Serological surveillance of measles in blood donors in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Castro-Silva, Rosangela de; Camacho, Luiz Antônio Bastos; Amorim, Luiz; Medeiros, Andréia Dantas; Ferreira, Daise Almeida; Oliveira, Solange Artimos de; Siqueira, Marilda Mendonça

doi:10.1590/s1020-49892003001000008

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is also possible that the proportion of susceptible individuals in the male population of the same age group is similar to that in women before the campaign, and that this may keep the virus circulating since men were not vaccinated. The proportion of IgMpositive women was similar to that found in blood donors in the city of Rio de Janeiro in 2000 (25), and corroborated the assumption that there was a contingent of rubella-susceptible women that would justify vaccination of all women in that age group. If one considers that mass vaccination protected only 12.6% of the women 15 to 29 years of age, this implies that it was necessary to vaccinate 8 childbearingage women (1/0.126) to immunize (se- (1 754 071 vaccinees and 21 398 susceptible newborns in 2002) had to be immunized.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Seroepidemiological profile of pregnant women after inadvertent rubella vaccination in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2001-2002

Sá¹,

Camacho²,

Siqueira³

et al. 2006

Rev Panam Salud Publica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mass immunization of childbearing-age women was justified on the basis of epidemiological and serological data. Follow-up of vaccinated pregnant women revealed no cases of congenital rubella syndrome due to rubella vaccination. However, the observed rate of congenital infection supports the recommendation to avoid vaccinating pregnant women, and to avoid conception for up to 1 month following rubella vaccination.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Seroepidemiological profile of pregnant women after inadvertent rubella vaccination in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2001-2002

Sá¹,

Camacho²,

Siqueira³

et al. 2006

Rev Panam Salud Publica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We identified over 220 studies that provided cross‐sectional data and nearly 180 studies that reported on immunity for women of child‐bearing age, primarily for rubella. Table summarizes the over 400 cross‐sectional and women of child‐bearing age measles and rubella serological studies…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Review of Measles and Rubella Serology Studies

Thompson

Odahowski²

2015

Risk Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Serological tests provide information about individual immunity from historical infection or immunization. Cross-sectional serological studies provide data about the age- and sex-specific immunity levels for individuals in the studied population, and these data can provide a point of comparison for the results of transmission models. In the context of developing an integrated model for measles and rubella transmission, we reviewed the existing measles and rubella literature to identify the results of national serological studies that provided cross-sectional estimates of population immunity at the time of data collection. We systematically searched PubMed, the Science Citation Index, and references we identified from relevant articles published in English. We extracted serological data for comparison to transmission model outputs. For rubella, serological studies of women of child-bearing age provide information about the potential risks of infants born with congenital rubella syndrome. Serological studies also document the loss of maternal antibodies, which occurs at different rates for the different viruses and according to the nature of the induced immunity (i.e., infection or vaccine). The serological evidence remains limited for some areas, with studies from developed countries representing a disproportionate part of the evidence. The collection and review of serological evidence can help program managers identify immunity gaps in the population, which may help them better understand the characteristics of individuals within their populations who may participate in transmission and manage risks.

show abstract

“…Improvement of assays that use minimally invasive specimens such as oral fluid or DBS could increase the acceptability of repeat surveys, which are preferable for assessing vaccine coverage , vaccine immunogenicity and campaign impact. In countries with high attendance at health services, sentinel site surveillance may be adequate to monitor trends, for example, in rubella and tetanus susceptibility among adult women , as is performed for monitoring trends in HIV .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seroepidemiology: an underused tool for designing and monitoring vaccination programmes in low‐ and middle‐income countries

Cutts

Hanson

2016

Tropical Med Int Health

125

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummarySeroepidemiology, the use of data on the prevalence of bio-markers of infection or vaccination, is a potentially powerful tool to understand the epidemiology of infection before vaccination and to monitor the effectiveness of vaccination programmes. Global and national burden of disease estimates for hepatitis B and rubella are based almost exclusively on serological data. Seroepidemiology has helped in the design of measles, poliomyelitis and rubella elimination programmes, by informing estimates of the required population immunity thresholds for elimination. It contributes to monitoring of these programmes by identifying population immunity gaps and evaluating the effectiveness of vaccination campaigns. Seroepidemiological data have also helped to identify contributing factors to resurgences of diphtheria, Haemophilus Influenzae type B and pertussis. When there is no confounding by antibodies induced by natural infection (as is the case for tetanus and hepatitis B vaccines), seroprevalence data provide a composite picture of vaccination coverage and effectiveness, although they cannot reliably indicate the number of doses of vaccine received. Despite these potential uses, technological, time and cost constraints have limited the widespread application of this tool in low-income countries. The use of venous blood samples makes it difficult to obtain high participation rates in surveys, but the performance of assays based on less invasive samples such as dried blood spots or oral fluid has varied greatly. Waning antibody levels after vaccination may mean that seroprevalence underestimates immunity. This, together with variation in assay sensitivity and specificity and the common need to take account of antibody induced by natural infection, means that relatively sophisticated statistical analysis of data is required. Nonetheless, advances in assays on minimally invasive samples may enhance the feasibility of including serology in large survey programmes in low-income countries. In this paper, we review the potential uses of seroepidemiology to improve vaccination policymaking and programme monitoring and discuss what is needed to broaden the use of this tool in low-and middle-income countries.

show abstract

Serological surveillance of measles in blood donors in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Cited by 12 publications

References 16 publications

Seroepidemiological profile of pregnant women after inadvertent rubella vaccination in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2001-2002

Seroepidemiological profile of pregnant women after inadvertent rubella vaccination in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2001-2002

Systematic Review of Measles and Rubella Serology Studies

Seroepidemiology: an underused tool for designing and monitoring vaccination programmes in low‐ and middle‐income countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About