Measles, Mumps, and Rubella -- Vaccine Use and Strategies for Elimination of Measles, Rubella, and Congenital Rubella Syndrome and Control of Mumps: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
warning: include_once(./sites/all/modules/date_backup/date/date.theme) [function.include-once]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/vaccgot7/public_html/includes/theme.inc on line 645.
warning: include_once() [function.include]: Failed opening './sites/all/modules/date_backup/date/date.theme' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/vaccgot7/public_html/includes/theme.inc on line 645.
Measles, Mumps, and Rubella -- Vaccine Use and Strategies for Elimination of
Measles, Rubella, and Congenital Rubella Syndrome and Control of Mumps:
Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
SUMMARY
These revised recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization
Practices (ACIP) on measles, mumps, and rubella prevention supersede
recommendations published in 1989 and 1990. This statement summarizes the goals
and current strategies for measles, rubella, and congenital rubella syndrome
(CRS) elimination and for mumps reduction in the United States. Changes from
previous recommendations include
Emphasis on the use of combined MMR vaccine for most indications;
A change in the recommended age for routine vaccination to 12-15 months
for the first dose of MMR, and to 4-6 years for the second dose of MMR;
A recommendation that all states take immediate steps to implement a two
dose MMR requirement for school entry and any additional measures needed to
ensure that all school-aged children are vaccinated with two doses of MMR by
2001;
A clarification of the role of serologic screening to determine immunity;
A change in the criteria for determining acceptable evidence of rubella
immunity;
A recommendation that all persons who work in health-care facilities have
acceptable evidence of measles and rubella immunity;
Changes in the recommended interval between administration of immune
globulin and measles vaccination; and
Updated information on adverse events and contraindications, particularly
for persons with severe HIV infection, persons with a history of egg allergy
or gelatin allergy, persons with a history of thrombocytopenia, and persons
receiving steroid therapy. INTRODUCTION
Since monovalent vaccines containing measles, rubella, and mumps vaccine
viruses -- and subsequently combined measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine -- were
licensed, the numbers of reported cases of measles, mumps, rubella, and
congenital rubella syndrome (CRS) have decreased by more than 99%. In 1993, the
Childhood Immunization Initiative established goals of eliminating indigenous
transmission of measles and rubella in the United States by 1996. Subsequently,
the goals of the initiative were extended to include reducing the number of
reported mumps cases to less than or equal to 1600 by 1996. U.S. Public Health
Service year 2000 objectives include eliminating measles, rubella, and
congenital rubella syndrome, and reducing mumps incidence to less than 500
reported cases per year. Since 1995, fewer cases of measles, rubella, and mumps
have been reported than at any time since nationwide disease reporting began,
and elimination of indigenous transmission appears feasible. These
recommendations are intended to hasten the achievement of these disease
elimination goals. Measles Clinical Characteristics
The incubation period of measles (rubeola) averages 10-12 days from exposure
to prodrome and 14 days from exposure to rash (range: 7-18 days). The disease
can be severe and is most frequently complicated by diarrhea, middle ear
infection, or bronchopneumonia. Encephalitis occurs in approximately one of
every 1,000 reported cases; survivors of this complication often have permanent
brain damage and mental retardation. Death occurs in 1-2 of every 1,000 reported
measles cases in the United States. The risk for death from measles or its
complications is greater for infants, young children, and adults than for older
children and adolescents. The most common causes of death are pneumonia and
acute encephalitis. In developing countries, measles is often more severe and
the case-fatality rate can be as high as 25%.
Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE) is a rare degenerative disease of
the central nervous system associated with measles virus. Signs and symptoms of
the disease appear years after measles infection. Widespread use of measles
vaccine has essentially eliminated SSPE from the United States (1).
Measles illness during pregnancy leads to increased rates of premature labor,
spontaneous abortion, and low birth weight among affected infants (2-5). Birth
defects, with no definable pattern of malformation, have been reported among
infants born to women infected with measles during pregnancy, but measles
infection has not been confirmed as the cause of the malformations.
