BACKGROUND:Rotavirus results in more diarrhoea-related deaths in children under five years than any other single agent in countries with high childhood mortality. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in countries with low childhood mortality. Rotavirus vaccines that have been prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include a monovalent vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline), a pentavalent vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck), and, more recently, another monovalent vaccine (Rotavac, Bharat Biotech). OBJECTIVES:To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO (RV1, RV5, and Rotavac) for their efficacy and safety in children. SEARCH METHODS:On 4 April 2018 we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, and BIOSIS. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA:We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in children comparing rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO versus placebo or no intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risks of bias. One review author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analysis by country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty. MAIN RESULTS:Fifty-five trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 216,480 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed RV1, 15 trials (88,934 participants) RV5, and four trials (8432 participants) Rotavac. RV1 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 84% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.26; 43,779 participants, 7 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 41% of cases of severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.74; 28,051 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 63% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60; 6114 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; 5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.23; 36,002 participants, 9 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 37% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 39,091 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries RV1 probably prevents 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83; 13,768 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96; 2764 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.88 95% CI 0.83 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence). There were 30 cases of intussusception reported in 53,032 children after RV1 vaccination and 28 cases in 44,214 children after placebo or no intervention (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.05; low-certainty evidence). RV5 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV5 probably prevents 92% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.22; 4132 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62; 5916 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.11; 1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; 7318 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 41% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; 5885 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; 5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; moderate to high-certainty evidence). There were 16 cases of intussusception in 43,629 children after RV5 vaccination and 20 cases in 41,866 children after placebo (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.45; low-certainty evidence). Rotavac Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low child mortality. In India, a high-mortality country, Rotavac probably prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60; 6799 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); the trial did not report on severe all-cause diarrhoea at one-year follow-up. Children vaccinated and followed up for two years Rotavac probably prevents 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases in India (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; 6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02; moderate-certainty evidence). There were eight cases of intussusception in 5764 children after Rotavac vaccination and three cases in 2818 children after placebo (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.35 to 5.02; very low-certainty evidence). There was insufficient evidence of an effect on mortality from any rotavirus vaccine (198,381 participants, 44 trials; low- to very low-certainty evidence), as the trials were not powered to detect an effect at this endpoint. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:RV1, RV5, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. Whilst the relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, there is a greater number of episodes prevented in these settings as the baseline risk is much higher. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events.

/pdf/vaccines-for-preventing-rotavirus-diarrhoea-vaccines-in-use-2begkwabqc.pdf

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

Purpose of reviewAs of 2019, four rotavirus vaccines have been prequalified by the WHO for use worldwide. This review highlights current knowledge regarding rotavirus vaccines available, and provides a brief summary of the rotavirus vaccine pipeline.Recent findingsData generated from use of currentl

Current and new rotavirus vaccines

The prevalence of diabetic retinopathy in the United States.

Summary Background The duration of protection offered by rotavirus vaccines varies across the world, and this variation is important to understanding and predicting the effects of the vaccines. There is now a large body of evidence on the efficacy of live oral rotavirus vaccines in different settings, but these data have never been synthesised to obtain robust estimates of efficacy by duration of follow-up. Our aim is to estimate the efficacy of live oral rotavirus vaccines at each point during follow-up and by mortality stratum. Methods In our meta-regression study, we identified all randomised controlled trials of rotavirus vaccines published until April 4, 2018, using the results of a Cochrane systematic review, and cross checked these studies against those identified by another systematic review. We excluded trials that were based on special populations, trials without an infant schedule, and trials without clear reporting of numbers of enrolled infants and events in different periods of follow-up. For all reported periods of follow-up, we extracted the mean duration of follow-up (time since administration of the final dose of rotavirus vaccination), the number of enrolled infants, and case counts for rotavirus-positive severe gastroenteritis in both non-vaccinated and vaccinated groups. We used a Bayesian hierarchical Poisson meta-regression model to estimate the pooled cumulative vaccine efficacy (VE) and its waning with time for three mortality strata. We then converted these VE estimates into instantaneous VE (iVE). Findings In settings with low mortality (15 observations), iVE pooled for infant schedules of Rotarix and RotaTeq was 98% (95% credibility interval 93–100) 2 weeks following the final dose of vaccination and 94% (87–98) after 12 months. In medium-mortality settings (11 observations), equivalent estimates were 82% (74–92) after 2 weeks and 77% (67–84) after 12 months. In settings with high mortality (24 observations), there were five different vaccines with observation points for infant schedules. The pooled iVE was 66% (48–81) after 2 weeks of follow-up and 44% (27–59) after 12 months. Interpretation Rotavirus vaccine efficacy is lower and wanes more rapidly in high-mortality settings than in low-mortality settings, but the earlier peak age of disease in high-mortality settings means that live oral rotavirus vaccines are still likely to provide substantial benefit. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Efficacy of live oral rotavirus vaccines by duration of follow-up: a meta-regression of randomised controlled trials.

