Mumps Vaccines: Current Challenges and Future Prospects.
ABSTRACT: Five decades have passed since the first mumps vaccine was licensed. Over this period, a resurgence of mumps infections has been recorded worldwide. Although global mumps infections have been controlled through vaccination, outbreaks are still on the rise, including in populations with high vaccination coverage. Several epidemiological studies suggest that this infectious virus continues to be a worldwide public health threat. The development and deployment of an improved, prophylactic mumps vaccine that provides long-lasting protection is indeed a priority. The purpose of this review is to provide an immuno-biological perspective on mumps vaccines. Here, we review the virology of mumps, licensed mumps vaccines, and the typical immune responses elicited following mumps vaccination. Furthermore, we discuss the limitations and challenges of the currently licensed mumps vaccines and provide strategies for the development of an improved mumps vaccine.
Project description:Mumps is an important childhood infectious disease caused by mumps virus (MuV). We reviewed the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and vaccine development of mumps. Previous studies were identified using the key words "mumps" and "epidemiology", "pathogenesis" or "vaccine" in MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. We excluded the articles that were not published in the English language, manuscripts without abstracts, and opinion articles from the review. The number of cases caused by MuV decreased steeply after the introduction of the mumps vaccine worldwide. In recent years, a global resurgence of mumps cases in developed countries and cases of aseptic meningitis caused by some mumps vaccine strains have renewed the importance of MuV infection worldwide. The performance of mumps vaccination has become an important issue for controlling mumps infections. Vaccine development and routine vaccination are still effective measures to globally reduce the incidence of mumps infections. During outbreaks, a third of MMR vaccine is recommended for groups of persons determined by public authorities.
Project description:After decades of declining mumps incidence amid widespread vaccination, the United States and other developed countries have experienced a resurgence in mumps cases over the last decade. Outbreaks affecting vaccinated individuals and communities with high vaccine coverage have prompted concerns about the effectiveness of the live attenuated vaccine currently in use. It is unclear whether immune protection wanes or whether the vaccine protects inadequately against currently circulating mumps virus lineages. Synthesizing data from six studies of mumps vaccine effectiveness, we estimated that vaccine-derived immune protection against mumps wanes on average 27 years (95% confidence interval, 16 to 51 years) after vaccination. After accounting for this waning, we found no evidence that the emergence of heterologous virus genotypes contributed to changes in vaccine effectiveness over time. A mathematical model of mumps transmission confirmed the central role of waning immunity to the vaccine in the re-emergence of mumps cases. Outbreaks from 2006 to the present among young adults, and outbreaks in the late 1980s and early 1990s among adolescents, aligned with peaks in mumps susceptibility of these age groups predicted to be due to loss of vaccine-derived protection. In contrast, evolution of mumps virus strains escaping immune pressure would be expected to cause a higher proportion of cases among children, not adolescents and young adults as observed. Routine use of a third vaccine dose at 18 years of age, or booster dosing throughout adulthood, may be a strategy to prevent mumps re-emergence and should be assessed in clinical trials.
Project description:BACKGROUND:MMR II (M-M-R II [Merck & Co, Inc.]) is currently the only measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine licensed in the United States. A second MMR vaccine would mitigate the potential risk of vaccine supply shortage or delay. In this study, we assessed the immunogenicity and safety of another MMR vaccine (MMR-RIT [Priorix, GlaxoSmithKline]) compared with those of the MMR II in 12- to 15-month-old children who received it as a first dose. METHODS:In this phase III, observer-blinded, noninferiority, lot-to-lot consistency clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01702428), 5003 healthy children were randomly assigned to receive 1 dose of MMR-RIT (1 of 3 production lots) or MMR II along with other age-recommended routine vaccines. We evaluated the immunogenicity of all vaccines in terms of antibody concentrations (by using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or electrochemiluminescence assay) and/or seroresponse rates 43 days after vaccination. We also assessed the reactogenicity and safety of the vaccines. RESULTS:Immunoresponses after vaccination with MMR-RIT were robust and noninferior to those after vaccination with the MMR II. Immunogenicity of the 3 production lots of MMR-RIT was consistent; more than 97% of the children had a seroresponse to MMR components. The coadministered vaccines elicited similar immunoresponses in the MMR-RIT and MMR II groups. Both MMR vaccines resulted in comparable reactogenicity profiles, and no safety concerns were detected. CONCLUSIONS:If licensed, the MMR-RIT could provide a valid option for the prevention of measles, mumps, and rubella in children in the United States and would reduce potential risks of a vaccine shortage.
