4.7 Article

Invasive Pneumococcal Disease After Implementation of 13-Valent Conjugate Vaccine

期刊

PEDIATRICS
卷 134, 期 2, 页码 210-217

出版社

AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2014-0473

关键词

invasive pneumococcal disease; conjugate vaccine; children; comorbidity; severity

资金

  1. Pfizer, Inc. [WS2420842]
  2. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [UL1TR000114]
  3. National Institutes of Health (NIH)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether there is a different clinical profile and severity of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in children caused by nonvaccine types in the era of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13). METHODS: Observational study of childhood IPD in Massachusetts based on state public health surveillance data comparing pre-PCV13 (2007-2009) and post-PCV13 (2010-2012) eras. RESULTS: There were 168 pre-PCV13 cases of IPD and 85 post-PCV13 cases of IPD in Massachusetts children <= 5 years of age. PCV13 serotypes declined by 18% in the first 2 years after PCV13 use (P = .011). In the post-PCV13 phase, a higher proportion of children were hospitalized (57.6% vs 50.6%), and a higher proportion of children had comorbidity (23.5% vs 19.6%). Neither difference was statistically significant, nor were comparisons of IPD caused by vaccine and nonvaccine types. Children with comorbidities had higher rates of IPD caused by a nonvaccine type (27.6% vs 17.2%; P = .085), were more likely to be hospitalized (80.4% vs 50%; P < .0001), and were more likely to have a longer hospital stay (median of 3 days vs 0.5 days; P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Initial data suggest that nonvaccine serotypes are more common in children with underlying conditions, who have greater morbidity from disease. In the post-PCV13 era, a larger proportion of patients are hospitalized, but mortality rates are unchanged. Routine vaccination with PCV13 may not be enough to reduce the risk in patients with comorbidity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据