Do Oral Cholera Vaccine and Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Combine to Provide Greater Protection Against Cholera? Results From a Cluster-Randomized Trial of Oral Cholera Vaccine in Kolkata, India.

Background: Oral cholera vaccine (OCV) and incremental improvements in household water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) within cholera-endemic areas can reduce cholera risk. However, we lack empiric evaluation of their combined impact. Methods: We evaluated a cluster-randomized, placebo-controlled trial of OCV (Shanchol) in Kolkata, India. The study population included 108 777 individuals, and 106 879 nonpregnant individuals >1 year of age were eligible to receive 2 doses of OCV or placebo. We measured cholera risk in all household members assigned to OCV vs placebo and in all members of households with "Better" vs "Not Better" WASH, where WASH was classified according to validated criteria. Protection was measured by Cox proportional hazard models. Results: Residence in an OCV household was associated with protective effectiveness (PE) of 54% (95% CI, 42%-64%; P < .001) and was similar regardless of Better (PE, 57%; 95% CI, 26%-75%; P = .002) or Not Better (PE, 53%; 95% CI, 40%-64%; P < .001) household WASH. Better WASH household residence was associated with PE of 30% (95% CI, 5%-48%; P = .023) and was similar in OCV (PE, 24%; 95% CI, -26% to 54%; P = .293) and placebo (PE, 29%; 95% CI, -3% to 51%; P = .069) households. When assessed conjointly, residence in OCV households with Better WASH was associated with the greatest PE against cholera at 69% (95% CI, 49%-81%; P < .001). Conclusions: These findings suggest that the combination of a vaccine policy and improved WASH reduces cholera risk more than either would alone, although the magnitude of either intervention was not affected by the other. Future randomized trials investigating OCV and WASH interventions separately and together are recommended to further understand the interaction between OCV and WASH.

Association Among Household Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) Status and Typhoid Risk in Urban Slums: Prospective Cohort Study in Bangladesh.

BACKGROUND: Typhoid fever, or enteric fever, is a highly fatal infectious disease that affects over 9 million people worldwide each year, resulting in more than 110,000 deaths. Reduction in the burden of typhoid in low-income countries is crucial for public health and requires the implementation of feasible water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions, especially in densely populated urban slums. OBJECTIVE: In this study, conducted in Mirpur, Bangladesh, we aimed to assess the association between household WASH status and typhoid risk in a training subpopulation of a large prospective cohort (n=98,087), and to evaluate the performance of a machine learning algorithm in creating a composite WASH variable. Further, we investigated the protection associated with living in households with improved WASH facilities and in clusters with increasing prevalence of such facilities during a 2-year follow-up period. METHODS: We used a machine learning algorithm to create a dichotomous composite variable ("Better" and "Not Better") based on 3 WASH variables: private toilet facility, safe drinking water source, and presence of water filter. The algorithm was trained using data from the training subpopulation and then validated in a distinct subpopulation (n=65,286) to assess its sensitivity and specificity. Cox regression models were used to evaluate the protective effect of living in "Better" WASH households and in clusters with increasing levels of "Better" WASH prevalence. RESULTS: We found that residence in households with improved WASH facilities was associated with a 38% reduction in typhoid risk (adjusted hazard ratio=0.62, 95% CI 0.49-0.78; P<.001). This reduction was particularly pronounced in individuals younger than 10 years at the first census participation, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.49 (95% CI 0.36-0.66; P<.001). Furthermore, we observed an inverse relationship between the prevalence of "Better" WASH facilities in clusters and the incidence of typhoid, although this association was not statistically significant in the multivariable model. Specifically, the adjusted hazard of typhoid decreased by 0.996 (95% CI 0.986-1.006) for each percent increase in the prevalence of "Better" WASH in the cluster (P=.39). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that existing variations in household WASH are associated with differences in the risk of typhoid in densely populated urban slums. This suggests that attainable improvements in WASH facilities can contribute to enhanced typhoid control, especially in settings where major infrastructural improvements are challenging. These findings underscore the importance of implementing and promoting comprehensive WASH interventions in low-income countries as a means to reduce the burden of typhoid and improve public health outcomes in vulnerable populations.

Better Existing Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Can Reduce the Risk of Cholera in an Endemic Setting: Results From a Prospective Cohort Study From Kolkata, India.

