MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130519850 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.02.001

Impact of maternal diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis vaccination on pertussis booster immune responses in toddlers: Follow-up of a randomized trial

2021· article· en· W3130519850 on OpenAlexaff
Federico Martinón‐Torres, Scott A. Halperin, Terry Nolan, Bruce Tapiéro, Kirsten P. Perrett, Ignacio Salamanca de la Cueva, José García-Sicilia, Zbyněk Straňák, Otto G. Vanderkooi, Pavel Kosina, Šárka Rumlarová, Miia Virta, J.M. Merino Arribas, Mariano Miranda-Valdivieso, Begoña Arias Novas, Jan Boženský, María José Cilleruelo Ortega, José Tomás Ramos Amador, Manuel Baca, Esperanza Escribano, Gianvincenzo Zuccotti, Jan Janota, Paola Marchisio, Lusiné Kostanyan, Nadia Meyer, Maria Angeles Ceregido, Brigitte Cheuvart, Sherine Kuriyakose, Narcisa Mesaros

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversity of CalgaryUniversité de MontréalCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchDalhousie University
FundersFakultní nemocnice Hradec KrálovéGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsTetanusDiphtheriaMedicineVaccinationBooster doseBooster (rocketry)ImmunologyWhooping coughPediatricsImmune systemImmunization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Transplacentally transferred antibodies induced by maternal pertussis vaccination interfere with infant immune responses to pertussis primary vaccination. We evaluated whether this interference remains in toddlers after booster vaccination. METHODS: weeks' gestation, with crossover immunization postpartum. Their infants were primed (study NCT02422264) and boosted (at 11-18 months; current study NCT02853929) with diphtheria-tetanus-three-component acellular pertussis-hepatitis B virus-inactivated poliovirus/Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine (DTaP-HepB-IPV/Hib) and 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. Immunogenicity before and after booster vaccination, and reactogenicity and safety of the booster were evaluated descriptively. RESULTS: 263 (Tdap group) and 277 (control group) toddlers received a DTaP-HepB-IPV/Hib booster. Pre-booster vaccination, observed geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) for the three pertussis antigens and diphtheria were 1.4-1.5-fold higher in controls than in the Tdap group. No differences were observed for the other DTaP-HepB-IPV/Hib antigens. One month post-booster vaccination, booster response rates for pertussis antigens were ≥ 92.1% and seroprotection rates for the other DTaP-HepB-IPV/Hib antigens were ≥ 99.2% in both groups (primary objective). Higher post-booster GMCs were observed in controls versus the Tdap group for anti-filamentous hemagglutinin (1.2-fold), anti-pertussis toxoid (1.5-fold) and anti-diphtheria (1.4-fold). GMCs for the other DTaP-HepB-IPV/Hib antigens were similar between groups. Serious adverse events were reported for three toddlers (controls, not vaccination-related). One death occurred pre-booster (Tdap group, not vaccination-related). CONCLUSIONS: As a consequence of interference of maternal pertussis antibodies with infant immune responses to pertussis primary vaccination, pertussis antibody concentrations were still lower in toddlers from Tdap-vaccinated mothers before DTaP-HepB-IPV/Hib booster vaccination. After the booster, antibody concentrations were lower for filamentous hemagglutinin and pertussis toxoid but not for pertactin. The clinical significance of this interference requires further evaluation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02853929.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccineSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207