observed, indicating efficient induction of antibodies targeting regions outside the RBD by XBB.1.5 vaccination. IgG subclass analysis demonstrated no significant subclass switching after vaccination. T-cell responses against the virus were comparable between seropositive and seronegative groups.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The study suggests that XBB.1.5 vaccination enhances humoral immunity against Omicron variants without significant IgG subclass switching. However, some individuals with low pre-vaccination IgG titers did not exhibit increased antibody levels post-vaccination, raising concerns about potential immune tolerance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"42 26","pages":"Article 126452"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142441825","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Gender differences in adverse effects following the second dose of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine: a cross-sectional study among healthcare workers","authors":"Masoud Sedaghat ,&nbsp;Badriyeh Karami ,&nbsp;Farid Najafi ,&nbsp;Fatemeh Khosravi Shadmani ,&nbsp;Shahab Rezaeian","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126424","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126424","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Background: Vaccination in pandemic diseases, in addition to positive effects on controlling the prevalence and reducing the resulting socioeconomic effects, can have adverse effects with different intensity based on gender, type and dose of vaccine. We aimed to investigate gender differences in adverse effects following the second dose of AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine among healthcare workers (HWs).</div><div>Method: This cross-sectional study was conducted on 780 HWs who worked in two educational hospitals in Kermanshah city, western Iran, and had received the second dose of AstraZeneca vaccine. The duration of the investigation of the adverse effects was a maximum of one month after receiving the second dose of AstraZeneca vaccine.</div><div>Results: The overall proportion of adverse effects following the second dose of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine was higher in female participants, but it was not significant (OR=1.83, p=0.056). The results of adjusted logistic regression showed that the odds of chills (OR=2.17, p=0.001), nausea (OR=2.98, p=0.012), and gastrointestinal symptoms (OR=2.1, p=0.001), runny nose (OR=1.5, p=0.047), fever (OR=1.64, p=0.002), body pain (OR=1.4, p=0.04), and fatigue (OR=1.85, p=0.001) were significantly higher in females than in males. The maximum gap of 15% (attributable risk) was shown for fever adverse between genders.</div><div>Conclusion: The higher occurrence rate of side effects after second dose of AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine in women, indicates that gender factors influence the response to the vaccine, consequently, it is imperative that women undergo further examination to mitigate the risk of complications arising from injection procedures.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"42 26","pages":"Article 126424"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142441829","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Development and characterization of HCMV recombinant subunit vaccines based on T-cell epitopes","authors":"Jun Li ,&nbsp;Xu Li ,&nbsp;Fengjun Liu ,&nbsp;Shasha Jiang ,&nbsp;Shuyun Zhang ,&nbsp;Meng Yu ,&nbsp;Wenxuan Liu ,&nbsp;Zonghui Li ,&nbsp;Bin Wang ,&nbsp;Yunyang Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126454","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126454","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV), a ubiquitous β-herpes virus, mostly causes asymptomatic infections in adults with healthy immune systems. Due to immunosuppressive therapy, solid organ transplantation (SOT) recipients are at increased risk of HCMV infection. In recent years, the interdisciplinary, filed of immunoinformatics, based on computer science, and modern immunology, has emerged. In this study, we designed three types of recombinant subunit vaccines, which are expressed by the <em>E. coli</em> BL21 strain according to immunoinformatics prediction. Subsequently, we evaluated the innate and cellular immune responses of recombinant subunit vaccines <em>in vivo</em> and/or <em>in vitro</em>. Flow cytometry analysis, revealed that recombinant subunit vaccines enhanced both innate and cellular immune responses <em>in vivo</em> and/or <em>in vitro</em>. We also found that the novel herb adjuvant hesperetin (HES) increased memory T cell inflation. Overall, we developed three types of recombinant subunit vaccines based on HCMV antigen fragments containing multiple T-cell epitopes and assessed the innate and cellular immune responses <em>in vivo</em> and/or <em>in vitro.