Search

Background In mid-2016, a cholera outbreak occurred in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. This retrospective study aims to determine if a reactive, ring vaccination strategy would have been useful in preventing cholera transmission during that outbreak. Methods Data on cholera cases were collected as part of hospital-based surveillance in the Kathmandu Valley in 2016. Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates were obtained during household visits. Geographic clusters of cases were visually determined and tested statistically for clustering. Cluster size was determined based on the distribution of cases around the index case. Results GPS coordinates for 69 cases were analysed. Six geographic clusters were identified, all of which showed significant clustering of cases. Approximately 85% of cases within a cluster occurred more than 7 d after the index case. The median ring size was 1 km, with a population of 14 000 people. Conclusions Cholera cases were clustered in space and the majority of cases occurred over 1 week after the initial cases in the cluster, allowing for an opportunity to prevent transmission through the use of the vaccine soon after the initial case was identified. A ring vaccination strategy may be especially useful for large urban areas with recurrent seasonal outbreaks but where the specific locations for such outbreaks are not predictable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several studies have shown that inactivated, whole-cell oral cholera vaccines (OCVs) confer both direct protection on vaccinees and herd protection on populations. Because our earlier cluster-randomized effectiveness trial (CRT) in urban Bangladesh failed to detect OCV herd protection, we reanalysed the trial to assess whether herd effects were masked in our original analysis.Methods: A total of 267 270 persons were randomized to 90 approximately equal-sized clusters. In 60 clusters persons aged 1 year and older were eligible to receive OCV and in 30 clusters persons received no intervention and served as controls. We analysed OCV protection against severely dehydrating cholera for the entire clusters, as in our original analysis, and for subclusters consisting of residents of innermost households. We hypothesized that if OCV herd protection was attenuated by cholera transmission into the clusters from the outside in this densely populated setting, herd protection would be most evident in the innermost households.Results: During 2 years of follow-up of all residents of the clusters, total protection (protection of OCV recipients relative to control residents) was 58% [95% confidence interval (CI): 43%, 70%; P<0.0001], indirect protection (protection of non-OCV recipients in OCV clusters relative to control participants) was 16% (95% CI: -20%, 41%; P=0.35) and overall OCV protection (protection of all residents in the OCV clusters relative to control residents) was 46% (95% CI: 30%, 59%; P<0.0001). Analyses of the inner 75% and 50% households of the clusters showed similar findings. However, total protection was 75% (95% CI: 50%, 87%, P<0.0001), indirect protection 52% (95% CI: -9%, 79%; P=0.08) and overall protection 72% (95% CI: 49%, 84%; P<0.0001) for the innermost 25% households.Conclusion: Consistent with past studies, substantial OCV herd protective effects were identified, but were unmasked only by analysing innermost households of the clusters. Caution is needed in defining clusters for analysis of vaccine herd effects in CRTs of vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: : Cholera remains a serious public health threat in Asia, Africa and in parts of the Americas. Three World health Organization (WHO) pre-qualified oral cholera vaccines are now available but their supply is limited, so current supplies must be administered strategically. This requires an improved understanding of disease transmission and control strategies.Methods: : We used demographics and disease surveillance data collected from 1991 to 2000 in Matlab, Bangladesh, to estimate the spatial and temporal extent of the zone of increased risk around cholera cases. Specifically, we compare the cholera incidence among individuals living close to cholera cases with that among individuals living close to those without medically-attended cholera in this rural endemic setting.Results: : Those living within 50 m of a confirmed cholera case had 36 times (95% confidence interval: 23-56) the risk of becoming a cholera case in the first 3 days (after case presentation) compared with risk elsewhere in the community. The relative risk gradually declined in space and time, but remained significantly high up to 450 me away within 3 days of case presentation, and up to 150 m away within 23 days from the date of presentation of the case.Conclusion: : These findings suggest that, if conducted rapidly, vaccinating individuals living close to a case (ring vaccination) could be an efficient and effective strategy to target vaccine to a high-risk population in an endemic setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Past research has suggested that the most cost-effective approach to using oral cholera vaccines (OCVs) to control endemic cholera may be to target only children <15 y of age. However, the assumption that vaccination of children with OCVs protects unvaccinated adults has never been tested. Methods We reanalyzed the data of an OCV trial in Bangladesh in which children 2–15 y of age and women >15 y of age were allocated to OCV or placebo and assessed herd protection by relating the risk of cholera in each nonvaccinated adult (>15 y) to OCV coverage (OCVC) of residents residing in virtual clusters within 500 m of the residence of that unvaccinated adult. Results The risk of cholera in unvaccinated adults decreased by 14% with each 10% increase of OCVC of all targeted age groups (95% 7 to 21%, p=0.0004). Also, the risk of cholera in unvaccinated adults decreased by 13% with each 10% increase in OCVC of children 2–15 y of age (95% CI 6 to 20%, p=0.0007). A high correlation between levels of OCVC of children and adult females precluded an assessment of the herd protection of unvaccinated adults by vaccinating children <16 y of age, independent of concomitant vaccination of adult women. Conclusions Unvaccinated adults benefitted from herd protection conferred by OCVs in this trial. Vaccination of children may be sufficient to confer this protection, but this possibility needs to be evaluated in further studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We evaluated the herd protection conferred by the bivalent killed oral cholera vaccine. The vaccine conferred significant herd protection, suggesting that significant public health impact in cholera control may be achieved even with modest vaccination coverage.Background. We evaluated the herd protection conferred by an oral cholera vaccine using 2 approaches: cluster design and geographic information system (GIS) design.Methods. Residents