xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml"
xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
http://id.medscape.com/govmt/CDC/MMWR/2001/10.01/mmwr5040.03/mig-pnt-mmwr5040.03.html

Public Health Dispatch: Acute Flaccid Paralysis Associated with Circulating
Vaccine-Derived Poliovirus --- Philippines, 2001
[MMWR 50(40):874-875, 2001. Centers for Disease Control]
Three cases of acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) associated with
circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus (cVDPV) isolates were reported in the
Philippines during March 15--July 26, 2001. The first case-patient, a child
aged 8 years from northern Mindanao island (500 miles south of Manila) who had
received 3 doses of oral polio vaccine (OPV), had onset of paralysis on March
15. A second child, aged 3 years from Laguna province on Luzon island (60 miles
south of Manila) who had received 3 OPV doses, presented with signs of
meningitis but no paralysis on July 23. A third child, aged 14 months from
Cavite province (25 miles from Manila and 45 miles north of Laguna province)
who had received 2 OPV doses, had onset of paralysis on July 26. No patients
had traveled outside of their province of residence since birth. Characterization
of isolates from the three patients revealed type 1 polioviruses derived from
Sabin vaccine strain type 1, with a 3% genetic sequence difference between
Sabin 1 vaccine and vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV) isolates. The three
polioviruses are not identical but are closely related (>99% sequence
homology); they also appear to share an identical recombination site with a
nonpolio enterovirus in the noncapsid region of the genome.
Following cVDPV outbreaks in the Dominican Republic and Haiti (Hispaniola)
during 2000--2001 [1],
the global polio laboratory network implemented additional testing requirements
for all polioviruses under investigation, prospectively and retrospectively.
Both an antigenic-based (ELISA) and a molecular-based test (probe
hybridization) are used to determine whether a poliovirus is wild or derived
from vaccine (i.e., intratypic differentiation [ITD]). Divergent ITD results
(one test showing vaccine-derived and the other wild-type virus) for any
poliovirus isolate now require genomic sequencing of the suspect isolates.
Retrospective testing of >2,000 vaccine-related isolates from AFP cases
globally has revealed no additional cVDPVs, although testing results of other
isolates in the laboratory network are pending. The cVDPVs from the Philippines
were detected after the implementation of new testing requirements for
prospective virus investigations.
In response to these cases, the Department of Health in the Philippines 1)
enhanced surveillance by active record review for AFP cases in hospitals and
other health-care facilities in the affected and neighboring provinces, 2)
established surveillance to conduct virologic investigations of aseptic
meningitis at major health-care facilities, 3) collected stool samples from
healthy contacts of case-patients, 4) conducted field investigations of
clustered AFP cases to determine the extent of cVDPV circulation, and 5)
assessed polio vaccination coverage in these communities. The investigations
have found no unreported cases, although some AFP cases remain under
investigation. To interrupt cVDPV circulation, a large-scale mass vaccination
campaign with OPV is planned.
Low routine vaccination coverage is one of the most important causes of
VDPV. Because the location of the originating events is unknown, the
contribution of other factors is difficult to assess; however, a combination of
two concurrent events within the virus is necessary for cVDPV emergence:
reversion of attenuating mutations to increase neurovirulence, and a presumed
increase in transmission characteristics that might be related to recombination
with a nonpolio enterovirus. The molecular basis for the second property is not
understood.
Wild poliovirus was last reported in the Philippines in 1993 [2],
and national vaccination rounds were last conducted in the Philippines in 1997
followed by subnational immunization days in 1998 and 1999. Among the areas
covered were Cebu, Davao, Manila, and parts of Mindanao; however, coverage did
not extend to the three provinces now reporting cVDPV cases. Routine coverage
with 3 OPV doses has been approximately 80% nationwide since the early 1990s;
however, coverage gaps are likely, particularly in slum areas.
Travelers to the Philippines should ensure that they are vaccinated
appropriately against polio according to national recommendations [3].
Reported by: National Epidemiology Center, National Center for Disease
Prevention and Control, Research Institute of Tropical Medicine, Dept of
Health; World Health Organization, Manila, Philippines. Regional Reference
Laboratory, Victorian Infectious Diseases Reference Laboratory, Fairfield,
Victoria, Australia. Global Specialized Laboratory, National Institute of
Infectious Diseases, Tokyo, Japan. Vaccines and Biologicals Dept, World Health
Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. Respiratory and Enteric Viruses Br, Div of
Viral and Rickettsial Diseases, National Center for Infectious Diseases;
Vaccine Preventable Disease Eradication Div, National Immunization Program,
CDC.
References
- CDC update:
outbreak of poliomyelitis---Dominican Republic and Haiti, 2000--2001. MMWR
2001;50:855--6.
- CDC. Progress
toward poliomyelitis eradication---Western Pacific Region, January 1, 1996--September
27, 1997. MMWR 1997;46:1113--7.
- CDC.
Poliomyelitis prevention in the United States: updated recommendations of
the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. MMWR 2000;49(no. RR-5).

All material on this
website is protected by copyright. Copyright ©
1994-2001 by Medscape Inc. All rights reserved. This website also contains
material copyrighted by 3rd parties. Medscape requires 3.x browsers or better
from Netscape or Microsoft.
ALL
INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR
GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE
KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED
AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO
VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU
ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.