medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública

2016, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

salud publica mex 2016; 58 (1)

Analysis of the evidence about the efficacy and safety of the CYD-TDV dengue vaccine and its potential licensing and implementation within the Mexican Universal Vaccination Program

Hernández-Ávila M, Santos-Preciado JI

Language: English
References: 52
Page: 71b-83b
PDF size: 273.72 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Dengue is a major global public health problem which affects Latin America and Mexico. The prevention and control measures focusing on epidemiological surveillance and vector control have been partially effective as well as costly; thus, the development of a vaccine against dengue has created great expectations among the health authorities and scientific communities worldwide. The CYD-TDV dengue vaccine produced by Sanofi-Pasteur is the only dengue vaccine evaluated in phase III controlled clinical trials.
However, despite the significant contribution to the development of a vaccine against dengue, the three phase III clinical studies of CYD-TDV and the meta-analysis of the long-term follow-up of those studies have provided evidence that this vaccine exhibited partial efficacy to protect against virologically confirmed dengue and lead to four considerations: a) adequate vaccine efficacy against infection by dengue viruses (DENV) 3 and 4, a lower vaccine efficacy against DENV 1, and null protection against infection by DENV 2; b) decreased vaccine efficacy in dengue seronegative individuals at the time of the initial vaccination; c) 83 and 90% protection against hospitalizations and severe forms of dengue, respectively, at 25 months follow-up; and d) increased hospitalization for dengue in the vaccinated group, in children under nine years of age at the time of vaccination, detected since the third year of follow-up. The benefit of CYD-TDV vaccine consists in protection against infection by DENV 3 and 4, as well as protection from hospitalizations and severe cases in individuals over nine years who have had a previous dengue infection, working mainly as a booster. In this review we identified elements of the efficacy and safety of this vaccine that must be taken into account in the licensing process and potential inclusion in the national vaccination program of Mexico. The available scientific evidence on the CYD-TDV vaccine shows merits but also leads to relevant questions that should be answered in order to properly assess the safety profile of the product and the target populations for potential benefit. In this regard we consider it would be informative to complete the 6-year follow-up after starting vaccination, according to the company’s own studies protocol, as recommended by the World Health Organization. As with any new vaccine, the potential licensing and implementation of use of CYD-TDV in the Mexican vaccination program requires a clear definition of the balance between the expected benefits and risks.
Particularly in the face of a vaccine with variable efficacy and the presence of some signs of risk, in the probable case of licencing, this must be followed by the development of detailed protocols in order to immediately identify any risks or health events associated with the vaccination.


REFERENCES

  1. Panamerican Health Organization. State of the art in the Prevention and Control of Dengue in the Americas. Washington, DC: PAHO, 2014. [Accessed Oct 2, 2014]. Available: http://www.paho.org/hq/ index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&Itemid=& gid=27233&lang=en

  2. Guzmán MG, Harris E. Dengue. Lancet 2015;385(9966):453-465.

  3. Dengue Virus Vaccine Development [Internet]. Elsevier Inc; 2014. [Accessed Sept 8, 2015]. Available: http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/B978-0-12- 800098-4.00007-6.

  4. Thisyakorn U, Thisyakorn C. Latest developments and future directions in dengue vaccines. Ther Adv Vaccines 2014;2:3-9.

  5. Guy B, Barrere B, Malinowski C, Saville M, Teyssou R, Lang J. From research to phase III: Preclinical, industrial and clinical development of the Sanofi Pasteur tetravalent dengue vaccine. Vaccine 2011;29(42):7229-7241.

  6. Sabchareon A, Wallace D, Sirivichayakul C, Limkittikul K, Chanthavanich P, Suvannadabba S, et al. Protective efficacy of the recombinant, liveattenuated, CYD tetravalent dengue vaccine in Thai schoolchildren: a randomised, controlled phase 2b trial. Lancet 2012;380(9853):1559-1567.

  7. Capeding MR, Tran NH, Hadinegoro SRS, Ismail HI, Chotpitayasunondh T, Chua MN, et al. Clinical efficacy and safety of a novel tetravalent dengue vaccine in healthy children in Asia: a phase 3, randomised, observer-masked, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2014;384(9951):1358-1365.

  8. Villar L, Dayan GH, Arredondo-García JL, Rivera DM, Cunha R, Deseda C, et al. Efficacy of a tetravalent dengue vaccine in children in Latin America. N Engl J Med 2015;372(2):113-123.

  9. Hadinegoro SR, Arredondo-García JL, Capeding MR, Deseda C, Chotpitayasunondh T, Dietze R, et al. Efficacy and long-term safety of a dengue vaccine in regions of endemic disease. N Engl J Med 2015;150727090428004.

