RESUMEN
Objective:To evaluate the difference in safety and immunogenicity of live rotavirus vaccine (oral) and measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine immunized alone or in combination.Methods:This study recruited 1 752 children aged 8-9 months who had not been vaccinated with live rotavirus vaccine (oral) or MMR vaccine after birth. The subjects were divided into three groups: study group (652 subjects, immunized with live rotavirus vaccine and MMR vaccine), control group 1 (723 subjects, immunized with live rotavirus vaccine) and control group 2 (377 subjects, immunized with MMR vaccine). Local and systemic adverse reactions within 30 d after vaccination were recorded. Serum samples were collected before and 35-42 d after immunization for analyzing the changes in antibodies.Results:Immunization alone or in combination with live rotavirus vaccine (oral) and MMR vaccine achieved similar results in the positive rates and concentrations of antibodies against rotavirus, measles and rubella viruses ( P>0.05). Moreover, the positive rates and the concentrations of the three antibodies were increased after vaccination. Compared with the control group 2, the concentration of antibody against mumps virus in the study group was increased ( P<0.05), but no significant difference in the positive rate of antibody against mumps virus was found between the two groups ( P>0.05). The positive rate and the concentration of antibody against mumps virus were increased after combined immunization or immunization with MMR vaccine alone. The overall incidence of fever and diarrhea was 1.54% (27/1 752) and 0.63% (11/1 752). No other abnormal reactions, incidental reactions or adverse reactions of any clinical significance were observed. Conclusions:Live rotavirus vaccine (oral) and MMR vaccine immunized alone or in combination showed good immunogenicity and safety.
RESUMEN
Measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine failure had been reported globally and here, we report that it occurs in India now. MMR vaccinated people have developed acute mumps accompanied by anti-mumps immunoglobulin M. Genotypic characterisation revealed that the circulating mumps strain was genotype C, which is distinct from the vaccine strain of genotype N (L-Zagreb). This is the first report in India to suggest that genotype C is responsible for the present mumps infection. Thus, the present MMR vaccine must be revamped and optimised for its efficacy to prevent any future mumps epidemics.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The safety of MMR(Measles, Mumps, and Rubella) immunization to children with egg allergies has been debated for decades because the live attenuated virus used in the vaccine is grown in cultured chick-embryo fibroblasts. Many studies that investigated adverse reactions to MMR vaccine have been reported abroad, but there has been no report in Korean children. So, this study is aimed at determining the prevalence of positive reactions to skin test with the diluted MMR vaccine and the safety of MMR immunization in Korean children with egg allergies. METHODS: Twenty children who have atopic dermatitis or urticaria associated with egg allergies in Samsung Medical Center underwent prick and intradermal tests with diluted MMR vaccine. Then, we administered the vaccine to the children subcutaneously. RESULTS: One patient(5.0%) had a positive result on the prick test and five(25.0%) on the intradermal test. Urticaria was elicited after MMR immunization in two children(10%) who had past illness of urticaria. One of them had a positive result on the prick and intradermal tests, but the other had negative results on both tests. CONCLUSION: Although anaphylaxis did not appear in our study, adverse reactions to MMR vaccination can occur in children with egg allergies, regardless of skin test result to MMR vaccine, prick or intradermal. Thus, in children with a history of severe systemic allergic reaction to egg, it is safe to perform MMR vaccination in a tertiary medical center where emergency care can be taken appropriately.