Measles can be severe and prolonged among immunocompromised persons,
particularly those who have certain leukemias, lymphomas, or human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Among these persons, measles may occur
without the typical rash and a patient may shed measles virus for several weeks
after the acute illness (6,7). Measles Elimination
Before measles vaccine was licensed in 1963, an average of 400,000 measles
cases were reported each year in the United States (8). However, because
virtually all children acquired measles, the number of cases probably approached
3.5 million per year (i.e., an entire birth cohort).
Since measles vaccine became available, professional and voluntary medical
and public health organizations have collaborated in vaccination programs that
have reduced the reported incidence of measles by greater than 99%. During the
late 1960s and early 1970s, the number of reported cases decreased to
approximately 22,000-75,000 cases per year. Although measles incidence decreased
substantially in all age groups, the greatest decrease occurred among children
aged less than 10 years. A less marked decrease also occurred among older
children.
During 1978, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (DHEW)
initiated a Measles Elimination Program with the goal of eliminating indigenous
measles from the United States by October 1, 1982. The three components of this
program were a) maintenance of high levels of immunity with a single dose of
measles vaccine, b) enhanced surveillance of disease, and c) aggressive outbreak
control. As a result of this program, the number of cases reported annually
decreased from 26,871 during 1978 to 1,497 during 1983. However, an average of
3,750 cases was reported each year during 1984-1988; 58% of these cases occurred
among children aged greater than or equal to 10 years, most of whom had received
only one dose of measles vaccine (9). Recurrent measles outbreaks among
vaccinated school-aged children prompted both the Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in
1989 to recommend that all children receive two doses of measles-containing
vaccine, preferably as MMR. Although administration of the second dose was
originally recommended either at entry to primary school (ACIP) or middle/
secondary school (AAP), ACIP, the AAP, and the American Academy of Family
Physicians (AAFP) now recommend that a child receive the second dose before
school entry, rather than delaying it until the child is aged 11-12 years.
During 1989-1991, a major resurgence of measles occurred in the United
States. More than 55,000 cases and greater than 120 measles-related deaths were
reported. The resurgence was characterized by an increasing proportion of cases
among unvaccinated preschool-aged children, particularly those resident in urban
areas (10-12).
Multiple barriers to timely vaccination of preschool-aged children were
identified during investigation of the 1989-1991 measles resurgence. Efforts to
increase vaccination coverage among preschool-aged children emphasized
vaccination as close to the recommended age as possible. These efforts, coupled
with ongoing implementation of the two-dose MMR recommendation, reduced reported
measles cases from 2,237 in 1992 to 312 in 1993 (9). Although 963 measles cases
were reported in 1994, measles incidence again declined in 1995, when 309 cases
were reported (13). In 1996, 508 cases were reported, of which 65 were
classified as international importations (14).
In 1993, the Childhood Immunization Initiative called for the elimination
from the United States by 1996 of indigenous transmission of six childhood
diseases, including rubella, congenital rubella syndrome (CRS), and measles
(10). In September 1994, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) adopted a
similar goal of eliminating measles throughout the Americas by 2000 (15). Both
epidemiologic and laboratory evidence suggest that the transmission of
indigenous measles was interrupted in the United States for the first time
during 1993 (16,17).
However, even after indigenous measles transmission has been eliminated,
measles cases caused by the importation of the virus from other countries will
continue to occur. Sustaining measles elimination will require continuing
efforts. Enhanced surveillance for measles must be maintained and disease
control activities must be undertaken immediately when suspected cases of
measles are reported. The major challenges to sustaining the elimination of
measles from the United States are a) continuing to vaccinate all children aged
12-15 months with a first dose of MMR, b) ensuring that all school-aged children
receive a second dose of MMR vaccine, and c) working with other countries to set
and achieve national measles elimination goals. Rubella And Congenital Rubella
Syndrome (CRS) Clinical Characteristics
Rubella is an exanthematous illness characterized by nonspecific signs and
symptoms including transient erythematous and sometimes pruritic rash,
postauricular or suboccipital lymphadenopathy, arthralgia, and low-grade fever.