living in 3933 dwellings (clusters) in Kolkata, India, were cluster-randomized to receive either cholera vaccine or oral placebo. Nonpregnant residents aged ≥1 year were invited to participate in the trial. Only the first episode of cholera detected for a subject between 14 and 1095 days after a second dose was considered. In the cluster design, indirect protection was assessed by comparing the incidence of cholera among nonparticipants in vaccine clusters vs those in placebo clusters. In the GIS analysis, herd protection was assessed by evaluating association between vaccine coverage among the population residing within 250 m of the household and the occurrence of cholera in that population.Results. Among 107 347 eligible residents, 66 990 received 2 doses of either cholera vaccine or placebo. In the cluster design, the 3-year data showed significant total protection (66% protection, 95% confidence interval [CI], 50%–78%, P < .01) but no evidence of indirect protection. With the GIS approach, the risk of cholera among placebo recipients was inversely related to neighborhood-level vaccine coverage, and the trend was highly significant (P < .01). This relationship held in multivariable models that also controlled for potentially confounding demographic variables (hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, .90–.98]; P < .01).Conclusions. Indirect protection was evident in analyses using the GIS approach but not the cluster design approach, likely owing to considerable transmission of cholera between clusters, which would vitiate herd protection in the cluster analyses.Clinical Trials Registration. NCT00289224. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background. Live oral cholera vaccines may protect against cholera in a manner similar to natural cholera infections. However, information on which to base these vaccines is limited. Methods. The study was conducted in a cholera-endemic population in Bangladesh. Patients with cholera (index patients) detected between 1991 and 2000 were age-matched to 4 cholera-free controls and then followed up during the subsequent 3 years. Results. El Tor cholera was associated with a 65% (95% confidence interval [CI], 37%-81%; P < .001) lower risk of a subsequent El Tor episode. Reduction of the risk of subsequent El Tor cholera was similar for children <5 years and for older persons and was sustained during all 3 years of follow-up. Having El Tor Inaba cholera was associated with lower risks of both El Tor Inaba and El Tor Ogawa cholera, but having El Tor Ogawa cholera was associated only with a reduced risk of El Tor Ogawa cholera. O139 cholera was associated with a 63% (95% CI, -61% to 92%; P = .18) lower risk of subsequent O139 cholera, but there was no evidence of cross-protection between the O1 and O139 serogroups. Conclusions. Live oral cholera vaccines designed to protect against the O1 and O139 serogroups should contain at least the Inaba serotype and strains of both serogroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Bangladesh and West Bengal cholera is seasonal, transmission occurs consistently annually. By contrast, in most African countries, cholera has inconsistent seasonal patterns and long periods without obvious transmission. Transmission patterns in Africa occur during intermittent outbreaks followed by elimination of that genetic lineage. Later another outbreak may occur because of reintroduction of new or evolved lineages from adjacent areas, often by human travelers. These then subsequently undergo subsequent elimination. The frequent elimination and reintroduction has several implications when planning for cholera's elimination including: a) reconsidering concepts of definition of elimination, b) stress on rapid detection and response to outbreaks, c) more effective use of oral cholera vaccine and WASH, d) need to readjust estimates of disease burden for Africa, e) re-examination of water as a reservoir for maintaining endemicity in Africa. This paper reviews major features of cholera's epidemiology in African countries which appear different from the Ganges Delta. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Targeted interventions have been delivered to neighbors of cholera cases in major epidemic responses globally despite limited evidence for the impact of such targeting. Using data from urban epidemics in Chad and Democratic Republic of the Congo, we estimate the extent of spatiotemporal zones of increased cholera risk around cases. In both cities, we found zones of increased risk of at least 200 meters during the 5 days immediately after case presentation to a clinic. Risk was highest for those living closest to cases and diminished in time and space similarly across settings. These results provide a rational basis for rapidly delivering targeting interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Information on the impact of hygiene interventions on severe outcomes is limited. As a pre-specified secondary outcome of a cluster-randomized controlled trial among >400 000 low-income residents in Dhaka, Bangladesh, we examined the impact of cholera vaccination plus a behaviour change intervention on diarrhoea-associated hospitalization.Methods: Ninety neighbourhood clusters were randomly allocated into three areas: cholera-vaccine-only; vaccine-plus-behaviour-change (promotion of hand-washing with soap plus drinking water chlorination); and control. Study follow-up continued for 2 years after intervention began. We calculated cluster-adjusted diarrhoea-associated hospitalization rates using data we collected from nearby hospitals, and 6-monthly census data of all trial households.Results: A total of 429 995 people contributed 500 700 person-years of data (average follow-up 1.13 years). Vaccine coverage was 58% at the start of analysis but continued to drop due to population migration. In the vaccine-plus-behaviour-change area, water plus soap was present at 45% of hand-washing stations; 4% of households had detectable chlorine in stored drinking water. Hospitalization rates were similar across the study areas [events/1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval (CI), cholera-vaccine-only: 9.4 (95% CI: 8.3-10.6); vaccine-plus-behaviour-change: 9.6 (95% CI: 8.3-11.1); control: 9.7 (95% CI: 8.3-11.6)]. Cholera cases accounted for 7% of total number of diarrhoea-associated hospitalizations.Conclusions: Neither cholera vaccination alone nor cholera vaccination combined with behaviour-change intervention efforts measurably reduced diarrhoea-associated hospitalization in this highly mobile population, during a time when cholera accounted for a small fraction of diarrhoea episodes. Affordable community-level interventions that prevent infection from multiple pathogens by reliably separating faeces from the environment, food and water, with minimal behavioural demands on impoverished communities, remain an important area for research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]