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
433
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

vaccine. For the GBS vaccine candidate, the predicted efficacy is 0.80. Thus, the potential reduction in morbidity and mortality for the GBS vaccine is 2,856 using the committee median perspective and 2,823 using the age-neutral perspective. These values are not adjusted for vaccine adverse effects or anticipated utilization. Use of PRMM values for comparing vaccines is described in Chapter 7.

Prospects for Vaccine Development

The type-specific polysaccharide antigens were identified as the protective antigens many years ago by Lancefield (1972). More recently, the sialated polysaccharide antigens have been purified and characterized by Jennings et al. (1980, 1983a, 1983b). Because the polysaccharide antigens may vary somewhat in molecular size, it may be possible to develop more immunogenic antigens consisting of conjugates or other larger polymers. The purified sialated polysaccharide antigens have been utilized in clinical trials to demonstrate their immunogenicity. A pilot study of GBS III vaccine in pregnant women recently began in Houston and is expected to be completed in late 1984 (Baker, personal communication, 1984). Success of maternal immunization is dependent on the production of the IgG isotype of antibodies that cross the placenta rather than IgM. Hence, candidate vaccines should be assessed for the classes of antibody they produce as well as for maternal immunogenicity.

Active immunization of the neonate probably would not be beneficial because the majority of cases of early-onset disease result from infection prior to delivery. Also, very young infants do not respond predictably to polysaccharide antigens, even when they are conjugated.

If active immunization of the mother is not possible, then passive immunization of the newborn could be carried out using an immunoglobulin reagent with known quantities of antibody to the GBS serotypes, prepared from immunized or immune donors (Santos et al., 1981; Vogel et al., 1980). If the studies in Houston referred to above confirm that immunization in pregnant women is effective and without significant side effects, then clinical trials could be carried out to demonstrate efficacy in prevention of neonatal early- and late-onset GBS disease. These clinical trials would require very large populations because of the relatively low incidence of the disease. Hence, they may require the collaboration of a number of centers or groups.

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 the vaccines are displayed together for comparison.

Page
433
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)