Rotavirus is the leading cause of diarrheal death among children   65% of children had at least one rotavirus diarrhea illness by 5 years of age and rotavirus accounted for > 40% of all-cause diarrhea hospitalizations globally. Two live, oral rotavirus vaccines have been implemented nationally in > 100 countries since 2006 and their use has substantially reduced the burden of severe diarrheal illness in all settings. Vaccine efficacy and effectiveness estimates suggest there is a gradient in vaccine performance between low child-mortality countries (> 90%) and medium and high child-mortality countries (57–75%). Additionally, an increased risk of intussusception (~ 1–6 per 100,000 vaccinated infants) following vaccination has been documented in some countries, but this is outweighed by the large benefits of vaccination. Two additional live, oral rotavirus vaccines were recently licensed and these have improved on some programmatic limitations of earlier vaccines, such as heat stability, cost, and cold-chain footprint. Non-replicating rotavirus vaccines that are parenterally administered are in clinical testing, and these have the potential to reduce the performance differential and safety concerns associated with live oral rotavirus vaccines.

/pdf/rotavirus-vaccines-effectiveness-safety-and-future-1ry2zefgyh.pdf

Rotavirus Vaccines: Effectiveness, Safety, and Future Directions.

A randomized Phase III clinical trial to assess the efficacy of a bovine-human reassortant pentavalent rotavirus vaccine in Indian infants

Background: Type-2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the leading lifestyle-related chronic disease as its prevalence is expected to rise up to 24.0% in the world by 2025, which was only 6.3% in year 2003.
Objective: To understand the high-altitude and low-altitude differentials for DM and diabetic retinopathy (DR) prevalence in a sub-Himalayan state of North India.
Methods: The study was carried out in the Shahpur block of Kangra district (altitude 2,404 feet) and the Spiti block of Lahaul and Spiti district (altitude 12,500 feet) of Himachal Pradesh.
Results: Among diabetics, the prevalence of DR was observed to be high (18.1%) in low landers and low (5.0%) in high landers. DM was more of a problem among low landers with a prevalence of 12.3% when compared to high landers (7.2%). Overall, the odd ratio of DR was twice as high (2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-2.3) among patients with an unsatisfactory level of HbA1c (>8.0%) adjusted for gender, age group, smoking status and hypertension.
Conclusion: Differential did exist, as DM and DR were significantly lower in high-altitude areas when compared to low-altitude areas.

/pdf/difference-in-prevalence-of-diabetes-and-diabetic-3kidpqnwl8.pdf

Lalit Gupta

Papers

A randomized Phase III clinical trial to assess the efficacy of a bovine-human reassortant pentavalent rotavirus vaccine in Indian infants

Difference in prevalence of diabetes and diabetic retinopathy among low-altitude dwellers vs. high-altitude dwellers in North India

In Vitro Studies on the Release of Intracelluar Prolactin from Lymphocytes Using Strees Related Amines and Hormones