Project description:When this trial was initiated, the combined measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine was licensed for subcutaneous administration in all European countries and for intramuscular administration in some countries, whereas varicella vaccine was licensed only for subcutaneous administration. This study evaluated the intramuscular administration of an MMR vaccine (M-M-RvaxPro) and a varicella vaccine (VARIVAX) compared with the subcutaneous route.An open-label randomised trial was performed in France and Germany. Healthy children, aged 12 to 18 months, received single injections of M-M-RvaxPro and VARIVAX concomitantly at separate injection sites. Both vaccines were administered either intramuscularly (IM group, n = 374) or subcutaneously (SC group, n = 378). Immunogenicity was assessed before vaccination and 42 days after vaccination. Injection-site erythema, swelling and pain were recorded from days 0 to 4 after vaccination. Body temperature was monitored daily between 0 and 42 days after vaccination. Other adverse events were recorded up to 42 days after vaccination and serious adverse events until the second study visit.Antibody response rates at day 42 in the per-protocol set of children initially seronegative to measles, mumps, rubella or varicella were similar between the IM and SC groups for all four antigens. Response rates were 94 to 96% for measles, 98% for both mumps and rubella and 86 to 88% for varicella. For children initially seronegative to varicella, 99% achieved the seroconversion threshold (antibody concentrations of >or= 1.25 gpELISA units/ml). Erythema and swelling were the most frequently reported injection-site reactions for both vaccines. Most injection-site reactions were of mild intensity or small size (<or= 2.5 cm). There was a trend for lower rates of injection-site erythema and swelling in the IM group. The incidence and nature of systemic adverse events were comparable for the two routes of administration, except varicella-like rashes, which were less frequent in the IM group.The immunogenicities of M-M-RvaxPro and VARIVAX administered by the intramuscular route were comparable with those following subcutaneous administration, and the tolerability of the two vaccines was comparable regardless of administration route. Integration of both administration routes in the current European indications for the two vaccines will now allow physicians in Europe to choose their preferred administration route in routine clinical practice.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00432523.
Project description:Vaccination programs for childhood diseases, such as measles, mumps and rubella have greatly contributed to decreasing the incidence and impact of those diseases. Nonetheless, despite long vaccination programmes across the world, mumps has not yet been eradicated in those countries: indeed, large outbreaks continue. For example, in Scotland large outbreaks occurred in 2004, 2005, and 2015, despite introducing the MMR (Measles-Mumps-Rubella) vaccine more than 20 years ago. There are indications that this vaccine-preventable disease is re-emerging in highly vaccinated populations. Here we investigate whether the resurgence of mumps is due to waning immunity, and further, could a booster dose be the solution to eradicate mumps or would it just extend the period of waning immunity? Using mathematical modeling we enhance a seasonally-structured disease model with four scenarios: no vaccination, vaccinated individuals protected for life, vaccinated individuals at risk of waning immunity, and introduction of measures to increase immunity (a third dose, or a better vaccine). The model is parameterised from observed clinical data in Scotland 2004-2015 and the literature. The results of the four scenarios are compared with observed clinical data 2004-2016. While the force of infection is relatively sensitive to the duration of immunity and the number of boosters undertaken, we conclude that periodic large outbreaks of mumps will be sustained for all except the second scenario. This suggests that the current protocol of two vaccinations is optimal in the sense that while there are periodic large outbreaks, the severity of cases in vaccinated individuals is less than in unvaccinated individuals, and the size of the outbreaks does not decrease sufficiently with a third booster to make economic sense. This recommendation relies on continuous efforts to maintain high levels of vaccination uptake.
Project description:Bluetongue (BT) is a haemorrhagic disease of wild and domestic ruminants with a huge economic worldwide impact on livestock. The disease is caused by BT-virus transmitted by Culicoides biting midges and disease control without vaccination is hardly possible. Vaccination is the most feasible and cost-effective way to minimize economic losses. Marketed BT vaccines are successfully used in different parts of the world. Inactivated BT vaccines are efficacious and safe but relatively expensive, whereas live-attenuated vaccines are efficacious and cheap but are unsafe because of under-attenuation, onward spread, reversion to virulence, and reassortment events. Both manufactured BT vaccines do not enable differentiating infected from vaccinated animals (DIVA) and protection is limited to the respective serotype. The ideal BT vaccine is a licensed, affordable, completely safe DIVA vaccine, that induces quick, lifelong, broad protection in all susceptible ruminant species. Promising vaccine candidates show improvement for one or more of these main vaccine standards. BTV protein vaccines and viral vector vaccines have DIVA potential depending on the selected BTV antigens, but are less effective and likely more costly per protected animal than current vaccines. Several vaccine platforms based on replicating BTV are applied for many serotypes by exchange of serotype dominant outer shell proteins. These platforms based on one BTV backbone result in attenuation or abortive virus replication and prevent disease by and spread of vaccine virus as well as reversion to virulence. These replicating BT vaccines induce humoral and T-cell mediated immune responses to all viral proteins except to one, which could enable DIVA tests. Most of these replicating vaccines can be produced similarly as currently marketed BT vaccines. All replicating vaccine platforms developed by reverse genetics are classified as genetic modified organisms. This implies extensive and expensive safety trails in target ruminant species, and acceptance by the community could be hindered. Nonetheless, several experimental BT vaccines show very promising improvements and could compete with marketed vaccines regarding their vaccine profile, but none of these next generation BT vaccines have been licensed yet.