Clinically similar exanthematous illnesses are caused by parvovirus,
adenoviruses, and enteroviruses. Moreover, 25%-50% of rubella infections are
subclinical. The incubation period ranges from 12 to 23 days. Before rubella
vaccine was available, the disease was common among children and young adults.
Among adults infected with rubella, transient polyarthralgia or polyarthritis
occur frequently. These manifestations are particularly common among women (18).
Central nervous system complications (i.e., encephalitis) occur at a ratio of 1
per 6,000 cases and are more likely to affect adults. Thrombocytopenia occurs at
a ratio of 1 per 3,000 cases and is more likely to affect children.
The most important consequences of rubella are the miscarriages, stillbirths,
fetal anomalies, and therapeutic abortions that result when rubella infection
occurs during early pregnancy, especially during the first trimester. An
estimated 20,000 cases of CRS occurred during 1964-1965 during the last U.S.
rubella epidemic before rubella vaccine became available.
The anomalies most commonly associated with CRS are auditory (e.g.,
sensorineural deafness), ophthalmic (e.g., cataracts, microphthalmia, glaucoma,
chorioretinitis), cardiac (e.g., patent ductus arteriosus, peripheral pulmonary
artery stenosis, atrial or ventricular septal defects), and neurologic (e.g.,
microcephaly, meningoencephalitis, mental retardation). In addition, infants
with CRS frequently exhibit both intrauterine and postnatal growth retardation.
Other conditions sometimes observed among patients who have CRS include
radiolucent bone defects, hepatosplenomegaly, thrombocytopenia, and purpuric
skin lesions.
Infants who are moderately or severely affected by CRS are readily
recognizable at birth, but mild CRS (e.g., slight cardiac involvement or
deafness) may be detected months or years after birth, or not at all. Although
CRS has been estimated to occur among 20%-25% of infants born to women who
acquire rubella during the first 20 weeks of pregnancy, this figure may
underestimate the risk for fetal infection and birth defects. When infants born
to mothers who were infected during the first 8 weeks of gestation were followed
for 4 years, 85% were found to be affected (19). The risk for any defect
decreases to approximately 52% for infections that occur during the ninth to
twelfth weeks of gestation. Infection after the twentieth week of gestation
rarely causes defects. Inapparent (subclinical) maternal rubella infection can
also cause congenital malformations. Fetal infection without clinical signs of
CRS can occur during any stage of pregnancy. Rubella Elimination
Before rubella vaccine was licensed during 1969, rubella incidence was
greatest among preschool and elementary school children. Therefore, vaccination
campaigns initially targeted children in kindergarten and the early grades of
elementary school, with the aim of interrupting circulation of the virus and
eliminating the risk for exposure among susceptible pregnant women. The risks
associated with administering a potentially teratogenic live virus vaccine to
young women of childbearing age were not known. During 1969-1976, reported
rubella cases decreased from 57,600 to 12,400. However, during 1975-1977, 62% of
reported rubella cases occurred among persons aged greater than 15 years
compared with 23% of cases occurring during 1966-1968, and serologic studies
suggested that 10%-15% of adults remained susceptible to rubella (20).
The number of CRS cases reported nationwide decreased by 69% from 69 in 1970
to 22 in 1976. Rubella outbreaks continued to occur among older adolescents and
young adults (e.g, in military camps, high schools, colleges, and universities).
In 1977, ACIP modified its recommendations to include the vaccination of
susceptible postpubertal girls and women. During the same year, the DHEW
undertook the National Childhood Immunization Initiative, which sought to
immunize greater than 90% of the nation's children against all
vaccine-preventable diseases. Enforcement of requirements for vaccination before
school entry was part of the initiative. The number of reported rubella and CRS
cases decreased after these programs were implemented, from 20,395 rubella cases
and 29 CRS cases in 1977 to 752 rubella cases and 2 CRS cases in 1984. In 1988,
225 cases of rubella were reported in the United States, the fewest since
national reporting began.