Background: Global cholera control efforts rely heavily on effective water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions in cholera-endemic settings. Methods: Using data from a large, randomized controlled trial of oral cholera vaccine conducted in Kolkata, India, we evaluated whether natural variations in WASH in an urban slum setting were predictive of cholera risk. From the control population (n = 55 086), baseline WASH data from a randomly selected "training subpopulation" (n = 27 634) were analyzed with recursive partitioning to develop a dichotomous ("better" vs "not better") composite household WASH variable from several WASH features collected at baseline, and this composite variable was then evaluated in a mutually exclusive "validation population" (n = 27 452). We then evaluated whether residents of better WASH households in the entire population (n = 55 086) experienced lower cholera risk using Cox regression models. Better WASH was defined by a combination of 4 dichotomized WASH characteristics including safe source of water for daily use, safe source of drinking water, private or shared flush toilet use, and always handwashing with soap after defecation. Results: Residence in better WASH households was associated with a 30% reduction in risk of cholera over a 5-year period (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.70 [95% confidence interval, .49-.99]; P = .048). We also found that the impact of better WASH households on reducing cholera risk was greatest in young children (0-4 years) and this effect progressively declined with age. Conclusions: The evidence suggests that modest improvements in WASH facilities and behaviors significantly modify cholera risk and may be an important component of cholera prevention and elimination strategies in endemic settings. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT00289224.

Immunogenicity of novel oral poliovirus vaccine type 2 administered concomitantly with bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine: an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Novel oral poliovirus vaccine type 2 (nOPV2) was developed by modifying the Sabin strain to increase genetic stability and reduce risk of seeding new circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 outbreaks. Bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (bOPV; containing Sabin types 1 and 3) is the vaccine of choice for type 1 and type 3 outbreak responses. We aimed to assess immunological interference between nOPV2 and bOPV when administered concomitantly. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised, controlled trial at two clinical trial sites in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Healthy infants aged 6 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1:1) using block randomisation, stratified by site, to receive nOPV2 only, nOPV2 plus bOPV, or bOPV only, at the ages of 6 weeks, 10 weeks, and 14 weeks. Eligibility criteria included singleton and full term (≥37 weeks' gestation) birth and parents intending to remain in the study area for the duration of study follow-up activities. Poliovirus neutralising antibody titres were measured at the ages of 6 weeks, 10 weeks, 14 weeks, and 18 weeks. The primary outcome was cumulative immune response for all three poliovirus types at the age of 14 weeks (after two doses) and was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which was restricted to participants with adequate blood specimens from all study visits. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study product. A non-inferiority margin of 10% was used to compare single and concomitant administration. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04579510. FINDINGS: Between Feb 8 and Sept 26, 2021, 736 participants (244 in the nOPV2 only group, 246 in the nOPV2 plus bOPV group, and 246 in the bOPV only group) were enrolled and included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. After two doses, 209 (86%; 95% CI 81-90) participants in the nOPV2 only group and 159 (65%; 58-70) participants in the nOPV2 plus bOPV group had a type 2 poliovirus immune response; 227 (92%; 88-95) participants in the nOPV2 plus bOPV group and 229 (93%; 89-96) participants in the bOPV only group had a type 1 response; and 216 (88%; 83-91) participants in the nOPV2 plus bOPV group and 212 (86%; 81-90) participants in the bOPV only group had a type 3 response. Co-administration was non-inferior to single administration for types 1 and 3, but not for type 2. There were 15 serious adverse events (including three deaths, one in each group, all attributable to sudden infant death syndrome); none were attributed to vaccination. INTERPRETATION: Co-administration of nOPV2 and bOPV interfered with immunogenicity for poliovirus type 2, but not for types 1 and 3. The blunted nOPV2 immunogenicity we observed would be a major drawback of using co-administration as a vaccination strategy. FUNDING: The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The interplay between WASH practices and vaccination with oral cholera vaccines in protecting against cholera in urban Bangladesh: Reanalysis of a cluster-randomized trial.

The current global initiative to end Cholera by 2030 emphasizes the use of oral cholera vaccine (OCV) combined with feasible household Water-Sanitation-Hygiene (WASH) interventions. However, little is known about how improved WASH practices and behaviors and OCV interact to reduce the risk of cholera. We reanalyzed two arms of a cluster-randomized trial in urban Bangladesh, to evaluate the effectiveness of OCV given as a 2-dose regimen. One arm (30 clusters, n = 94,675) was randomized to vaccination of persons aged one year and older with OCV, and the other arm (30 clusters, n = 80,056) to no intervention. We evaluated the prevention of cholera by household WASH, classified at baseline using a previously validated rule, and OCV over 2 years of follow-up. When analyzed by assignment to OCV clusters rather than receipt of OCV, in comparison to persons living in "Not Better WASH" households in the control clusters, reduction of severe cholera (the primary outcome) was similar for persons in "Not Better WASH" households in vaccine clusters (46%, 95% CI:24,62), for persons in "Better WASH" households in the control clusters (48%, 95% CI:25,64), and for persons in "Better WASH" households in the vaccine clusters (48%, 95% CI:16,67). In contrast, when analyzed by actual receipt of a complete OCV regimen, , in comparison to persons in "Not Better WASH" households in the control clusters, protection against severe cholera increased steadily from 39% (95% CI:13,58) in residents of "Better WASH" households in the control clusters to 57% (95% CI:35,72) in vaccinated persons in "Not Better WASH" households to 63% (95% CI:21,83) in vaccinated persons in "Better WASH" households. This analysis suggests that improved household WASH and OCV received may interact to provide greater protection against cholera. However, the divergence between findings related to intent to vaccinate versus those pertaining to actual receipt of OCV underscores the need for further research on this topic.

