National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

New Vaccine Development: Establishing Priorities: Volume I, Diseases of Importance in the United States (1985)
Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice (BPH)

Citation Manager

. "Appendix D: Prospects for Immunizing Against Coccidioidomycosis." New Vaccine Development: Establishing Priorities: Volume I, Diseases of Importance in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 1985.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
193
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


New Vaccine Development Establishing Priorities, Volume I: Diseases of Importance in the United States
  • Examination of the culture supernatant of the in vitro endospore spherule endospore cycle for the presence of high molecular weight antigen liberated from the cells.

Using acrylamide gel electrophoresis, Pappagianis and coworkers have found evidence of soluble, high molecular weight components, which appear to be at least partially protein, early in the culture cycle (Pappagianis, personal communication, 1984). The immunogenicity and protective efficacy of these components are not known.

Anticipated Vaccine Utilization

The health belief model parameters (perceptions of risk of illness, severity, vaccination benefits, and barriers) used to predict vaccine utilization are described in Chapter 6, where scores assigned to various vaccines are displayed together to facilitate comparison.

Lay Acceptance

Lay perceptions of the risk and severity of coccidioidomycosis are judged to be very low, primarily because the public is thought to be unfamiliar with the disease and because many of the persons at highest risk are migrant agricultural workers with limited access to the medical care system. The perception of benefits also is judged to be very low because of the relatively low efficacy of the vaccine and the mild or asymptomatic nature of most infections. Perceived barriers to vaccination are judged to be high because of the moderate incidence of adverse reactions to the vaccine and the predicted number of required doses (3).

Provider Acceptance

Physicians in areas of the United States in which coccidioidomycosis is endemic probably have become more aware of the risk of disease and more familiar with its clinical manifestations in recent months because of clinical trials of the vaccine candidate now being conducted in Arizona and California. Their perceptions of risk and severity of disease are judged to be moderate. Perceived benefits of the vaccine are likely to be relatively high, although moderated somewhat by the relatively low predicted efficacy of the vaccine. Perceived barriers are judged to be moderate because of the moderate incidence of adverse reactions to the vaccine.

Cost of Illness

The scope and purpose of the calculations included below are described in Chapters 4 and 7. These calculations are based on

Page
193
Front Matter (R1-R14)
1. Summary (1-16)
2. Priority Setting for Health Related Investments: A Review of Methods (17-27)
3. Overview of the Analytic Approach (28-38)
4. Comparison of Disease Burdens and Costs (39-58)
5. Predictions on Vaccine Development (59-66)
6. Assessing the Likely Utilization of New Vaccines (67-91)
7. Calculation and Comparison of the Health Benefits and Costs Associated with Candidate Vaccines (92-120)
8. Additional Issues in the Selection of Priorities for Accelerated Vaccine Development (121-126)
9. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations (127-148)
Appendix A: Some Examples of the Application of Project Selection Method (149-152)
Appendix B: Pathogenic Agents for Which Accelerated Vaccine Development Does Not Appear Appropriate (153-170)
Appendix C: Prospects for Immunizing Against Bordetella pertussis (171-182)
Appendix D: Prospects for Immunizing Against Coccidioidomycosis (183-197)
Appendix E: Prospects for Immunizing Against Cytomegalovirus (198-234)
Appendix F: Prospects for Immunizing Against Hemophilus influenzae type b (235-251)
Appendix G: Prospects for Immunizing Against Hepatitis A Virus (252-260)
Appendix H: Prospects for Immunizing Against Hepatitis B Virus (261-279)
Appendix I: Prospects for Immunizing Against Herpes Simplex Viruses 1 and 2 (280-312)
Appendix J: Prospects for Immunizing Against Herpesvirus varicellae (313-341)
Appendix K: Prospects for Immunizing Against Influenza Viruses A and B (342-364)
Appendix L: Prospects for Immunizing Against Neisseria gonorrhoeae (365-384)
Appendix M: Prospects for Immunizing Against Parainfluenza Viruses (385-396)
Appendix N: Prospects for Immunizing Against Respiratory Syncytial Virus (397-409)
Appendix O: Prospects for Immunizing Against Rotavirus (410-423)
Appendix P: Prospects for Immunizing Against Streptococcus group B (424-439)
Appendix Q: Questionnaire for Assessing Morbidity-Mortality Trade-Offs (440-443)
Appendix R: Technical Notes (444-444)
Appendix S: Biographical Notes on Committee Members (445-449)
Appendix T: Additional Sources of Advice to the Committee (450-452)
Index (453-458)