12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Case-control vaccine effectiveness studies: Data collection, analysis and reporting results

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The case-control methodology is frequently used to evaluate vaccine effectiveness post-licensure. The results of such studies provide important insight into the level of protection afforded by vaccines in a ‘real world’ context, and are commonly used to guide vaccine policy decisions. However, the potential for bias and confounding are important limitations to this method, and the results of a poorly conducted or incorrectly interpreted case-control study can mislead policies. In 2012, a group of experts met to review recent experience with case-control studies evaluating vaccine effectiveness; we summarize the recommendations of that group regarding best practices for data collection, analysis, and presentation of the results of case-control vaccine effectiveness studies. Vaccination status is the primary exposure of interest, but can be challenging to assess accurately and with minimal bias. Investigators should understand factors associated with vaccination as well as the availability of documented vaccination status in the study context; case-control studies may not be a valid method for evaluating vaccine effectiveness in settings where many children lack a documented immunization history. To avoid bias, it is essential to use the same methods and effort gathering vaccination data from cases and controls. Variables that may confound the association between illness and vaccination are also important to capture as completely as possible, and where relevant, adjust for in the analysis according to the analytic plan. In presenting results from case-control vaccine effectiveness studies, investigators should describe enrollment among eligible cases and controls as well as the proportion with no documented vaccine history. Emphasis should be placed on confidence intervals, rather than point estimates, of vaccine effectiveness. Case-control studies are a useful approach for evaluating vaccine effectiveness; however careful attention must be paid to the collection, analysis and presentation of the data in order to best inform evidence-based vaccine policies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references56

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The impact of residual and unmeasured confounding in epidemiologic studies: a simulation study.

          Measurement error in explanatory variables and unmeasured confounders can cause considerable problems in epidemiologic studies. It is well recognized that under certain conditions, nondifferential measurement error in the exposure variable produces bias towards the null. Measurement error in confounders will lead to residual confounding, but this is not a straightforward issue, and it is not clear in which direction the bias will point. Unmeasured confounders further complicate matters. There has been discussion about the amount of bias in exposure effect estimates that can plausibly occur due to residual or unmeasured confounding. In this paper, the authors use simulation studies and logistic regression analyses to investigate the size of the apparent exposure-outcome association that can occur when in truth the exposure has no causal effect on the outcome. The authors consider two cases with a normally distributed exposure and either two or four normally distributed confounders. When the confounders are uncorrelated, bias in the exposure effect estimate increases as the amount of residual and unmeasured confounding increases. Patterns are more complex for correlated confounders. With plausible assumptions, effect sizes of the magnitude frequently reported in observational epidemiologic studies can be generated by residual and/or unmeasured confounding alone.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effectiveness of seven-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine against invasive pneumococcal disease: a matched case-control study.

            When seven-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine was introduced in the USA, many children were vaccinated on schedules that differed from those tested in clinical trials. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of the vaccine against various pneumococcal serotypes, and to measure the effectiveness of the recommended dose schedule and of catch-up and incomplete schedules. Invasive disease, defined as isolation of pneumococcus from a sterile site, was identified in children aged 3-59 months through the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Active Bacterial Core surveillance. We tested isolates for serotype and antimicrobial susceptibility. Three controls, matched for age and zip code were selected for each case. We calculated the matched odds ratio for vaccination using conditional logistic regression, controlling for underlying conditions. Vaccine effectiveness was calculated as one minus the adjusted matched odds ratio times 100%. We enrolled 782 cases and 2512 controls. Effectiveness of one or more doses against vaccine serotypes was 96% (95% CI 93-98) in healthy children and 81% (57-92) in those with coexisting disorders. It was 76% (63-85) against infections that were not susceptible to penicillin. Vaccination prevented disease caused by all seven vaccine serotypes, and by vaccine-related serotype 6A. Several schedules were more protective than no vaccination; three infant doses with a booster were more protective against vaccine-type disease than were three infant doses alone (p=0.0323). The seven-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine prevents invasive disease in both healthy and chronically ill children. The vaccine is effective when used with various non-standard schedules.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effectiveness of ten-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine against invasive pneumococcal disease in Brazil: a matched case-control study.