Evaluation of the safety, immunogenicity, and faecal shedding of novel oral polio vaccine type 2 in healthy newborn infants in Bangladesh: a randomised, controlled, phase 2 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses (cVDPV2) from Sabin oral poliovirus vaccines (OPVs) are the leading cause of poliomyelitis. A novel type 2 OPV (nOPV2) has been developed to be more genetically stable with similar tolerability and immunogenicity to that of Sabin type 2 vaccines to mitigate the risk of cVDPV2. We aimed to assess these aspects of nOPV2 in poliovirus vaccine-naive newborn infants. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, controlled, phase 2 trial we enrolled newborn infants at the Matlab Health Research Centre, Chandpur, Bangladesh. We included infants who were healthy and were a single birth after at least 37 weeks' gestation. Infants were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either two doses of nOPV2 or placebo, administered at age 0-3 days and at 4 weeks. Exclusion criteria included receipt of rotavirus or any other poliovirus vaccine, any infection or illness at the time of enrolment (vomiting, diarrhoea, or intolerance to liquids), diagnosis or suspicion of any immunodeficiency disorder in the infant or a close family member, or any contraindication for venipuncture. The primary safety outcome was safety and tolerability after one and two doses of nOPV2, given 4 weeks apart in poliovirus vaccine-naive newborn infants and the primary immunogenicity outcome was the seroconversion rate for neutralising antibodies against type 2 poliovirus, measured 28 days after the first and second vaccinations with nOPV2. Study staff recorded solicited and unsolicited adverse events after each dose during daily home visits for 7 days. Poliovirus neutralising antibody responses were measured in sera drawn at birth and at age 4 weeks and 8 weeks. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04693286. FINDINGS: Between Sept 21, 2020, and Aug 16, 2021, we screened 334 newborn infants, of whom three (<1%) were found to be ineligible and one (<1%) was withdrawn by the parents; the remaining 330 (99%) infants were assigned to receive nOPV2 (n=220 [67%]) or placebo (n=110 [33%]). nOPV2 was well tolerated; 154 (70%) of 220 newborn infants in the nOPV2 group and 78 (71%) of 110 in the placebo group had solicited adverse events, which were all mild or moderate in severity. Severe unsolicited adverse events in 11 (5%) vaccine recipients and five (5%) placebo recipients were considered unrelated to vaccination. 306 (93%) of 330 infants had seroprotective maternal antibodies against type 2 poliovirus at birth, decreasing to 58 (56%) of 104 in the placebo group at 8 weeks. In the nOPV2 group 196 (90%) of 217 infants seroconverted by week 8 after two doses, when 214 (99%) had seroprotective antibodies. INTERPRETATION: nOPV2 was well tolerated and immunogenic in newborn infants, with two doses, at birth and 4 weeks, resulting in almost 99% of infants having protective neutralising antibodies. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Cost of oral cholera vaccine delivery in a mass immunization program for children in urban Bangladesh.

Cholera poses a substantial health burden in the developing world due to both epidemic and endemic diseases. The World Health Organization recommends oral cholera vaccines for mass vaccination campaigns in addition to traditional prevention practices and treatments in resource-poor settings. In many developing countries like Bangladesh, the major challenge behind implementing mass vaccination campaigns concerns the affordability of the oral cholera vaccine (OCV). Vaccination of children with OCV is not only an impactful approach for controlling cholera at the population level and reducing childhood morbidity but is also considered more cost-effective than vaccinating all ages. The aim of the study was to estimate the cost of an OCV campaign for children from a societal perspective using empirical study. A total of 66,311 children aged 1 to 14 years old were fully vaccinated with two doses of the OCV Shanchol while 9,035 individuals received one dose of this vaccine. The estimated societal cost per individual for full vaccination was US$ 6.11, which includes the cost of vaccine delivery estimated at US$ 1.95. The cost per single dose was estimated at US$ 2.86. The total provider cost for full vaccination was estimated at US$ 6.01 and the recipient cost at US$ 0.10. Our estimation of OCV delivery costs for children was relatively higher than what was found in a similar mass OCV campaign for all age groups, indicating that there may be additional cost factors to consider in targeted vaccine campaigns. This analysis provides useful benchmarks for the possible costs related to delivery of OCV to children and future OCV cost-effectiveness models should factor in these possible cost disparities. Attempts to reduce the cost per dose are likely to have a greater impact on the cost of similar vaccination campaigns in many resource-poor settings.