</em></div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"42 26","pages":"Article 126454"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142446462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Safety and immunogenicity of a ChAd155-vectored rabies vaccine compared with inactivated, purified chick embryo cell rabies vaccine in healthy adults","authors":"Varun K. Phadke ,&nbsp;Daniel J. Gromer ,&nbsp;Paulina A. Rebolledo ,&nbsp;Daniel S. Graciaa ,&nbsp;Zanthia Wiley ,&nbsp;Amy C. Sherman ,&nbsp;Erin M. Scherer ,&nbsp;Maranda Leary ,&nbsp;Tigisty Girmay ,&nbsp;Michele P. McCullough ,&nbsp;Ji-Young Min ,&nbsp;Stefania Capone ,&nbsp;Andrea Sommella ,&nbsp;Alessandra Vitelli ,&nbsp;Jamie Retallick ,&nbsp;Janine Seetahal ,&nbsp;Mark Koller ,&nbsp;Rachel Tsong ,&nbsp;Hannah Neill-Gubitz ,&nbsp;Mark J. Mulligan ,&nbsp;Nadine G. Rouphael","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126441","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126441","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Rabies is a zoonotic viral encephalitis that is endemic in many countries and confers a high mortality. Licensed vaccines require several doses to ensure efficacy. To investigate a logistically favorable approach, we assessed the safety and immunogenicity of ChAd155-RG, a novel investigational rabies vaccine using a replication-defective chimpanzee adenovirus vector.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a first-in-human, phase 1, randomized, double-blind, dose-escalation trial comparing ChAd155-RG with a licensed inactivated vaccine (RabAvert) in healthy adults. Participants received either RabAvert at standard dosing or ChAd155-RG at a low dose for one immunization or a high dose for one or two immunizations. To assess safety, we evaluated reactogenicity, unsolicited adverse events, and thrombotic events. To measure immunogenicity, we measured rabies viral neutralizing antibody (VNA) titers and anti-ChAd155 neutralizing antibodies.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Mild to moderate systemic reactogenicity and transient lymphopenia and neutropenia were more common among recipients of ChAd155-RG compared with those who received RabAvert. No thrombotic events or serious adverse events were reported. Only the groups receiving RabAvert or two doses of high-dose ChAd155-RG achieved 100 % seroconversion, and seroprotection was most durable in the RabAvert group. Most participants had preexisting anti-vector antibodies, which were boosted by ChAd155-RG. Baseline and post-vaccination anti-vector antibody titers were negatively associated with post-vaccination rabies VNA titers.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In this phase 1 clinical trial, a novel rabies vaccine using a simian adenovirus vector was safe and tolerable, but generated lower, less durable rabies VNA titers than a standard inactivated rabies virus vaccine, which may be due to preexisting, anti-vector immunity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"42 26","pages":"Article 126441"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142441830","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Attitudes and beliefs of healthcare providers toward vaccination in the United States: A cross-sectional online survey","authors":"Amanda L. Eiden ,&nbsp;Sheila Drakeley ,&nbsp;Kushal Modi ,&nbsp;deMauri Mackie ,&nbsp;Alexandra Bhatti ,&nbsp;Anthony DiFranzo","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126437","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126437","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Healthcare providers' (HCPs') beliefs and practices regarding vaccination influence vaccine acceptance in patients.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To describe HCPs' beliefs and practices regarding vaccines and perceptions of patient perspectives related to vaccine hesitancy.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This was a non-interventional, cross-sectional, online survey administered to 1213 HCPs based in the United States from December 2021 through January 2022. HCPs provided responses regarding their demographic and professional characteristics, beliefs about vaccine safety and effectiveness, vaccination practices, and their views regarding patients' willingness to receive vaccination.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Study participants included doctors (55.4 %); physician assistants (11.2 %); pharmacists (11.7 %); nurse practitioners (11.1 %); and registered nurses (10.6 %) from across the United States (West, 35.6 %; Midwest, 27.0 %; South, 25.6 %; Northeast, 11.9 %). HCPs belonged to group practices or clinics (34.5 %), private practices (31.9 %), hospital-based practices (21.9 %), or pharmacies (11.7 %). Most HCPs strongly believed it was their duty to promote vaccination (78.1 %) and used in-person conversations to educate patients about vaccines (85.0 %); 95.1 % had been vaccinated against COVID-19. HCPs reported that 54.9 % of patients accept all vaccines without hesitation, 21.0 % accept all vaccines but hesitate, 16.8 % accept only select vaccines, and 7.2 % reject all vaccines. Reasons commonly cited by patients for being hesitant to accept vaccines or refusal included negative media (hesitancy: 64.6 %; refusal: 73.2 %), the influence of friends or family (hesitancy: 60.5 %; refusal: 68.7 %), distrust of the government (hesitancy: 45.8 %; refusal: 68.4 %), concerns over long-term side effects (hesitancy: 56.1 %; refusal: 68.3 %), and worries about vaccine-related autism or infertility (hesitancy: 49.7 %; refusal: 71.9 %). HCPs reported that the largest contributors to vaccine misinformation among patients were social media (91.0 %), celebrities/TV personalities (63.5 %), and mass media (61.1 %).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Despite most HCPs being active proponents of vaccination, misconceptions about vaccination and vaccine hesitancy persists. Consideration should be given to HCP training to support their efforts to promote vaccine acceptance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"42 26","pages":"Article 126437"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142441828","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}