However, because of outbreaks among unvaccinated adults (e.g., in prisons,
colleges, and workplaces), greater than 1000 rubella cases were reported in 1990
and again in 1991. The largest outbreak and the greatest number of CRS cases
occurred among children and adults in religious communities that do not accept
vaccination. Since 1992, reported indigenous rubella and CRS have continued to
occur at a low but relatively constant endemic level with an annual average of
less than 200 rubella cases (128 cases in 1995 and 213 cases in 1996). Four
confirmed CRS cases occurred in 1995 and 2 in 1996. However, in the United
States, surveillance for CRS relies on a passive system. Consequently, the
reported annual totals of CRS are regarded as minimum figures, representing an
estimated 40%-70% of all cases (21,22).
During 1992-1997, 65% of reported cases of rubella occurred among persons
aged greater than or equal to 20 years. In addition, recent evidence suggests
that the risk for both rubella and CRS is increased among persons of Hispanic
ethnicity, particularly those born outside the United States. Outbreaks of
rubella in California (1990-1991), Massachusetts (1993-1994), Connecticut
(1995), and North Carolina (1996 and 1997) have occurred primarily among persons
of Hispanic origin. During 1985-1995, the ethnicity of a total of 89 children
with laboratory-confirmed or clinically compatible cases of CRS was known; 35
(39%) were of Hispanic origin (23-27).
Recent data indicate that the rate of rubella susceptibility and risk for
rubella infection are highest among young adults. During 1992-94, approximately
8% of persons aged 15-29 years were estimated to lack serologic evidence of
immunity to rubella (CDC, unpublished data). Data from two recent studies
indicate that vaccine-induced rubella antibody levels among adolescents may have
decreased during the 9-14 years that had elapsed since they were initially
vaccinated. However, recent rubella surveillance data do not indicate that
rubella and CRS are increasing among vaccinated persons (28) (CDC, unpublished
data).
The primary objective of the rubella immunization program is the prevention
of CRS. The major components of the rubella and CRS elimination strategy are
achieving and maintaining high immunization levels for children and adults,
especially women of childbearing age; conducting accurate surveillance for
rubella and CRS; and undertaking control measures promptly when a rubella
outbreak occurs. Since the late 1970s, this strategy has effectively prevented
major epidemics of rubella and CRS in the United States. Mumps Clinical
Characteristics
Persons in whom "classical" mumps develops have bilateral or (less commonly)
unilateral parotitis, with onset an average of 16-18 days after exposure.
Parotitis may be preceded by fever, headache, malaise, myalgia, and anorexia.
Only 30%-40% of mumps infections produce typical acute parotitis; 15%-20% of
infections are asymptomatic and up to 50% of infections are associated with
nonspecific or primarily respiratory symptoms (29,30). Inapparent infection may
be more common among adults than children; parotitis occurs more commonly among
children aged 2-9 years (30,31). Serious complications of mumps infection can
occur without evidence of parotitis (29,32,33).
Most serious complications of mumps are more common among adults than among
children (29,34). Although orchitis may occur among up to 38% of postpubertal
men in whom mumps develops, sterility is thought to occur only rarely (35).
Aseptic meningitis affects 4%-6% of persons with clinical cases of mumps and
typically is mild (29,36-38). However, mumps meningoencephalitis can cause
permanent sequelae, including paralysis, seizures, cranial nerve palsies,
aqueductal stenosis, and hydrocephalus (39-41). In the prevaccine era, mumps was
a major cause of sensorineural deafness among children. Deafness may be sudden
in onset, bilateral, and permanent (42-44).
Among women in whom mumps develops during the first trimester of pregnancy,
an increased risk for fetal death has been observed (45). However, mumps
infection during pregnancy is not associated with congenital malformations (46).
Mumps Control
In the United States, the reported incidence of mumps decreased steadily
after the introduction of live mumps vaccine in 1967 and the recommendation for
its routine use in 1977. In 1995, 906 cases were reported, representing a 99%
decrease from the 185,691 cases reported in 1968. The enactment and enforcement
of state vaccination laws requiring that students be vaccinated before school
entry has contributed more to reducing mumps incidence than any other measure
(47). During the 1980s and early 1990s, mumps incidence was lowest in states
where comprehensive vaccination laws were enforced. States where vaccination
laws were less comprehensive reported intermediate mumps incidence, and the
highest incidence was reported in states did not have such laws (47-51).