Are better existing WASH practices in urban slums associated with a lower long-term risk of severe cholera? A prospective cohort study with 4 years of follow-up in Mirpur, Bangladesh.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between existing household water quality, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) practices and severe cholera risk in a dense urban slum where cholera is highly endemic. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We assembled a large prospective cohort within a cluster randomised trial evaluating the effectiveness of oral cholera vaccine. Our dynamic cohort population (n=193 576) comprised individuals living in the 'non-intervention' clusters of the trial, and were followed over 4 years. This study was conducted in a dense urban slum community of Dhaka, Bangladesh and cholera surveillance was undertaken in 12 hospitals serving the study area. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: First severe cholera episode detected during follow-up period. METHODS: We applied a machine learning algorithm on a training subpopulation (n=96 943) to develop a binary ('better', 'not better') composite WASH variable predictive of severe cholera. The WASH rule was evaluated for performance in a separate validation subpopulation (n=96 633). Afterwards, we used Cox regression models to evaluate the association between 'better' WASH households and severe cholera risk over 4 years in the entire study population. RESULTS: The 'better' WASH rule found that water quality and access were the most significant factors associated with severe cholera risk. Members of 'better' WASH households, constituting one-third of the population, had a 47% reduced risk of severe cholera (95% CI: 29 to 69; p<0.001), after adjusting for covariates. The protective association between living in a 'better' WASH household and severe cholera persisted in all age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Salutary existing household WASH practices were associated with a significantly reduced long-term risk of severe cholera in an urban slum of Dhaka. These findings suggest that WASH adaptations already practised in the community may be important for developing and implementing effective and sustainable cholera control programmes in similar settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This article is a re-analysis of data from a cluster randomized trial; can be found on ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01339845.

Prevention of Typhoid Fever by Existing Improvements in Household Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene, and the Use of the Vi Polysaccharide Typhoid Vaccine in Poor Urban Slums: Results from a Cluster-Randomized Trial.

Modest improvements in household water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) and typhoid vaccination can reduce typhoid risk in endemic settings. However, empiric evaluation of their combined impact is lacking. A total of 62,756 persons residing in 80 clusters in a Kolkata slum were allocated randomly 1:1 to either the typhoid Vi polysaccharide (ViPS) vaccine or hepatitis A (Hep A) vaccine. Surveillance was conducted for 2 years before and 2 years after vaccination. We classified households as having "better" or "not better" WASH, and calculated the prevalence of better WASH households in clusters using previously validated criteria. We evaluated the protection by better household WASH, better household WASH prevalence, and ViPS vaccination against typhoid in all cluster members present at baseline using Cox proportional hazard models. Overall, ViPS vaccination was associated with a 55% (P < 0.001; 95% CI, 35-69) reduction of typhoid risk and was similar regardless of better WASH in the residence. Living in a better WASH household was associated with a typhoid risk reduction of 31% (P = 0.16; 95% CI, -16 to 59) overall. The reduction was 48% (P = 0.05; 95% CI, -1 to 73) in Hep A clusters, 6% (P = 0.85; 95% CI, -82 to 51) in ViPS clusters, and 57% (P < 0.05; 95% CI, 15-78) in the population during the 2 years preceding the trial. These findings demonstrate a preventive association of better household WASH in the non-ViPS population, but, unexpectedly, an absence of additional protection from ViPS by better WASH in the ViPS population. This analysis highlights the importance of assessing the combination of WASH in conjunction with typhoid vaccines, and has implications for the evaluation of new-generation typhoid conjugate vaccines.

