ABSTRACT
Justification: Mumps, despite being a widely prevalent disease in the country, is considered as an insignificant public health problem mainly because of poor documentation of clinical cases and lack of published studies. In the absence of adequate published data on disease burden, Government of India has recently decided to introduce measles-rubella (MR) vaccine in its National Immunization Program and neglected mumps component. Process: Following an IAP ACVIP meeting on December 6 and 7, 2014, a detailed review of burden of mumps in India along with vaccination strategies to control the disease was prepared. The draft was circulated amongst the members of the committee for review and approval. Revised final draft was later approved by IAP executive board in January 2015. Objectives: To provide a review of community burden of mumps in India; and to discuss the vaccination strategies to impress upon policymakers to include mumps vaccination in National immunization program. Recommendations : A total of 14 studies and two media reports on mumps outbreak were retrieved. The outbreaks were reported from all the regions of the country. Mumps meningoencephalitis was responsible for 2.3% to 14.6% of all investigated hospitalized acute encephalitis syndrome or viral encephalitis cases in different studies. Data from Infectious Disease Surveillance (ID Surv) portal of IAP and Integrated Disease Surveillance Program (IDSP) of Government of India (GoI) were also reviewed. While a total of 1052 cases were reported by the IDSurv, IDSP had investigated 72 outbreaks with 1564 cases in 14 states during different time periods. Genotypes G (subtype G2) and C were found to be main genotypes of the mumps virus circulating in the country. Three studies studied serological status of young children and adolescents against mumps, and found susceptibility rates ranging from 32% to 80% in different age groups. Conclusions: Mumps poses a significant disease burden in India. This calls for inclusion of mumps vaccine in the National immunization program.
ABSTRACT
Justification: There is a need to review/revise recommendations about existing vaccines in light of recent developments in the field of vaccinology. Process: Following an IAP ACVIP meeting on April 19 and 20, 2014, a draft of revised recommendations for the year 2014 and updates on certain vaccine formulations was prepared and circulated among the meeting participants to arrive at a consensus. Objectives: To review and revise recommendations for 2014 Immunization timetable for pediatricians in office practice and issue statements on certain new and existing vaccine formulations. Recommendations: The major changes in the 2014 Immunization Timetable include two doses of MMR vaccine at 9 and 15 months of age, single dose recommendation for administration of live attenuated H2 strain hepatitis A vaccine, inclusion of two new situations in ‘high-risk category of children’ in context with ‘pre-exposure prophylaxis’ of rabies, creation of a new slot at 9-12 months of age for typhoid conjugate vaccine for primary immunization, and recommendation of two doses of human papilloma virus vaccines with a minimum interval of 6 months between doses for primary schedule of adolescent/ preadolescent girls aged 9-14 years. There would not be any change to the committee’s last year’s (2013) recommendations on pertussis vaccination and administration schedule of monovalent human rotavirus vaccine. There is no need of providing additional doses of whole-cell pertussis vaccine to children who have earlier completed their primary schedule with acellular pertussis vaccine-containing products. A brief update on the new Indian Rotavirus vaccine, 116E is also provided. The committee has reviewed and offered its recommendations on the currently available pentavalent vaccine (DTwP+Hib+Hepatitis-B) combinations in Indian market. The comments and footnotes for several vaccines are also updated and revised.
ABSTRACT
The Academy’s Expert group on Immunization has discussed various issues pertaining to rubella vaccine introduction in to the Universal Immunization Program. Though the move to introduce rubella vaccine in to the UIP is laudable, the decision to overlook mumps seems inexplicable and illogical. Logistics also support the use of measles-mump and rubella (MMR) vaccine instead of measles-rubella (MR) vaccine. Regarding the timing of administration of MMR/MR vaccine, the academy recommends that the vaccine should be given early to have much higher coverage than introducing it late at the time of 1st booster of DPT. According to available evidence, both these vaccines (MMR/MR) can be given safely at different ages including at 9 months of age. The second dose should also be of the same antigen (MMR/ MR) and be given along with 1st DPT booster at 16-24 months of age.