Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35588754›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Infectious diseases2022

Safety and immunogenicity of the Rotavac and Rotasiil rotavirus vaccines administered in an interchangeable dosing schedule among healthy Indian infants: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 4, non-inferiority trial.

Suman Kanungo, Pranab Chatterjee, Ashish Bavdekar, Manoj Murhekar, Sudhir Babji, Richa Garg, Sandip Samanta, Ranjan K Nandy, Anand Kawade, Kangusamy Boopathi and 5 more

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IVMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Suman KanungoDivision of Epidemiology, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases, Kolkata, India.
Pranab ChatterjeeDivision of Epidemiology, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases, Kolkata, India; Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Ashish BavdekarDepartment of Paediatrics, KEM Hospital Research Centre, Pune, India.
Manoj MurhekarDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India.
Sudhir BabjiDepartment of Microbiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Richa GargDivision of Epidemiology, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases, Kolkata, India.
Sandip SamantaDepartment of Paediatrics, Dr BC Roy Post Graduate Institute of Paediatric Sciences, Kolkata, India.
Ranjan K NandyDivision of Bacteriology, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases, Kolkata, India.
Anand KawadeSpecial Care Newborn Unit, KEM Hospital Research Centre, Pune, India.
Kangusamy BoopathiDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India.
Kaliaperumal KanagasabaiDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India.
Vineet Kumar KamalDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India.
Velusamy Saravana KumarDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India.
Nivedita GuptaDivision of Virology, Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi, India.
Shanta DuttaDivision of Epidemiology, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases, Kolkata, India; Division of Bacteriology, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases, Kolkata, India. Electronic address: shanta1232001@gmail.com.
Indian Council of Medical Research · INNational Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases · INNational Institute of Epidemiology · INChristian Medical College & Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRotavirus is the leading cause of severe dehydrating gastroenteritis among children younger than 5 years in low-income and middle-income countries. Two vaccines-Rotavac and Rotasiil-are used in routine immunisation in India. The safety and immunogenicity of these vaccines administered in a mixed regimen is not documented. We therefore aimed to compare the safety and seroresponse of recipients of a mixed regimen versus a single regimen.

methodsWe did a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 4, non-inferiority trial at two sites in India. We recruited healthy infants aged 6-8 weeks. Infants with systemic disorders, weight-for-height Z scores of less than minus three SDs, or a history of persistent diarrhoea were excluded. Eligible infants were randomly allocated to six groups in equal numbers to receive either the single vaccine regimen (ie, Rotavac-Rotavac-Rotavac [group 1] or Rotasiil-Rotasiil-Rotasiil [group 2]) or the mixed vaccine regimen (ie, Rotavac-Rotasiil-Rotavac [group 3], Rotasiil-Rotavac-Rotasiil [group 4], Rotavac-Rotasiil-Rotasiil [group 5], or Rotasiil-Rotavac-Rotavac [group 6]). Randomisation was done using an online software by site in blocks of at least 12. The primary outcome was seroresponse to rotavirus vaccine, measured using rotavirus-specific serum IgA antibodies 4 weeks after the third dose. The seroresponse rates were compared between recipients of the four mixed vaccine regimens (consisting of various combinations of Rotavac and Rotasiil) with recipients of the single vaccine regimens (consisting of Rotavac or Rotasiil only for all three doses). The non-inferiority margin was set at 10%. Safety follow-ups were done for the duration of study participation. This trial was registered with the Clinical Trials Registry India, number CTRI/2018/08/015317.

findingsBetween March 25, 2019, and Jan 15, 2020, a total of 1979 eligible infants were randomly assigned to receive a single vaccine regimen (n=659; 329 in group 1 and 330 in group 2) or a mixed vaccine regimen (n=1320; 329 each in groups 3 and 4, and 331 each in groups 5 and 6). All eligible participants received the first dose, 1925 (97·3%) of 1979 received the second dose, and 1894 (95·7%) received all three doses of vaccine. 1852 (93·6%) of 1979 participants completed the follow-up. The immunogenicity analysis consisted of 1839 infants (1238 [67·3%] in the mixed vaccine regimen and 601 [32·7%] in the single vaccine regimen; 13 samples were insufficient in quantity) who completed vaccination and provided post-vaccination sera. The seroresponse rate in the mixed vaccine regimen group (33·5% [95% CI 30·9-36·2]) was non-inferior compared with the single vaccine regimen group (29·6% [26·1-33·4]); the seroresponse rate difference was 3·9% (95% CI -0·7 to 8·3). The proportion of participants with any type of solicited adverse events was 90·9% (95% CI 88·4-93·0) in the single vaccine regimen group and 91·1% (89·5-92·6) in the mixed vaccine regimen group. No vaccine-related serious adverse events or intussusception were reported during the study.

interpretationRotavac and Rotasiil can be safely used in an interchangeable manner for routine immunisation since the seroresponse was non-inferior in the mixed vaccine regimen compared with the single vaccine regimen. These results allow for flexibility in administering the vaccines, helping to overcome vaccine shortages and supply chain issues, and targeting migrant populations easily.

fundingMinistry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. TRANSLATION: For the Hindi translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Indexed as

GastroenteritisRotavirusRotavirus InfectionsRotavirus VaccinesAntibodies, ViralChildHumansImmunogenicity, VaccineImmunoglobulin AInfantAntibodies, ViralImmunoglobulin ARotavirus Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID35588754
PMCPMC9464301
OpenAlexW4280571099

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.