Prevention of Typhoid by Vi Conjugate Vaccine and Achievable Improvements in Household Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene: Evidence From a Cluster-Randomized Trial in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

BACKGROUND: Typhoid fever contributes to approximately 135 000 deaths annually. Achievable improvements in household water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) combined with vaccination using typhoid conjugate vaccines (TCVs) may be an effective preventive strategy. However, little is known about how improved WASH and vaccination interact to lower the risk of typhoid. METHODS: A total of 61 654 urban Bangladeshi children aged 9 months to <16 years, residing in 150 clusters with a baseline population of 205 760 residents, were randomized 1:1 by cluster to Vi-tetanus toxoid TCV or Japanese encephalitis (JE) vaccine. Surveillance for blood culture-confirmed typhoid fever was conducted over 2 years. Existing household WASH status was assessed at baseline as Better or Not Better using previously validated criteria. The reduction in typhoid risk among all residents associated with living in TCV clusters, Better WASH households, or both was evaluated using mixed-effects Poisson regression models. RESULTS: The adjusted reduced risk of typhoid among all residents living in the clusters assigned to TCV was 55% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43%-65%; P < .001), and that of living in Better WASH households, regardless of cluster, was 37% (95% CI, 24%-48%; P < .001). The highest risk of typhoid was observed in persons living in households with Not Better WASH in the JE clusters. In comparison with these persons, those living in households with Better WASH in the TCV clusters had an adjusted reduced risk of 71% (95% CI, 59%-80%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of TCV programs combined with achievable and culturally acceptable household WASH practices were independently associated with a significant reduction in typhoid risk. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ISRCTN11643110.

Re-evaluation of population-level protection conferred by a rotavirus vaccine using the 'fried-egg' approach in a rural setting in Bangladesh.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine herd protection assessed in a cluster-randomized trial (CRT) may be masked by disease transmission into the cluster from outside. However, herd effects can be unmasked using a 'fried-egg' approach whereby the analysis, restricted to the innermost households of clusters, 'yolk', creates an insulating 'egg-white' periphery. This approach has been demonstrated to unmask vaccine herd protection in reanalyses of cholera and typhoid vaccine CRTs. We applied this approach to an earlier CRT in Bangladesh of rotavirus vaccine (RV) whose overall analysis had failed to detect herd protection. Herein we present the results of this analysis. METHODS: In the study area, infants in 142 villages were randomized to receive two doses of RV with routine EPI vaccines (RV villages) or only EPI vaccines (non-RV villages). We analyzed RV protection against acute rotavirus diarrhoea for the entire cluster (P100) and P75, P50, P25 clusters, representing 75%, 50% and 25% of the innermost households for each cluster, respectively. RESULTS: During 2 years of follow-up, there was evidence of 27% overall (95 %CI: 7, 43) and 42% total protection (95 %CI: 23, 56) in the P100 cluster, but it did not increase when moved in smaller yolks. There was no evidence of indirect vaccine protection in the yolks at any cluster size. CONCLUSION: Our reanalysis of the CRT using the fried- egg approach did not detect RV herd protection. Whether these findings reflect a true inability of the RV to confer herd protection in this setting, or are due to limitations of the approach, requires further study.

Impact of clinical registries on quality of patient care and clinical outcomes: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Clinical quality registries (CQRs) are playing an increasingly important role in improving health outcomes and reducing health care costs. CQRs are established with the purpose of monitoring quality of care, providing feedback, benchmarking performance, describing pattern of treatment, reducing variation and as a tool for conducting research. OBJECTIVES: To synthesise the impact of clinical quality registries (CQRs) as an 'intervention' on (I) mortality/survival; (II) measures of outcome that reflect a process or outcome of health care; (III) health care utilisation; and (IV) healthcare-related costs. METHODS: The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL and Google Scholar. In addition, a review of the grey literature and a reference check of citations and reference lists within articles was undertaken to identify relevant studies in English covering the period January 1980 to December 2016. The PRISMA-P methodology, checklist and standard search strategy using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria and structured data extraction tools were used. Data on study design and methods, participant characteristics attributes of included registries and impact of the registry on outcome measures and/or processes of care were extracted. RESULTS: We identified 30102 abstracts from which 75 full text articles were assessed and finally 17 articles were selected for synthesis. Out of 17 studies, six focused on diabetes care, two on cardiac diseases, two on lung diseases and others on organ transplantations, rheumatoid arthritis, ulcer healing, surgical complications and kidney disease. The majority of studies were "before after" design (#11) followed by cohort design (#2), randomised controlled trial (#2), experimental non randomised study and one cross sectional comparison. The measures of impact of registries were multifarious and included change in processes of care, quality of care, treatment outcomes, adherence to guidelines and survival. Sixteen of 17 studies demonstrated positive findings in their outcomes after implementation of the registry. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the large number of published articles using data derived from CQRs, few have rigorously evaluated the impact of the registry as an intervention on improving health outcomes. Those that have evaluated this impact have mostly found a positive impact on healthcare processes and outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015017319.