  10. Dirección General de Epidemiología. Perfil Epidemiológico de Dengue en México [Internet]. Mexico City: DGE, 2012. [Accessed Sept 8, 2015]. Available: http://www.epidemiologia.salud.gob.mx/dgae/infoepid/publicaciones2012. html

  11. Dirección General de Epidemiología. Perfil Epidemiológico de Dengue en México [Internet]. México: 2012-2015 (Epidemiological Week ). [Accessed Sept 8, 2015]. Available: http://www.epidemiologia.salud.gob.mx/doctos/ panodengue/PANORAMAS_2015/ Pano_dengue_sem_43_2015.pdf

  12. Flipse, J, Smit JM. The Complexity of a dengue vaccine: A review of the human antibody response. PLoS Neglected Tropical diseases 2015;9:0003749.

  13. Katzelnick LC, Fonville JM, Gromowski JD, Bustos-Arriaga J, Green A, James SL, et al. Dengue viruses cluster antigenically but not as discrete serotypes. Science 2015;349:1338-1333.

  14. Weinberg GA, Szilagyi PG. Vaccine epidemiology: efficacy, effectiveness, and the translational research roadmap. J Infect Dis 2010;201(11):1607- 1610.

  15. Eichler H-G, Abadie E, Breckenridge A, Flamion B, Gustafsson LL, Leufkens H, et al. Bridging the efficacy-effectiveness gap: a regulator’s perspective on addressing variability of drug response. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2011;10(7):495-506.

  16. Rodriguez-Barraquer I, Mier-y-Teran-Romero L, Ferguson N, Burke DS, Cummings DAT. Differential efficacy of dengue vaccine by immune status. Lancet 2015;385(9979):1726.

  17. Simmons CP. A Candidate dengue vaccine walks a tightrope. N Engl J Med 2015:150727094715001.

  18. Halstead SB, Mahalingam S, Marovich MA, Ubol S, Mosser DM. Intrinsic antibody-dependent enhancement of microbial infection in macrophages: disease regulation by immune complexes. Lancet Infect Dis 2010;10:712- 722.

  19. Whitehorn J, Simmons CP. The pathogenesis of dengue. Vaccine 2011;29:7221-7228.

  20. Halstead SB. Controversies in dengue pathogenesis. Paediatr Int Child Health 2012;32 Suppl 1:5-9.

  21. Guzmán MG, Álvarez M, Halstead SB. Secondary Infection as a risk factor for dengue hemorrhagic fever/dengue shock syndrome: an historical perspective and role of antibody-dependent enhancement of infection. Arch Virol 2013;158:1445-1459.

  22. Montoya M, Gresh L, Mercado JC, Williams KL, Vargas MJ, Gutierrez G, et al. Symptomatic versus inapparent outcome in repeat dengue virus infections is influenced by the time interval between infections and study year. PLoS neglected tropical diseases 2013;7:e2357.

  23. Anderson KB, Gibbons RV, Cummings DA, Nisalak A, Green S, Libraty DH, et al. A shorter time interval between first and second dengue infections is associated with protection from clinical illness in a school-based cohort in Thailand. J Infect Dis 2014;209:360-368.

  24. Bhoomiboonchoo P, Nisalak A, Chansatiporn N, Yoon IK, Kalayanarooj S, Thipayamongkolgul M, et al. Sequential dengue virus infections detected in active and passive surveillance programs in Thailand, 1994-2010. BMC public health 2015;15:250.

  25. Loroño-Pino MA, Farfán-Ale JA, Rosado-Paredes E, Arjona-Torres AI, Flores-Flores LF, Manzano-Cabrera LA, et al. Prevalencia de anticuerpos contra el virus dengue en Yucatán, México, 1985. Rev Latinoam Microbiol 1989;31:259-262.

  26. Fárfan-Ale JA, Loroño-Pino MA. Incidencia de infección por virus dengue en niños de 8 a 14 años de edad radicados en las áreas del municipio de Mérida, Yucatán. Bol Med Hosp Infant Mex 1991;48(11):780-784.

  27. Espinoza-Gómez F, Hernández-Suárez CM, Rendón-Ramírez R, CarrilloÁlvarez ML, Flores-González JC. Transmisión interepidémica del dengue en la ciudad de Colima, México. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45(5):365-370.

  28. Navarrete-Espinosa J, Acevedo-Vales JA, Huerta-Hernández E, Torres-Barranca J, Gavaldón-Rosas DG. Prevalence of dengue and leptospira antibodies in the state of Veracruz, Mexico. Salud Publica Mex 2006;48(3):220-228.

  29. Brunkard JM, Robles López JL, Ramirez J, Cifuentes E, Rothenberg SJ, et al. Dengue fever seroprevalence and risk factors, Texas-Mexico border, 2004. Emerg Infect Dis 2007;13(10):1477-1483.

  30. Sánchez-Burgos GG, López-Alvarado MA, Castañeda-Desales D, Ruiz- Gómez J, Ramos-Castañeda J. Prevalence of neutralizing antibodies to dengue virus serotypes in university students from Tabasco, Mexico. Salud Publica Mex 2008;50(5):362-366.

  31. Sosa-Cabrera TJ, Álvarez-Vera M, Blum-Domínguez S, Salicorrea- Ortegón H. Identificación de serotipos del virus dengue circulantes en el estado de Campeche, México. Rev Cubana Med Trop 2008;60(3).