              In March 2010, Brazil introduced the ten-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV10), which was licensed based on non-inferiority of immunological correlates of protection compared with the seven-valent vaccine. The schedule comprised three primary doses at ages 2 months, 4 months, and 6 months, and a booster dose at age 12 months. A single catch-up dose was offered for children aged 12-23 months at the time of introduction. We assessed PCV10 effectiveness against invasive pneumococcal disease in Brazilian children. Invasive pneumococcal disease, defined as isolation of Streptococcus pneumoniae from blood, cerebrospinal fluid, or another normally sterile site, was identified in children age-eligible for at least one PCV10 dose through laboratory-based and hospital-based surveillance in ten states in Brazil from March 1, 2010, until Dec 31, 2012. We aimed to identify four age-matched and neighbourhood-matched controls for each case. We used conditional logistic regression and calculated PCV10 effectiveness as (1-adjusted matched odds ratio) × 100% for vaccine-type and vaccine-related serotypes (ie, in the same serogroup as a vaccine serotype). In 316 cases (median age 13·2 months, range 2·6-53·1) and 1219 controls (13·3 months, 2·6-53·1), the adjusted effectiveness of an age-appropriate PCV10 schedule was 83·8% (95% CI 65·9-92·3) against vaccine serotypes, and 77·9% (41·0-91·7) against vaccine-related serotypes. Serotype-specific effectiveness was shown for the two most common vaccine serotypes-14 (87·7%, 60·8-96·1) and 6B (82·8%, 23·8-96·1)-and serotype 19A (82·2%, 10·7-96·4), a serotype related to vaccine serotype 19F. A single catch-up dose in children aged 12-23 months was effective against vaccine-type disease (68·0%, 17·6-87·6). No significant effectiveness was shown against non-vaccine serotypes for age-appropriate or catch-up schedules. In the routine immunisation programme in Brazil, PCV10 prevents invasive disease caused by vaccine serotypes. PCV10 might provide cross-protection against some vaccine-related serotypes. Brazilian Ministry of Health, Pan-American Health Organization, and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                8406899
                Vaccine
                Vaccine
                Vaccine
                0264-410X
                1873-2518
                05 June 2017
                23 April 2017
                30 January 2020
                09 February 2020
                : 35
                : 25
                : 3303-3308
                Affiliations
                [a ]National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA, USA
                [b ]International Center for Maternal and Newborn Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, USA
                [c ]Rollins School of Public Health Emory University, 1518 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA, USA
                [d ]Department of Immunizations, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland
                [e ]Centre for Respiratory Diseases and Meningitis, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, 1 Modderfontein Rd, Sandringham, Johannesburg, South Africa
                [f ]International Vaccine Access Center, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, USA
                [g ]Respiratory and Meningeal Pathogens Unit, University of Witwatersrand, Richard Ward, 1 Jan Smuts Ave, Braamfontein, Johannesburg, South Africa
                [h ]Monitoring & Evaluation, Policy & Performance, GAVI Alliance, Chemin des Mines 2, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland
                [i ]Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Royal Children’s Hospital, 50 Flemington Rd, Parkville VIC 3052, Australia
                [j ]Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, London WC1E 7HT, UK
                [k ]KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, PO Box 230-80108, Kilifi, Kenya
                [l ]MRC Tropical Epidemiology Group, London School of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, London, UK
                [m ]Centre of Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health and Centre for International Health, University of Bergen, PO Box 7800, Bergen, Norway
                [n ]Department of International Public Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 4404, Nydalen, Oslo, Norway
                [o ]PATH, 2201 Westlake Avenue, Seattle, WA, USA
                [p ]Aga Khan University, Stadium Rd, Karachi, Pakistan
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. jverani@ 123456cdc.gov (J.R. Verani).
                Article
                EMS85646
                10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.04.035
                7008029
                28442230
                14388e51-4756-464e-ab2a-b488d1754b0b

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                vaccines,case-control studies,evaluation studies
                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                vaccines, case-control studies, evaluation studies

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content203

                Cited by15

                Most referenced authors1,377