Response to smallpox vaccine in persons immunized in the distant past
- PMID: 12824212
- DOI: 10.1001/jama.289.24.3295
Response to smallpox vaccine in persons immunized in the distant past
Erratum in
- JAMA. 2003 Jul 16;290(3):334
Abstract
Context: There is renewed interest in use of smallpox vaccine due to the potential for a bioterrorist attack. This would involve vaccinating health care workers who were previously vaccinated.
Objective: To evaluate the use of diluted vaccinia virus in vaccination of previously vaccinated (non-naive) participants.
Design, setting, and participants: Eighty non-naive participants, aged 32 to 60 years, were randomized in a single-blinded study to receive either undiluted or diluted (1:3.2, 1:10, or 1:32) doses of smallpox vaccine. A comparison group, aged 18 to 31 years, of 10 vaccinia-naive participants received undiluted vaccine. Participants were enrolled between April 1 and May 15, 2002, at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Vaccine and Treatment Evaluation Unit at Saint Louis University, St Louis, Mo.
Intervention: Smallpox vaccine was administered by scarification using 15 skin punctures in the deltoid region of the arm.
Main outcome measures: Presence of a major reaction, defined as a vesicular or pustular lesion or area of palpable induration surrounding a central lesion following vaccination, and measures of viral shedding and antibody titers.
Results: Initial vaccination resulted in a major reaction in 64 of 80 non-naive participants. Ninety-five percent of non-naive participants had major reactions in the undiluted group, 90% in the 1:3.2 dilution group, 81% in the 1:10 dilution group, and 52.6% in the 1:32 dilution group. All (n = 10) of the vaccinia-naive participants had major reactions. Compared with vaccinia-naive participants, non-naive participants had significantly smaller skin lesions (P =.04) and significantly less incidence of fever (P =.02). Preexisting antibody was present in 76 of 80 non-naive participants. Antibody responses were significantly higher and occurred more rapidly in the non-naive participants compared with the vaccinia-naive participants (P =.002 for day 28 and P =.003 for 6 months). Vaccinia-naive participants shed virus from the vaccination site 2 to 6 days longer and had significantly higher peak mean viral titers when compared with the non-naive participants (P =.002).
Conclusions: Previously vaccinated persons can be successfully revaccinated with diluted (<or=1:10) smallpox vaccine. Fewer adverse reactions were observed in this study of non-naive participants when compared with events in vaccinia-naive participants, which may be due to immunologic memory.
Comment in
-
Smallpox immunization in the 21st century: the old and the new.JAMA. 2003 Jun 25;289(24):3306-8. doi: 10.1001/jama.289.24.3306. JAMA. 2003. PMID: 12824215 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Clinical responses to smallpox vaccine in vaccinia-naive and previously vaccinated populations: undiluted and diluted Lancy-Vaxina vaccine in a single-blind, randomized, prospective trial.J Infect Dis. 2005 Sep 15;192(6):1066-70. doi: 10.1086/432765. Epub 2005 Aug 11. J Infect Dis. 2005. PMID: 16107961 Clinical Trial.
-
Clinical and immunological responses to undiluted and diluted smallpox vaccine with vaccinia virus of Lister strain.Vaccine. 2006 Jan 23;24(4):510-5. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2005.07.082. Epub 2005 Aug 18. Vaccine. 2006. PMID: 16139395 Clinical Trial.
-
Vaccination success rate and reaction profile with diluted and undiluted smallpox vaccine: a randomized controlled trial.JAMA. 2004 Sep 8;292(10):1205-12. doi: 10.1001/jama.292.10.1205. JAMA. 2004. PMID: 15353533 Clinical Trial.
-
Third-generation smallpox vaccines: challenges in the absence of clinical smallpox.Future Microbiol. 2010 Sep;5(9):1367-82. doi: 10.2217/fmb.10.98. Future Microbiol. 2010. PMID: 20860482 Review.
-
Unintentional transfer of vaccinia virus associated with smallpox vaccines: ACAM2000(®) compared with Dryvax(®).Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013 Jul;9(7):1489-96. doi: 10.4161/hv.24319. Epub 2013 Apr 9. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013. PMID: 23571177 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
The mark of success: The role of vaccine-induced skin scar formation for BCG and smallpox vaccine-associated clinical benefits.Semin Immunopathol. 2024 Aug 26;46(5):13. doi: 10.1007/s00281-024-01022-9. Semin Immunopathol. 2024. PMID: 39186134 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A bacteriophage-based validation of a personal protective equipment doffing procedure to be used with high-consequence pathogens.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2024 May 6;45(9):1-7. doi: 10.1017/ice.2024.84. Online ahead of print. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2024. PMID: 38706211 Free PMC article.
-
Early Pro-Inflammatory Signal and T-Cell Activation Associate With Vaccine-Induced Anti-Vaccinia Protective Neutralizing Antibodies.Front Immunol. 2021 Oct 11;12:737487. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.737487. eCollection 2021. Front Immunol. 2021. PMID: 34707608 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Erythema multiforme, Stevens Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis reported after vaccination, 1999-2017.Vaccine. 2020 Feb 11;38(7):1746-1752. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.12.028. Epub 2019 Dec 20. Vaccine. 2020. PMID: 31870573 Free PMC article.
-
Identifying and Tracking Low-Frequency Virus-Specific TCR Clonotypes Using High-Throughput Sequencing.Cell Rep. 2018 Nov 27;25(9):2369-2378.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.11.009. Cell Rep. 2018. PMID: 30485806 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
