2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.12.018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interchangeability of meningococcal group C conjugate vaccines with different carrier proteins in the United Kingdom infant immunisation schedule

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…4,21 However, compared with previous term (PCV13) and preterm (PCV7) studies, antibody concentrations after primary and booster vaccination are lower overall, resulting in lower seroprotection after primary vaccination. 4,5,8,9,22 Similarly, compared with the recent PCV13 preterm study, 7 lower IgG GMCs and seroprotection rates were seen for all serotypes. These differences may be due to the different laboratory testing methods used for serotype-specific antibody concentrations, but potential biological explanations include interactions with concurrently administered vaccines, the younger gestation of the study cohort, or our broad inclusion criteria encompassing infants with complex medical problems (representative of the preterm population).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 69%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…4,21 However, compared with previous term (PCV13) and preterm (PCV7) studies, antibody concentrations after primary and booster vaccination are lower overall, resulting in lower seroprotection after primary vaccination. 4,5,8,9,22 Similarly, compared with the recent PCV13 preterm study, 7 lower IgG GMCs and seroprotection rates were seen for all serotypes. These differences may be due to the different laboratory testing methods used for serotype-specific antibody concentrations, but potential biological explanations include interactions with concurrently administered vaccines, the younger gestation of the study cohort, or our broad inclusion criteria encompassing infants with complex medical problems (representative of the preterm population).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…However, lower antibody concentrations were seen in our study cohort compared with a recent cohort of term infants in the United Kingdom who received a reduced dose schedule, which was analyzed in the same laboratory. 22 In addition, we did not include any assessment of functional activity of the antibodies detected. Opsonophagocytic antibody titers may have allowed us to assess the potential clinical impact of schedule differences in more detail and should be considered in future studies.…”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…A trial conducted in the UK evaluated the MenC response following a 2 dose infant priming schedule at 3 and 4 months of age by the MCC vaccine administered, 2 doses of NeisVac-C Ò or Menjugate Ò or NeisVac-C Ò followed by Menjugate Ò or vice versa, Menjugate Ò followed by NeisVac-C Ò . 20 The results of this trial showed that MenC responses differed significantly according to MCC schedule. Those vaccinated with Menjugate Ò followed by NeisVac-C Ò had the lowest SBA titres, while those receiving NeisVac-C Ò / Menjugate Ò had the highest; suggesting the order in which the infants received the MCC affected their responses (Fig.…”
Section: Evidence Supporting a Single Infant Priming Dosementioning
confidence: 79%
“…Analysis of MenC serum bacterial antibody (SBA) responses in UK infants showed that MCC vaccines with different carrier proteins are not interchangeable. 13 Those infants vaccinated with MCC-CRM followed by MCC-TT had significantly reduced MenC and Hib responses compared to those vaccinated with 2 doses of MCC-CRM or MCC-TT, or MCC-TT followed by MCC-CRM (Fig. 5).…”
Section: Bystander Interferencementioning
confidence: 91%
“…5). 13 While none of the previously reported phenomena explain the reason for these reduced responses, immune interaction between the carrier proteins is the most likely explanation.…”
Section: Bystander Interferencementioning
confidence: 93%