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 P: Prospects for Immunizing Against Streptococcus group B." 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
431
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

postpartum period: the advantages and limitations of the different forms of chemoprophylaxis have been discussed elsewhere (Fischer et al., 1983). In general, chemoprophylaxis does not appear to be as practicable as vaccine control because of its complex logistical requirements for serological screening, culturing, and antibiotic administration.

Vaccine Preventable Illness Estimates

Defining the target population is the first step in calculating the possible reduction in morbidity and mortality that could be produced by a vaccine candidate. This knowledge can be translated into an estimate for vaccine preventable illness (VPI). VPI is defined as the number of cases, complications, sequelae, and deaths that could be prevented by immunization of the entire target population with a hypothetical vaccine that is 100 percent effective.

Over 50 percent of clinically significant neonatal GBS disease occurs in term infants. It is assumed that maternal immunization would provide passive immunity in the term neonate of sufficient duration to protect against both early- and late-onset disease. In the premature infant, however, even high levels of the appropriate (IgG) maternal antibody might not result in sufficient placental transport to confer protection. Therefore, only 90 percent of neonatal GBS disease is assumed in this exercise to be potentially preventable by maternal immunization. Theoretically, it also should be possible to prevent 100 percent of maternal disease caused by GBS with an ideal vaccine that decreased or eliminated carriage of GBS. Table P.5 shows a summary of VPI for GBS.

Vaccine Preventable Illness Values

The concept of “infant mortality equivalence value” is used to standardize vaccine preventable illness scores, just as it is used to standardize disease burden values (see Chapter 4). Vaccine preventable illness values for GBS are calculated using estimates from Table P.5 and the two sets of IME values employed throughout this report, using IME values based on a median of committee member perspectives, the total vaccine preventable illness value for GBS is 3,570; with the age-neutral perspective the value is 3,528.

Possible Reduction in Morbidity and Mortality (PRMM)

To calculate the possible reduction in morbidity and mortality (the maximum potential health benefits) that could be produced by the GBS vaccine candidate, the total vaccine preventable illness value for each IME perspective is multiplied by the predicted efficacy of the

Page
431
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)