Project description:Routine childhood vaccination against measles, mumps and rubella has virtually abolished virus-related morbidity and mortality. Notwithstanding this, we describe here devastating neurological complications associated with the detection of live-attenuated mumps virus Jeryl Lynn (MuVJL5) in the brain of a child who had undergone successful allogeneic transplantation for severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID). This is the first confirmed report of MuVJL5 associated with chronic encephalitis and highlights the need to exclude immunodeficient individuals from immunisation with live-attenuated vaccines. The diagnosis was only possible by deep sequencing of the brain biopsy. Sequence comparison of the vaccine batch to the MuVJL5 isolated from brain identified biased hypermutation, particularly in the matrix gene, similar to those found in measles from cases of SSPE. The findings provide unique insights into the pathogenesis of paramyxovirus brain infections.
Project description:In 2016, a year-long large-scale mumps outbreak occurred in Arkansas among a highly-vaccinated population. A total of 2954 mumps cases were identified during this outbreak. The majority of cases (1676 (57%)) were school-aged children (5-17?years), 1536 (92%) of these children had completed the mumps vaccination schedule. To weigh the possibility that the mumps virus evaded vaccine-induced immunity in the affected Arkansas population, we established a pipeline for genomic characterization of the outbreak strains. Our pipeline produces whole-genome sequences along with phylogenetic analysis of the outbreak mumps virus strains. We collected buccal swab samples of patients who tested positive for the mumps virus during the 2016 Arkansas outbreak, and used the portable Oxford Nanopore Technology to sequence the extracted strains. Our pipeline identified the genotype of the Arkansas mumps strains as genotype G and presented a genome-based phylogenetic tree with superior resolution to a standard small hydrophobic (SH) gene-based tree. We phylogenetically compared the Arkansas whole-genome sequences to all publicly available mumps strains. While these analyses show that the Arkansas mumps strains are evolutionarily distinct from the vaccine strains, we observed no correlation between vaccination history and phylogenetic grouping. Furthermore, we predicted potential B-cell epitopes encoded by the Arkansas mumps strains using a random forest prediction model trained on antibody-antigen protein structures. Over half of the predicted epitopes of the Jeryl-Lynn vaccine strains in the Hemagglutinin-Neuraminidase (HN) surface glycoprotein (a major target of neutralizing antibodies) region are missing in the Arkansas mumps strains. In-silico analyses of potential epitopes may indicate that the Arkansas mumps strains display antigens with reduced immunogenicity, which may contribute to reduced vaccine effectiveness. However, our in-silico findings should be assessed by robust experiments such as cross neutralization assays. Metadata analysis showed that vaccination history had no effect on the evolution of the Arkansas mumps strains during this outbreak. We conclude that the driving force behind the spread of the mumps virus in the 2016 Arkansas outbreak remains undetermined.
Project description:Background:After routine mumps immunization programs were implemented in Manitoba in the 1980s, incidence was low, with 0-9 cases of disease annually. In September 2016, a mumps outbreak began in fully vaccinated university students in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Objective:We describe the investigation of this province-wide mumps outbreak, which lasted between September 2016 and December 2018. We present the details of public health measures implemented and challenges encountered. Possible contributing factors to the sustained transmission are also provided. Methods:Probable and confirmed cases of mumps were investigated by public health departments using the investigation form developed for this outbreak. Confirmed mumps cases were linked to the provincial immunization registry. An outbreak response team planned and implemented control measures across the province. Results:The outbreak began in vaccinated university students in September 2016 and spread across the province. Activity was high and prolonged in the northern remote areas. By the end of 2018, 2,223 cases had been confirmed. All age groups were affected, and incidence was highest among people aged 18-29 years. Two-dose coverage of mumps-containing vaccine in confirmed cases was close to 70%. Conclusion:This prolonged outbreak revealed a large vulnerable population likely resulting from under-vaccination and waning vaccine-induced immunity in the absence of natural boosting from exposure to mumps virus. It is important to maintain high two-dose coverage with mumps-containing vaccines. A third dose of mumps-containing vaccine in future outbreaks may be considered.
Project description:The first licensed dengue vaccine led to considerable controversy, and to date, no dengue vaccine is in widespread use. All three leading dengue vaccine candidates are live attenuated vaccines, with the main difference between them being the type of backbone and the extent of chimerization. While CYD-TDV (the first licensed dengue vaccine) does not include non-structural proteins of dengue, TAK-003 contains the dengue virus serotype 2 backbone, and the Butantan/Merck vaccine contains three full-genomes of the four dengue virus serotypes. While dengue-primed individuals can already benefit from vaccination against all four serotypes with the first licensed dengue vaccine CYD-TDV, the need for dengue-naive population has not yet been met. To improve tetravalent protection, sequential vaccination should be considered in addition to a heterologous prime-boost approach.