4.7 Article

Meningococcal Carriage Following a Vaccination Campaign With MenB-4C and MenB-FHbp in Response to a University Serogroup B Meningococcal Disease Outbreak-Oregon, 2015-2016

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 216, Issue 9, Pages 1130-1140

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jix446

Keywords

Meningococcal disease; Neisseria meningitidis; carriage; MenB-4C; MenB-FHbp

Funding

  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Limited data exist on the impact of the serogroup B meningococcal (MenB) vaccines MenB-FHbp and MenB-4C on meningococcal carriage and herd protection. We therefore assessed meningococcal carriage following a MenB vaccination campaign in response to a university serogroup B meningococcal disease outbreak in 2015. Methods. A convenience sample of students recommended for vaccination provided oropharyngeal swab specimens and completed questionnaires during 4 carriage surveys over 11 months. Isolates were tested by real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis, slide agglutination, and whole-genome sequencing. Vaccination history was verified via university records and the state immunization registry. Results. A total of 4225 oropharyngeal swab specimens from 3802 unique participants were analyzed. Total meningococcal and genotypically serogroup B carriage prevalence among sampled students were stable, at 11%-17% and 1.2%-2.4% during each round, respectively; no participants carried the outbreak strain. Neither 1-3 doses of MenB-FHbp nor 1-2 doses of MenB-4C was associated with decreased total or serogroup B carriage prevalence. Conclusions. While few participants completed the full MenB vaccination series, limiting analytic power, these data suggest that MenB-FHbp and MenB-4C do not have a large, rapid impact on meningococcal carriage and are unlikely to provide herd protection in the context of an outbreak response.

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