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 E: Prospects for Immunizing Against Cytomegalovirus." 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
218
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

it is theoretically possible to develop a vaccination program aimed at pubertal females, similar to that in the United Kingdom for congenital rubella, difficulties may be encountered in achieving high immunization rates in that group. Some health professionals favor the strategy of administering a CMV vaccine simultaneously with current pediatric vaccines.

High-Risk Individuals

For seronegative persons who are going to receive a transplant from a seropositive donor and individuals with leukemias and lymphomas (subsequently referred to as “high-risk individuals”), it would seem desirable to offer some degree of protection against primary infection. Studies are underway in transplant recipients using the Towne live attenuated vaccine developed by Plotkin (Plotkin et al., 1984). The preliminary report on these studies indicates that of those vaccinated, 15 out of 16 seronegative recipients of renal transplants from seropositive donors had evidence of infection following transplantation, and nine manifested evidence of cytomegalovirus disease. Eleven of the 14 placebo recipients had evidence of infection and 10 showed clinical manifestations of CMV infection. The infection rate and the percentage of those infected showing symptoms did not differ significantly between the vaccine-treated and placebo-treated groups; however, a significantly higher percentage of placebo recipients showed evidence of severe CMV disease.

These preliminary studies suggest that this high-risk population is an appropriate, discrete target population (albeit small) to consider in CMV vaccine development.

Suitability for Vaccine Control

CMV infection occurs over a wide age range, so an effective vaccination program would have to involve either a vaccine that provides very long lasting protection or boosters at regular intervals. The need for frequent boosters, which is more likely with a subunit vaccine, could decrease utilization rates.

Congenital Infections

It appears that the best method for reducing the impact of congenital cytomegalovirus infection would be the induction of long lasting immunity in childhood. This would prevent primary infection during pregnancy. Immunization of pubertal females also would be effective if a high rate of vaccination could be achieved.

Page
218
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)