28.12.2013 Views

LIVE POLIO IRUS VACCINES

LIVE POLIO IRUS VACCINES

LIVE POLIO IRUS VACCINES

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

454<br />

Efficacy-Field Evidence<br />

It is noted that there were five cases in the<br />

recently vaccinated giving a case rate of 15.6 per<br />

100,000, and none in the vaccinated after an interval<br />

adequate to permit the development of antibodies.<br />

In the unvaccinated less than 40 years of<br />

age, the case rate was 1.0 per 100,000, and in<br />

those 40 years and over, 0.8 per 100,000 person<br />

years. The case rates are to be compared with<br />

illustrative rates for Dade County of 4.2 per<br />

100,000 total population in 1959, of 0.8 in 1957<br />

(a year of low incidence), and of 16.4 in 1954 (a<br />

year of high incidence). Thus the case rate in<br />

the recently vaccinated compares with that for<br />

the population as a whole observed in a year of<br />

high incidence. The lack of cases in the 55,000<br />

person years of experience of the orally vaccinated<br />

is encouraging.<br />

Time relationships are of particular importance.<br />

The intervals between the taking of the<br />

vaccine and onset of symptoms were respectively<br />

7, 9, 9, 13, and 14 days. Coincidental cases would<br />

be expected to have onsets distributed evenly at<br />

least for the first two weeks following vaccination.<br />

A chance grouping of onsets of all cases within<br />

the second week following vaccination would be<br />

improbable. In the experience with the live virus<br />

vaccine in the USSR, there are reports that onsets<br />

of illness in paralytic cases up to and including<br />

10 days following oral vaccination were interpreted<br />

as cases probably related to pre-existing<br />

infection due to wild virus. Although these<br />

would be expected to occur in any large-scale<br />

use, cases of this type were not discussed in the<br />

official presentation from the USSR. We can<br />

therefore only emphasize the importance of records<br />

that show both the occurrence of paralytic<br />

polio in vaccinees from the day of vaccination to<br />

onset of illness, as well as complete reports of<br />

cases occurring in the comparable unvaccinated<br />

group. Data of this kind are obviously required.<br />

There were two cases in 1960 in the orally<br />

unvaccinated. As noted in the case reports in<br />

the appendix, one occurred in a child of a rural<br />

family, no member of which had taken oral vaccine<br />

and in which the probability of contact with<br />

the vaccine virus was relatively remote. The<br />

other was the fulminating fatal case whose wife<br />

and child had taken oral vaccine one month<br />

earlier. The course of the disease spoke for infection<br />

with a highly virulent virus. If these<br />

are accepted as coincidental infections and<br />

disease, the evidence indicates the safety of an<br />

oral polio vaccination program to contacts and<br />

the community.<br />

Of the seven cases, poliovirus was isolated from<br />

four, all yielding Type 3 virus and two of these<br />

Type 1 also. In two cases findings are pending.<br />

In the fatal case no feces were collected.<br />

None of the seven cases had had a full course<br />

of Salk vaccination. Two had been inoculated<br />

twice. The child of two received the last dose 18<br />

months prior to onset. The adult male had taken<br />

them "about five years ago."<br />

The one suspect case in which diagnosis is still<br />

undetermined is a male 20 years of age. He noted<br />

malaise, headache, fever and difficulty in swallowing<br />

with onset 11 days after taking oral vaccine.<br />

His symptoms improved but the gag reflex<br />

is still absent. He had had no Salk vaccine.<br />

This patient has some neuromuscular congenital<br />

defects.<br />

COMMENT<br />

At this time we are able to present only very<br />

early and obviously incomplete observations.<br />

Final evaluation will need to include the results<br />

of marker studies and serological findings,<br />

neither of which is at hand. Thus our impressions<br />

must be based chiefly on epidemiological<br />

findings. The observations which impress us as<br />

being of greatest significance include:<br />

1. There was a ready acceptance in Dade<br />

County of a living oral poliovirus vaccine by<br />

412,000 of the population.<br />

2. Significant immediate reactions to oral polio<br />

vaccination were not observed.<br />

3. The usual incidence of aseptic meningitis<br />

and encephalitis noted in the previous year continued<br />

throughout the trial period without significant<br />

change.<br />

4. There was no evidence of any significant<br />

association between attenuated vaccine virus and<br />

the 29 currently accepted cases of non-bacterial,<br />

non-paralytic infections of the central nervous<br />

system. Four of these 1960 cases occurred prior<br />

to the field trial.<br />

5. There was substantial evidence of safety<br />

to contacts in the presence of an extensive use of<br />

oral polio vaccine.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!