MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1479777070 · doi:10.1093/pch/12.10.873

How long can we expect pertussis protection to last after the adolescent booster dose of tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap) vaccines?

2007· article· en· W1479777070 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Nawaf Al Dajani, David W. Scheifele

Notice bibliographique

RevuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineImmunology and Microbiology
ThématiqueBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Établissements canadiensBC Children's Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésTetanusDiphtheriaMedicineWhooping coughBooster (rocketry)Booster dosePediatricsVirologyImmunologyImmunizationVaccinationAntigen

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Possibly 10 years. The longest published follow-up extended five years, at which time antibody levels and cell-mediated immunity were still readily detectable (1). The slow antibody decay pattern suggests that protection will last for at least 10 years (2). However, antibody levels do not correlate well with protection against pertussis, so proof of ongoing protection will have to come from epi-demiological studies. A major challenge for pertussis control is that neither natural infection nor immunization induce life-long immunity against subsequent infection. After the introduction of pertussis vaccine more than five decades ago, disease incidence decreased dramatically from 157 per 100,000 individuals in the prevaccine era to less than one per 100,000 individuals in the early 1970s, a decrease of more than 99%. The majority of remaining cases were noted in children younger than 10 years of age. Over the past two decades, a gradual increase in pertussis incidence has occurred (Figure 1), reaching 8.9 per 100,000 individuals per year in 2004, with the majority of cases now seen in adolescents and adults (1,2), who are the major source of infection for young infants (3). Fully immunized children older than six months of age are well protected by acellular vaccines. Young infants often have severe pertussis, and account for most related deaths (4). To improve disease control, all provinces and territories have expanded their pertussis immunization programs to include a booster dose for adolescents, namely the tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap) vaccine. Two such products that contain reduced amounts of diphtheria and certain pertussis antigens to minimize side effects are currently approved for use in adolescents and adults. Adverse effects occur at approximately the same rates with Tdap, and combined tetanus-diphtheria vaccines. Figure 1 Incidence rate of pertussis infections in Canada between 1924 and 2004, based on notifications to Health Canada. Reproduced from reference 10 The mechanism of immunity to pertussis after natural infection or immunization is complex and not fully understood. Immunity has been shown to wane seven to 20 years after natural infection and five to 10 years after immunization with whole cell vaccines (5). Current acellular vaccines elicit antibodies to the key antigens of pertussis including pertussis toxin, pertactin (PRN), filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA) and fimbriae, but the minimum serum antibody concentrations that protect against infection have not yet been determined. Cell-mediated immunity against pertussis is also elicited by immunization, but its role in protecting against infection is unclear (6,7). Edelman et al (7) recently reported persistence of immunoglobulin G antibodies against PRN and FHA, five years after Tdap booster vaccination of adolescents. They also demonstrated persistent cell-mediated immunity responses against pertussis toxin, PRN and FHA, consistent with ongoing immune memory. Thus, the authors predicted that adequate protection would extend beyond five years and probably to 10 years postimmunization (7). That means adolescent vaccinees may again become susceptible to pertussis as young adults and/or parents, and pose a risk for young infants. Developing strategies to extend protection among adults will be essential for maximal disease control. Implementing Tdap boosters every 10 years in adults is unlikely to be sufficient given the poor compliance with 10-yearly tetanus-diphtheria boosters. Innovative approaches are needed, such as targeting adults about to start a family or possibly boosting women during pregnancy (a subject of ongoing studies) (8). Recently, a group of pertussis researchers recommended a ‘cocooning’ strategy, which entails immunization of family members and close contacts of the newborn, aiming to create a protective environment for the most vulnerable infants where it is economically feasible (9). Awareness about pertussis, its risks and the importance of vaccination needs to be emphasized to adolescents and adults, including health care workers and day care providers who care for children. Paediatricians should ensure that they and their office staff have set a good example. The Upshots column in Paediatrics & Child Health is meant to address practical questions without ready answers in standard references such as the Red Book or the Canadian Immunization Guide. Readers are invited to submit questions to the journal office. A timely response will be provided, whenever possible, from one member of a panel of experts. The most interesting exchanges will be selected for publication. Submitters should identify themselves, but will be given the option of anonymity in the published version. Submitted questions may be edited for clarity and brevity. David Scheifele MD Associate Editor, Paediatrics & Child Health

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,009
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,031

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,022
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,003
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0090,006

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,015
Tête enseignante GPT0,246
Écart entre enseignants0,231 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2007
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePaediatrics & Child HealthMême sujetBacterial Infections and VaccinesTravaux en français237 207