PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15804351

BCG vaccination at three different age groups: response and effectiveness.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The protection, which some BCG vaccines could confer against the development of tuberculosis (TB) in childhood, might be indirectly reflected by the subsequent development of BCG immune response. The objectives of the study were to examine effectiveness and possible differences of post-vaccination reaction to a lyophilized BCG at different age groups and to evaluate its protection against TB in a decade's period. METHODS: We studied the post-vaccination PPD-skin reaction and scar formation at three different school levels, corresponding to ages of 6, 12 and 15 years old, vaccinated by a lyophilized BCG vaccine (Pasteur Institute), currently used in our country. During a 10-year follow up the reported TB cases in vaccinated and non-vaccinated adolescences up to 24-years old were analyzed and compared to the number of cumulative cases observed in the adult population of two neighboring territories (vaccinated and non-vaccinated). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: There was a significant correlation (r2 = 0.87, p < 0.0001) between tuberculin induration and scar formation. There was no statistically significant difference between the three age groups (6, 12, and 15 year-old, respectively) in regard to the diameter of tuberculin induration or scar formation. Although 34% of 10-year later indurations were unpredictably related to the initial ones (increased or decreased), they were significantly correlated (r2 = 0.45, p = 0.009). The relative percentage of TB for the 14-24 years-age group to the adult studied population was significantly lower among the immunized children compared to the non-immunized population of the same age group (17/77, 22% vs. 71/101, 70%, p < .0001). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the lyophilized BCG vaccine used for BCG programs at different age groups is equally effective and may confer satisfactory protection against tuberculosis in puberty.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

George Briassoulis, Irene Karabatsou, Vasilis Gogoglou, Athina Tsorva. 2005-04-01. BCG vaccination at three different age groups: response and effectiveness.. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-8518-3-1

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