4.7 Article

Maternal Antibody at Delivery Protects Neonates From Early Onset Group B Streptococcal Disease

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 209, Issue 5, Pages 781-788

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jit549

Keywords

Group B Streptococcus; neonate; neonatal sepsis; meningitis; glycoconjugate vaccine; immunization; serocorrelate; protective immunity

Funding

  1. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, National Institutes of Health [AI-75326, AI-25495, AI-23339]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Further reduction in the group B streptococcal (GBS) disease burden in neonates in the United States awaits an additional prevention strategy, such as maternal immunization. Methods. We performed a prospective, multicenter, case-control study of 33 mothers delivering neonates with early onset GBS infection (cases), and 99 age- and ethnicity-matched mothers colonized with the same capsular polysaccharide (CPS) types delivering healthy neonates (controls). Relative risk and absolute risk were calculated for early onset disease associated with concentrations of type Ia, III, or V CPS-specific antibody in maternal serum. Results. For GBS types Ia and III, maternal CPS-specific antibody concentrations of >= 0.5 mu g/mL were associated with a relative risk of approximately 0.1 (95% confidence intervals [CIs], .01-.74 and 0-.72, respectively; P = .02 for each), corresponding to a 90% risk reduction (by logistic regression). For type V, the relative risk was 0.3 (95% CI, .01-3.1), corresponding to a 70% risk reduction. By Bayesian modeling, the risk of early onset disease would decrease by 70% if maternal CPS-specific antibody concentrations for these 3 GBS types were >= 1 mu g/mL. Conclusions. Maternal CPS-specific antibody serum concentrations of >= 1 mu g/mL at the time of delivery appear to protect most neonates from early onset GBS type Ia and III disease.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available