Hepatitis B vaccine - proposal for a standardized assessment of immune response

Abstract

The authors developed a comparative study of the various methods of assessment of immune response to Hepatitis B vaccine. Eighty-six health care professionals underwent a vaccination programme with three doses of plasma-derived vaccine against Hepatitis B (H-B-Vax, Merck, Sharp & Dohme) given intra-muscularly. Assessment of immune response was carried out three months after the end of the programme, by radioimmunoassay (RIA) and enzymeimmunoassay (EIA). The results showed that the semi-quantitative assessment of Anti-HBs antibodies by RIA or EIA was perfectly comparable to the reference method (quantitative determination of antibodies by RIA). In view of these findings, the authors suggest a standardization of assessment of immune response to the vaccine, thus permitting correct planning of booster doses and easier comparison between different studies

Seropositivity for hepatitis B virus, vaccination coverage, and vaccine response in dentists from Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil

“…Furthermore, the frequency of vaccine response was significantly lower among older subjects, in accordance with other authors (Ferraz et al 1992, Cleveland et al 1994, Cuevas et al 1997, Averhoff et al 1998, Arca et al 1998, Silva et al 2005. Consistent with previous investigations (Zumaeta et al 1995, Prakash et al 2000, differences in vaccine response were not observed regarding gender, smoking status, vaccination schedule, vaccine administration route, and vaccine site, although females and nonsmokers are more likely to demonstrate high vaccine response (Cleveland et al 1994, Averhoff et al 1998.…”

“…Corroborating other studies (Ferraz et al 1992, Oliveira 1997, Cuevas et al 1997, Turchi et al 1997, Arca et al 1998, Lopes et al 2001, we observed that the vaccine response index was significantly higher among dentists who received the third dose up to one year before the interview, compared to their counterparts. a: the samples 1-3 were HBsAg/anti-HBc/anti-HBe positive; the samples 5-9 were anti-HBc/anti-HBs positive.…”

Intradermal vaccination of adults with three low doses (2 µg) of recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. I. Seroconversion rate and adverse effects

“…The following criterion was adopted for interpretation of the results: an anti-HBs titer lower than 2.1 U S/N indicates the absence of seroconversion (susceptibility), a titer between 2.1 and 10 U S/N indicates seroconversion with a low response, corresponding to poor responders or hyporesponders, and a titer higher than 10 U S/N indicates the development of solid immunity, corresponding to good responders (Pead 1986, Ferraz et al 1992). In the radioimmunoassay, S (sample) corresponds to the anti-HBs titer of the sample, in cpm, and N (negative) corresponds to the mean count obtained for negative controls, also in cpm.…”

Intradermal vaccination of adults with three low doses (2 µg) of recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. II. Persistence of immunity and induction of immunologic memory

“…The following serological markers of HBV infection were determined at the Laboratory of Clinical Analyses of HURNP by a microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) using kits from Abbott Laboratories, US: HBsAg, anti-HBs, anti-HBc, HBeAg, and anti-HBe, with the results only being characterized as reactive or non-reactive, except for anti-HBs which was quantified as mIU/ml, with the result being considered to be reactive when the anti-HBs concentration was equal to or higher than 10 mIU/ml (Hadler et al 1986, CDC 1987. Dentists with reactive anti-HBs were considered good or poor responders when the serum anti-HBs concentration was higher than 100 mIU/ml or between 10 and 100 mIU/ ml, respectively (Pead 1986, Ferraz et al 1992. Intradermal application of a 2 µg booster dose (0.1 ml) of the Belgian recombinant vaccine between January 14, 1999 and January 21, 2000 was indicated to dentists who did not show any of the serological markers for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, or whose anti-HBs concentration was lower than 100 mIU/ml.…”