Search

Introduction: Mass vaccinations are a main strategy in the deployment of oral cholera vaccines. Campaigns avoid giving vaccine to pregnant women because of the absence of safety data of the killed whole-cell oral cholera (rBS-WC) vaccine. Balancing this concern is the known higher risk of cholera and of complications of pregnancy should cholera occur in these women, as well as the lack of expected adverse events from a killed oral bacterial vaccine. Methodology/Principal Findings: From January to February 2009, a mass rBS-WC vaccination campaign of persons over two years of age was conducted in an urban and a rural area (population 51,151) in Zanzibar. Pregnant women were advised not to participate in the campaign. More than nine months after the last dose of the vaccine was administered, we visited all women between 15 and 50 years of age living in the study area. The outcome of pregnancies that were inadvertently exposed to at least one oral cholera vaccine dose and those that were not exposed was evaluated. 13,736 (94%) of the target women in the study site were interviewed. 1,151 (79%) of the 1,453 deliveries in 2009 occurred during the period when foetal exposure to the vaccine could have occurred. 955 (83%) out of these 1,151 mothers had not been vaccinated; the remaining 196 (17%) mothers had received at least one dose of the oral cholera vaccine. There were no statistically significant differences in the odds ratios for birth outcomes among the exposed and unexposed pregnancies. Conclusions/Significance: We found no statistically significant evidence of a harmful effect of gestational exposure to the rBS-WC vaccine. These findings, along with the absence of a rational basis for expecting a risk from this killed oral bacterial vaccine, are reassuring but the study had insufficient power to detect infrequent events. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00709410 Author Summary: Pregnant women are more vulnerable to complications of cholera than other people. It would be helpful to include pregnant women in vaccination campaigns against cholera but pregnant women and their unborn children are highly vulnerable to the potential adverse effects of biological products such as vaccines. The safety of oral cholera vaccines in pregnant women has up to now not been evaluated. During a large mass cholera vaccination campaign in Zanzibar in 2009, women were advised not to participate if they thought they may be pregnant. The large majority (955 or 83%) of women residing in the study area who were to be pregnant during the 9 months following the vaccinations did not participate in the campaign. The remaining 196 (17%) women received the vaccine. A comparison between vaccine exposed and unexposed pregnancies did not reveal any significant differences in outcome between the two groups. The small number of miscarriages, infant deaths and ill infants was similarly distributed between the two groups. These findings are reassuring but continued monitoring of this vaccine when given during pregnancy is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The gold standard for the diagnosis of cholera is stool culture, but this requires laboratory facilities and takes at least 24 hours. A rapid diagnostic test (RDT) that can be used by minimally trained staff at treatment centers could potentially improve the reporting and management of cholera outbreaks. Methods: We evaluated the Crystal VC™ RDT under field conditions in Zanzibar in 2009. Patients presenting to treatment centers with watery diarrhea provided a stool sample for rapid diagnostic testing. Results were compared to stool culture performed in a reference laboratory. We assessed the overall performance of the RDT and evaluated whether previous intake of antibiotics, intravenous fluids, location of testing, and skill level of the technician affected the RDT results. Results: We included stool samples from 624 patients. Compared to culture, the overall sensitivity of the RDT was 93.1% (95%CI: 88.7 to 96.2%), specificity was 49.2% (95%CI: 44.3 to 54.1%), the positive predictive value was 47.0% (95%CI: 42.1 to 52.0%) and the negative predictive value was 93.6% (95%CI: 89.6 to 96.5%). The overall false positivity rate was 50.8% (213/ 419); fieldworkers frequently misread very faint test lines as positive. Conclusion: The observed sensitivity of the Crystal VC RDT evaluated was similar compared to earlier versions, while specificity was poorer. The current version of the RDT could potentially be used as a screening tool in the field. Because of the high proportion of false positive results when field workers test stool specimens, positive results will need to be confirmed with stool culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background: Zanzibar, in east Africa, has been severely and repeatedly affected by cholera since 1978. We assessed the effectiveness of oral cholera vaccination in high-risk populations in the archipelago to estimate the indirect (herd) protection conferred by the vaccine and direct vaccine effectiveness. Methods: We offered two doses of a killed whole-cell B-subunit cholera vaccine to individuals aged 2 years and older in six rural and urban sites. To estimate vaccine direct protection, we compared the incidence of cholera between recipients and non-recipients using generalised estimating equations with the log link function while controlling for potential confounding variables. To estimate indirect effects, we used a geographic information systems approach and assessed the association between neighbourhood-level vaccine coverage and the risk for cholera in the non-vaccinated residents of that neighbourhood, after controlling for potential confounding variables. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00709410. Findings: Of 48 178 individuals eligible to receive the vaccine, 23 921 (50%) received two doses. Between February, 2009, and May, 2010, there was an outbreak of cholera, enabling us to assess vaccine effectiveness. The vaccine conferred 79% (95% CI 47–92) direct protection against cholera in participants who received two doses. Indirect (herd) protection was shown by a decrease in the risk for cholera of non-vaccinated residents within a household''s neighbourhood as the vaccine coverage in that neighbourhood increased. Interpretation: Our findings suggest that the oral cholera vaccine offers both direct and indirect (herd) protection in a sub-Saharan African setting. Mass oral cholera immunisation campaigns have the potential to provide not only protection for vaccinated individuals but also for the unvaccinated members of the community and should be strongly considered for wider use. Because this is an internationally-licensed vaccine, we could not undertake a randomised placebo-controlled trial, but the absence of vaccine effectiveness against non-cholera diarrhoea indicates that the noted protection against cholera could not be explained by bias. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, and the South Korean Government. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]