Mumps incidence is now very low in all areas of the United States. The
substantial reduction in mumps incidence during the past few years may reflect
the change in the recommendations for use of MMR vaccine. The implementation of
the two-dose MMR vaccination schedule likely decreased mumps incidence further
by immunizing children among whom the first dose of mumps antigen did not elicit
an immune response (52,53). The principal strategy to prevent mumps is to
achieve and maintain high immunization levels by routinely vaccinating all
children with two doses of MMR. VACCINE PREPARATIONS
Measles, rubella, and mumps vaccines are available in monovalent measles (Attenuvax
, Merck & Co., Inc.), rubella (Meruvax , Merck & Co., Inc.), or mumps (Mumpsvax
, Merck & Co., Inc.) form and in combinations: measles-mumps-rubella (MMR)
(M-M-R II , Merck & Co., Inc.), measles-rubella (MR) (M-R-Vax , Merck & Co.,
Inc.), and rubella-mumps (Biavax II , Merck & Co., Inc.) vaccines. Each dose of
the combined or monovalent vaccines contains approximately 0.3 milligrams of
human albumin, 25 micrograms of neomycin, 14.5 milligrams of sorbitol, and 14.5
milligrams of hydrolyzed gelatin (Merck & Co., Inc., manufacturer's package
insert). Live measles vaccine and live mumps vaccine are produced in chick
embryo cell culture. Live rubella vaccine is grown in human diploid cell
culture. Measles Component
Since 1963, when both inactivated and live attenuated (Edmonston B strain)
vaccines were licensed, the type of measles vaccine used in the United States
has changed several times. Distribution of the inactivated and live Edmonston B
vaccines ceased after 1967 and 1975, respectively. Distribution in the United
States of a live, further attenuated vaccine (Schwarz strain) first introduced
in 1965 has also ceased. A live, further attenuated preparation of the Enders-Edmonston
virus strain that is grown in chick embryo fibroblast cell culture, licensed in
1968, is the only measles virus vaccine now available in the United States. This
further attenuated vaccine (formerly called "Moraten") causes fewer adverse
reactions than the Edmonston B vaccine.
Measles vaccine produces an
inapparent or mild, noncommunicable infection. Measles antibodies develop
among approximately 95% of children vaccinated at age 12 months and 98% of
children vaccinated at age 15 months (CDC, unpublished data). Studies indicate
that, if the first dose is administered no earlier than the first birthday,
greater than 99% of persons who receive two doses of measles vaccine develop
serologic evidence of measles immunity (54)(CDC, unpublished data). Although
vaccination produces lower antibody levels than natural disease, both serologic
and epidemiologic evidence indicate that the vaccine induces long-term --
probably lifelong -- immunity, in most persons (55). Most vaccinated persons who
appear to lose antibody show an anamnestic immune response upon revaccination,
indicating that they are probably still immune (56). Although revaccination
elicits increased antibody levels in some persons, these increased levels may
not be sustained (57). Findings of some studies indicate that immunity can wane
after successful vaccination (secondary vaccine failure), but this phenomenon
appears to occur rarely and to have little effect on measles transmission and
the occurrence of outbreaks (55,58,59). Rubella Component
The live rubella virus vaccine currently distributed in the United States is
prepared in human diploid cell culture. This vaccine, containing virus strain RA
27/3, was licensed in the United States in January, 1979 and replaced previous
rubella vaccines (e.g., HPV-77 and Cendehill) because it induced an increased
and more persistent antibody response and was associated with fewer adverse
events.
