Head-to-head comparison of the immunogenicity of RotaTeq and Rotarix rotavirus vaccines and factors associated with seroresponse in infants in Bangladesh: a randomised, controlled, open-label, parallel, phase 4 trial

Abstract

Background: A head-to-head comparison of the most widely used oral rotavirus vaccines has not previously been done, particularly in a high child mortality setting. We therefore aimed to compare the immunogenicity of RotaTeq (Merck, Kenilworth, NJ, USA) and Rotarix (GlaxoSmithKline, Rixensart, Belgium) rotavirus vaccines in the same population and examined risk factors for low seroresponse.

Methods: We did a randomised, controlled, open-label, parallel, phase 4 trial in urban slums within Mirpur and Mohakahli (Dhaka, Bangladesh). We enrolled eligible participants who were healthy infants aged 6 weeks and full-term (ie, >37 weeks' gestation). We randomly assigned participants (1:1), using block randomisation via a computer-generated electronic allocation with block sizes of 8, 16, 24, and 32, to receive either three RotaTeq vaccine doses at ages 6, 10, and 14 weeks or two Rotarix doses at ages 6 and 10 weeks without oral poliovirus vaccine. Coprimary outcomes were the rotavirus-specific IgA seroconversion in both vaccines, and the comparison of the rotavirus IgA seroconversion by salivary secretor phenotype in each vaccine arm. Seroconversion at age 18 weeks in the RotaTeq arm and age of 14 weeks in the Rotarix arm was used to compare the complete series of each vaccine. Seroconversion at age 14 weeks was used to compare two RotaTeq doses versus two Rotarix doses. Seroconversion at age 22 weeks was used to compare the immunogenicity at the same age after receiving the full vaccine series. Safety was assessed for the duration of study participation. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02847026.

Findings: Between Sept 1 and Dec 8, 2016, a total of 1144 infants were randomly assigned to either the RotaTeq arm (n=571) or Rotarix arm (n=573); 1080 infants (531 in the RotaTeq arm and 549 in the Rotarix arm) completed the study. Rotavirus IgA seroconversion 4 weeks after the full series occurred in 390 (73%) of 531 infants age 18 weeks in the RotaTeq arm and 354 (64%) of 549 infants age 14 weeks in the Rotarix arm (p=0·01). At age 14 weeks, 4 weeks after two doses, RotaTeq recipients had lower seroconversion than Rotarix recipients (268 [50%] of 531 vs 354 [64%] of 549; p<0·0001). However, at age 22 weeks, RotaTeq recipients had higher seroconversion than Rotarix recipients (394 [74%] of 531 vs 278 [51%] of 549; p<0·0001). Among RotaTeq recipients, seroconversion 4 weeks after the third dose was higher than after the second dose (390 [73%] of 531 vs 268 [50%] of 531; p<0·0001]. In the RotaTeq arm, rotavirus IgA seroconversion was lower in non-secretors than in secretors at ages 14 weeks (p=0·08), 18 weeks (p=0·01), and 22 weeks (p=0·02). Similarly, in the Rotarix arm, rotavirus IgA seroconversion was lower in non-secretors than in secretors at ages 14 weeks (p=0·02) and 22 weeks (p=0·01). 65 (11%) of 571 infants had adverse events in the RotaTeq arm compared with 63 (11%) of 573 infants in the Rotarix arm; no adverse events were attributed to the use of either vaccine. One death due to aspiration occurred in the RotaTeq arm, which was not related to the vaccine.

Interpretation: RotaTeq induced a higher magnitude and longer duration of rotavirus IgA response than Rotarix in this high child mortality setting. Additional vaccination strategies should be evaluated to overcome the suboptimal performance of current oral rotavirus vaccines in these settings.

Funding: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.