Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26449565›Full record

ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2015

Long-term Consistency in Rotavirus Vaccine Protection: RV5 and RV1 Vaccine Effectiveness in US Children, 2012-2013.

Daniel C Payne, Rangaraj Selvarangan, Parvin H Azimi, Julie A Boom, Janet A Englund, Mary Allen Staat, Natasha B Halasa, Geoffrey A Weinberg, Peter G Szilagyi, James Chappell and 17 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Health impact of rotavirus vaccination in China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

27 authors.

Daniel C PayneDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Rangaraj SelvaranganThe Children's Mercy Hospital, Kansas City, Missouri.
Parvin H AzimiUCSF Benioff Children's Hospital Oakland, California.
Julie A BoomTexas Children's Hospital Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Janet A EnglundSeattle Children's Hospital, Washington.
Mary Allen StaatCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Ohio.
Natasha B HalasaVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Geoffrey A WeinbergUniversity of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, New York.
Peter G SzilagyiUniversity of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, New York University of California, Los Angeles.
James ChappellVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Monica McNealCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Ohio.
Eileen J KleinSeattle Children's Hospital, Washington.
Leila C SahniTexas Children's Hospital.
Samantha H JohnstonUCSF Benioff Children's Hospital Oakland, California.
Christopher J HarrisonThe Children's Mercy Hospital, Kansas City, Missouri.
Carol J BakerBaylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
David I BernsteinCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Ohio.
Mary E MoffattThe Children's Mercy Hospital, Kansas City, Missouri.
Jacqueline E TateDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Slavica Mijatovic-RustempasicDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Mathew D EsonaDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Mary E WikswoDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Aaron T CurnsDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Iddrisu SulemanaDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Michael D BowenDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Jon R GentschDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Umesh D ParasharDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.

Funding

Enhanced Surveillance for New Vaccine Preventable Disease -Patient Protection-ACAU01IP000458 · IP · CINCINNATI CHILDRENS HOSP MED CTR · PI STAAT, MARY A · 2011 to 2015
$3.4M
NCIRD CDC HHS IP11-010NCIRD CDC HHS U01 IP000458NCIRD CDC HHS U01 IP001049NCIRD CDC HHS U01 IP001059
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUsing a multicenter, active surveillance network from 2 rotavirus seasons (2012 and 2013), we assessed the vaccine effectiveness of RV5 (RotaTeq) and RV1 (Rotarix) rotavirus vaccines in preventing rotavirus gastroenteritis hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits for numerous demographic and secular strata.

methodsWe enrolled children hospitalized or visiting the ED with acute gastroenteritis (AGE) for the 2012 and 2013 seasons at 7 medical institutions. Stool specimens were tested for rotavirus by enzyme immunoassay and genotyped, and rotavirus vaccination histories were compared for rotavirus-positive cases and rotavirus-negative AGE controls. We calculated the vaccine effectiveness (VE) for preventing rotavirus associated hospitalizations and ED visits for each vaccine, stratified by vaccine dose, season, clinical setting, age, predominant genotype, and ethnicity.

resultsRV5-specific VE analyses included 2961 subjects, 402 rotavirus cases (14%) and 2559 rotavirus-negative AGE controls. RV1-specific VE analyses included 904 subjects, 100 rotavirus cases (11%), and 804 rotavirus-negative AGE controls. Over the 2 rotavirus seasons, the VE for a complete 3-dose vaccination with RV5 was 80% (confidence interval [CI], 74%-84%), and VE for a complete 2-dose vaccination with RV1 was 80% (CI, 68%-88%).Statistically significant VE was observed for each year of life for which sufficient data allowed analysis (7 years for RV5 and 3 years for RV1). Both vaccines provided statistically significant genotype-specific protection against predominant circulating rotavirus strains.

conclusionsIn this large, geographically and demographically diverse sample of US children, we observed that RV5 and RV1 rotavirus vaccines each provided a lasting and broadly heterologous protection against rotavirus gastroenteritis.

Indexed as

Antigens, ViralChildChild, PreschoolEmergency Medical ServicesEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayEpidemiological MonitoringFecesFemaleGastroenteritisGenotypeHospitalizationHumansInfantMaleRNA, ViralRotavirus InfectionsAntigens, ViralRIX4414 vaccineRNA, ViralRotaTeqRotavirus VaccinesVaccines, Attenuatedacute gastroenteritisrotavirus vaccineRV1-RotarixRV5-RotaTeqsurveillance

Identifiers

PMID26449565
PMCPMC7724934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.