In clinical trials, greater than or equal to 95% of susceptible persons aged
greater than or equal to 12 months who received a single dose of strain RA 27/3
rubella vaccine developed serologic evidence of immunity (60-62). Clinical
efficacy and challenge studies indicate that greater than 90% of vaccinated
persons have protection against both clinical rubella and viremia for at least
15 years (63-66). Follow-up studies indicate that one dose of vaccine confers
long-term -- probably lifelong -- protection (67). Although antibody titers
induced by the vaccine are generally lower than those stimulated by rubella
infection, vaccine-induced immunity protects, in nearly all instances, against
both clinical illness and viremia after natural exposure (68,69). In studies
that attempted artificial reinfection of persons who received RA 27/3 vaccine,
resistance to reinfection was similar to the resistance that follows natural
infection (70). However, several reports indicate that viremic reinfection
following exposure may occur among vaccinated persons who have low levels of
detectable antibody (64). The frequency and consequences of this phenomenon are
unknown but it is believed to be uncommon. Clinical reinfection and fetal
infection among persons who developed immunity as a consequence of infection
with wild virus have been documented, but are apparently rare (71). Rarely,
clinical reinfection and fetal infection have been reported among women with
vaccine-induced immunity. Rare cases of CRS have occurred among infants born to
mothers who had documented serologic evidence of rubella immunity before they
became pregnant. Mumps Component
The only mumps vaccine now available in the United States is a live virus
vaccine (Jeryl-Lynn strain) that is prepared in chick-embryo cell culture. The
vaccine produces a subclinical, noncommunicable infection with very few side
effects.
More than 97% of persons who are susceptible to mumps develop measurable
antibody following vaccination and, in controlled clinical trials, one dose of
vaccine was approximately 95% efficacious in preventing mumps disease (72-74).
However, field studies have documented lower estimates of vaccine efficacy,
ranging from 75% to 95% (47,75). Antibody levels induced by the vaccine are
lower than antibody levels resulting from natural infection (72,76,77). The
duration of vaccine-induced immunity is unknown, but serologic and epidemiologic
data collected during 30 years of live vaccine use indicate both the persistence
of antibody and continuing protection against infection (33,78,79). Vaccine
Shipment and Storage
Administration of improperly stored vaccine may fail to provide protection
against disease from measles, rubella, and/or mumps. These live virus vaccines
are supplied in lyophilized form and should be stored at 2-8 C (35.6-46.4 F) or
colder. They must be shipped at 10 C (50 F) or colder and may be shipped on dry
ice. The vaccines must be protected from light, which may inactivate the vaccine
viruses. Reconstituted vaccine also must be protected from light, must be stored
at 2-8 C (35.6-46.4 F), and must not be frozen. Reconstituted vaccine must be
discarded if not used within 8 hours. VACCINE USAGE
Two doses of MMR vaccine separated by at least 1 month (i.e., a minimum of 28
days) and administered on or after the first birthday are recommended for all
children and for certain high-risk groups of adolescents and adults. The
recommended 1 month interval between successive doses of MMR or other
measles-containing vaccine is based on the principle that live virus vaccines
not administered at the same time should be separated by at least 1 month (80).
MMR is the vaccine of choice when protection against any of these three
diseases is required on or after the first birthday, unless any of its component
vaccines is contraindicated. The purpose of the two-dose vaccination schedule is
to produce immunity in the small proportion of persons who fail to respond
immunologically to one or more of the components of the first dose. Studies
indicate that two doses of measles vaccine are necessary to develop adequate
population immunity to prevent measles outbreaks among school-aged and older
persons. Mumps can occur in highly vaccinated populations; in these outbreaks,
substantial numbers of cases have occurred among persons who had previously
received a single dose of mumps-containing vaccine (33,81). Although primary
rubella vaccine failure rarely occurs, the potential consequences of failure
(i.e., CRS) are substantial.
Almost all persons who do not respond to the measles component of the first
dose of MMR vaccine will respond to the second dose (82) (CDC, unpublished
data). Few data regarding the immune response to the rubella and mumps
components of a second dose of MMR vaccine are available, but most persons who
do not respond to the rubella or mumps components of the first dose would be
expected to respond to the second (82-84) (CDC, unpublished data). The second
dose is not generally considered a booster dose because a primary immune
response to the first dose provides long-term protection. Although some persons
who develop normal antibody titers in response to a single dose of MMR vaccine
will develop higher antibody titers to the three component vaccines when
administered a second dose of vaccine, these increased antibody levels typically
do not persist (57).
