32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Prevention of Pertussis, Tetanus, and Diphtheria with Vaccines in the United States: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)

      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.

          Summary

          This report compiles and summarizes all recommendations from CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding prevention and control of tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis in the United States. As a comprehensive summary of previously published recommendations, this report does not contain any new recommendations and replaces all previously published reports and policy notes; it is intended for use by clinicians and public health providers as a resource. ACIP recommends routine vaccination for tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis. Infants and young children are recommended to receive a 5-dose series of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccines, with one adolescent booster dose of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine. Adults who have never received Tdap also are recommended to receive a booster dose of Tdap. Women are recommended to receive a dose of Tdap during each pregnancy, which should be administered from 27 through 36 weeks’ gestation, regardless of previous receipt of Tdap. After receipt of Tdap, adolescents and adults are recommended to receive a booster tetanus and diphtheria toxoids (Td) vaccine every 10 years to assure ongoing protection against tetanus and diphtheria.

          Related collections

          Most cited references314

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

          Acellular pertussis vaccines protect against disease but fail to prevent infection and transmission in a nonhuman primate model.

          Pertussis is a highly contagious respiratory illness caused by the bacterial pathogen Bordetella pertussis. Pertussis rates in the United States have been rising and reached a 50-y high of 42,000 cases in 2012. Although pertussis resurgence is not completely understood, we hypothesize that current acellular pertussis (aP) vaccines fail to prevent colonization and transmission. To test our hypothesis, infant baboons were vaccinated at 2, 4, and 6 mo of age with aP or whole-cell pertussis (wP) vaccines and challenged with B. pertussis at 7 mo. Infection was followed by quantifying colonization in nasopharyngeal washes and monitoring leukocytosis and symptoms. Baboons vaccinated with aP were protected from severe pertussis-associated symptoms but not from colonization, did not clear the infection faster than naïve animals, and readily transmitted B. pertussis to unvaccinated contacts. Vaccination with wP induced a more rapid clearance compared with naïve and aP-vaccinated animals. By comparison, previously infected animals were not colonized upon secondary infection. Although all vaccinated and previously infected animals had robust serum antibody responses, we found key differences in T-cell immunity. Previously infected animals and wP-vaccinated animals possess strong B. pertussis-specific T helper 17 (Th17) memory and Th1 memory, whereas aP vaccination induced a Th1/Th2 response instead. The observation that aP, which induces an immune response mismatched to that induced by natural infection, fails to prevent colonization or transmission provides a plausible explanation for the resurgence of pertussis and suggests that optimal control of pertussis will require the development of improved vaccines.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Safety monitoring in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

            The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) conduct post-licensure vaccine safety monitoring using the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a spontaneous (or passive) reporting system. This means that after a vaccine is approved, CDC and FDA continue to monitor safety while it is distributed in the marketplace for use by collecting and analyzing spontaneous reports of adverse events that occur in persons following vaccination. Various methods and statistical techniques are used to analyze VAERS data, which CDC and FDA use to guide further safety evaluations and inform decisions around vaccine recommendations and regulatory action. VAERS data must be interpreted with caution due to the inherent limitations of passive surveillance. VAERS is primarily a safety signal detection and hypothesis generating system. Generally, VAERS data cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused an adverse event. VAERS data interpreted alone or out of context can lead to erroneous conclusions about cause and effect as well as the risk of adverse events occurring following vaccination. CDC makes VAERS data available to the public and readily accessible online. We describe fundamental vaccine safety concepts, provide an overview of VAERS for healthcare professionals who provide vaccinations and might want to report or better understand a vaccine adverse event, and explain how CDC and FDA analyze VAERS data. We also describe strengths and limitations, and address common misconceptions about VAERS. Information in this review will be helpful for healthcare professionals counseling patients, parents, and others on vaccine safety and benefit-risk balance of vaccination.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Waning protection after fifth dose of acellular pertussis vaccine in children.

              In the United States, children receive five doses of diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine before 7 years of age. The duration of protection after five doses of DTaP is unknown. We assessed the risk of pertussis in children in California relative to the time since the fifth dose of DTaP from 2006 to 2011. This period included a large outbreak in 2010. We conducted a case-control study involving members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California who were vaccinated with DTaP at 47 to 84 months of age. We compared children with pertussis confirmed by a positive polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) assay with two sets of controls: those who were PCR-negative for pertussis and closely matched controls from the general population of health-plan members. We used logistic regression to examine the risk of pertussis in relation to the duration of time since the fifth DTaP dose. Children who received whole-cell pertussis vaccine during infancy or who received any pertussis-containing vaccine after their fifth dose of DTaP were excluded. We compared 277 children, 4 to 12 years of age, who were PCR-positive for pertussis with 3318 PCR-negative controls and 6086 matched controls. PCR-positive children were more likely to have received the fifth DTaP dose earlier than PCR-negative controls (P<0.001) or matched controls (P=0.005). Comparison with PCR-negative controls yielded an odds ratio of 1.42 (95% confidence interval, 1.21 to 1.66), indicating that after the fifth dose of DTaP, the odds of acquiring pertussis increased by an average of 42% per year. Protection against pertussis waned during the 5 years after the fifth dose of DTaP. (Funded by Kaiser Permanente).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                MMWR Recomm Rep
                MMWR Recomm Rep
                RR
                MMWR Recommendations and Reports
                Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
                1057-5987
                1545-8601
                27 April 2018
                27 April 2018
                : 67
                : 2
                : 1-44
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Bacterial Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC
                [2 ]Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC
                [3 ]Office of the Director, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC
                [4 ]University of California, Berkeley; Berkeley, CA
                [5 ]University of California, San Diego; La Jolla, California
                [6 ]Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC
                Author notes
                Corresponding preparer: Jennifer L. Liang, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC. E-mail: JLiang@ 123456cdc.gov .
                Article
                rr6702a1
                10.15585/mmwr.rr6702a1
                5919600
                29702631
                163d094c-f1e4-4182-9978-a59c7505484d

                All material in the MMWR Series is in the public domain and may be used and reprinted without permission; citation as to source, however, is appreciated.

                History
                Categories
                Recommendations and Reports

                Comments

                Comment on this article