  32. Vázquez-Pichardo M, Rosales-Jiménez C. Núñez-León A, Rivera-Osorio P, De La Cruz-Hernández S, Ruiz–López A, et al. Serotipos de dengue en México durante 2009 y 2010. Bol Med Hosp Infant Mex 2011;68(2):103- 110.

  33. Amaya-Larios IY, Martínez-Vega RA, Mayer SV, Galeana-Hernández M, Comas-García A, Sepúlveda-Salinas KJ, et al. Seroprevalence of neutralizing antibodies against dengue virus in two localities in the state of Morelos, Mexico. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2014;91(5):1057-1065.

  34. World Health Organization. Weekly epidemiological record; 21 August 2015, 90thyear / 21 AOÛT 2015, 90 eANNÉE No. 34, 2015;90:421-432. [Accessed Sept 8, 2015]. Available: http://www.who.int/wer/2015/wer9034/ en/

  35. Live Dengue Vaccines Technical Consultation Reporting Group, Bentsi-Enchill AD, Schmitz J, Edelman R, Durbin A, Roehrig JT, et al. Longterm safety assessment of live attenuated tetravalent dengue vaccines: deliberations from a WHO technical consultation. Vaccine [Internet] 2013;31(23):2603-2609. [Accessed Sept 8, 2015]. Available: http://linkinghub. elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0264410X13003733.

  36. World Health Organization. Questions and Answers on Dengue Vaccines: Efficacy and longer-term safety of CYD-TDV, July 2015. [Accessed Sept 8, 2015]. Available: http://www.who.int/immunization/research/development/ dengue_q_and_a/en/.

  37. CDC. Withdrawal of Rotavirus Vaccine Recommendation. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1999;48(43):1007.

  38. Organización Panamericana de la Salud. Evaluación Internacional del Programa de Vacunación Universal de México. Washington: OPS, 2014.

  39. Undurraga EA, Betancourt-Cravioto M, Ramos-Castañeda J, Martínez- Vega R, Méndez-Galván J, Gubler DJ, et al. Economic and Disease Burden of Dengue in Mexico. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2015;9(3):e0003547-26.

  40. Shepard DS, Undurraga EA, Betancourt-Cravioto M, Guzmán MG, Halstead SB, Harris E, et al. Approaches to refining estimates of global burden and economics of dengue. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2014;8(11):e3306.

  41. Americas Dengue Prevention Board. Planning for the Introduction of Dengue Vaccines. Brasilia, Brazil: Americas Dengue Prevention Board, 2011. [Accessed Sept 8, 2015] Available: http://www.denguevaccines.org/sites/ default/files/ADPB-Brazil_11-Short.pdf

  42. World Health Organization. Chikungunya Virus. Ginebra: OMS, 2011:1- 161.

  43. Pan American Health Organization, World Health Organization. Chikungunya Fever in the Americas. Washington: OPS, 2014:1-1.

  44. Pan American Health Organization, World Health Organization. Number of Reported Cases of Chikungunya Fever in the Americas, by Country or Territory 2013-2015 (Week 37). [Accessed Sept 8, 2015]. Available: http://www.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_topics&view=article&id= 343&Itemid=40931&lang=en

  45. Rivera-Ávila RC. Fiebre chikungunya en México: caso confirmado y apuntes para la respuesta epidemiológica. Salud Publica Mex 2014;56:402- 404

  46. Organización Panamericana de la Salud. Alerta Epidemiológica, Infección por Virus Zika, 7 de Mayo del 2015. [Accessed Sept 8, 2015]. Available: http://www.paho.org/Hq/index.php?option=com_topics&view=a rticle&id=427&lang=fr

  47. World Health Organization. Principles and considerations for adding a vaccine to a national immunization programme: from decision to implementation and monitoring. Ginebra: WHO, 2014.

  48. Mahoney R. The introduction of new vaccines into developing countries. V: Will we lose a decade or more in the introduction of dengue vaccines to developing countries? Vaccine 2014;32(8):904-908.

  49. Douglas DL, DeRoeck DA, Mahoney RT, Wichmann O. Will dengue vaccines be used in the public sector and if so, how? Findings from an 8-country Survey of Policymakers and Opinion Leaders PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2013;7(3):e2127.

  50. Diaz-Ortega JL, Ferreira-Guerrero E, Trejo-Valdivia B, Tellez-Rojo MM, Ferreyra-Reyes L, Hernandez-Serrato M, et al. Vaccination coverage in children and adolescents in Mexico: Vaccinated, under vaccinated and non vaccinated. Salud Publica Mex 2013;55 (Suppl 2):S289-299.

  51. Diekema DS, Marcuse EK. Ethical issues in the vaccination of children. In: Bayer R, Gostin LO, Jennings B, Steinbock B, (eds). Public Health Ethics: Theory, Policy and Practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2007:279-288.

  52. Gostin LO, Bayer R, Fairchild AL. Ethical and legal challenges posed by severe acute respiratory syndrome: implications for the control of severe infectious disease threats. JAMA 2003;290:3229-3237.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com