Use of combined MMR vaccine for both measles doses and all other indications
should provide an additional safeguard against primary vaccine failures and
facilitate elimination of rubella and CRS and continued reduction of mumps
incidence. Data also indicate that the favorable benefit/cost ratio for routine
measles, rubella, and mumps vaccination is even greater when the vaccines are
administered as combined MMR vaccine (85,86). Dosage and Route of Administration
The lyophilized live MMR vaccine (and its component vaccines) should be
reconstituted and administered as recommended by the manufacturer. All measles-,
rubella-, or mumps-containing vaccines available in the United States should be
administered subcutaneously in the recommended standard single-dose volume of
0.5 mL. Simultaneous Administration of Vaccines
In general, simultaneous administration of the most widely used live and
inactivated vaccines does not impair antibody responses or increase rates of
adverse reactions (80). The antibody responses of persons vaccinated with MMR
are similar to those of persons vaccinated with single-antigen measles, mumps,
and rubella vaccines at different sites or at different times.
ACIP encourages routine simultaneous administration of MMR, diphtheria and
tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis (DTaP) or diphtheria and tetanus toxoids
and whole-cell pertussis (DTP) vaccine, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)
vaccine, and oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) or inactivated poliovirus vaccine
(IPV) to children who are at the recommended age to receive these vaccines.
Antibody responses were equivalent and no clinically significant increases in
the frequency of adverse events occurred when MMR vaccine, DTaP (or DTP), Hib
vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine, and IPV or OPV were administered either
simultaneously at different sites or at separate times (87). Likewise,
seroconversion rates, antibody levels, and frequencies of adverse reactions were
similar in two groups, one of which was administered MMR and varicella vaccines
simultaneously at separate sites and the other of which received the vaccines 6
weeks apart (88)(Merck Research Laboratories, unpublished data).
Live measles and yellow fever vaccines can be administered simultaneously at
separate anatomical sites in separate syringes (89). Limited data also indicate
that the immunogenicity and safety of inactivated Japanese encephalitis vaccine
are not compromised by simultaneous administration with live measles vaccine
(90). Limited data exist concerning concurrent administration of MMR vaccine and
other vaccines that are often recommended for international travelers (e.g.,
meningococcal vaccine, typhoid vaccines). However, neither theoretical
considerations nor practical experience indicate that the simultaneous
administration at separate anatomic sites of MMR and other live or inactivated
vaccines will produce a diminished immune response or increase the incidence of
adverse events among vaccinated persons. DOCUMENTATION OF IMMUNITY
Only doses of vaccine for which written documentation of the date of
administration is presented should be considered valid. Neither a self-reported
dose nor a history of vaccination provided by a parent is, by itself, considered
adequate documentation. No health-care worker should provide a vaccination
record for a patient unless that health-care worker has administered the vaccine
or has seen a record that documents vaccination. Persons who may be immune to
measles, mumps, or rubella but who lack either adequate documentation of
vaccination or other acceptable evidence of immunity (Table_1)
should be vaccinated. Vaccination status and date of administration of all
vaccinations should be documented in the patient's permanent medical record.
Serologic screening for measles, rubella, or mumps immunity generally is
neither necessary nor recommended if a person has other acceptable evidence of
immunity to the disease (Table_1). Serologic
screening can be a barrier to vaccination. With the exception of women who are
known to be pregnant (see Women of Childbearing Age), persons who lack
acceptable evidence of immunity generally should be vaccinated without serologic
testing. Serologic screening is appropriate only when persons identified as
susceptible are subsequently vaccinated in a timely manner. Screening is most
applicable when the return and vaccination of those tested can be ensured (e.g.,
hiring of new health-care workers). If these conditions are not met, serologic
screening is inappropriate (91). Likewise, during an outbreak of measles,
rubella, or mumps, serologic screening before vaccination generally is not
recommended because waiting for results, contacting, and then vaccinating
persons identified as susceptible can impede the rapid vaccination needed to
curb the outbreak.
Serologic screening for antibodies to measles, rubella, or mumps alone will
not identify persons who are susceptible to the other diseases for which
screening is not done. Post-vaccination serologic testing to verify an immune
response to MMR or its component vaccines is not recommended.
The criteria for acceptable evidence of immunity to measles, rubella, and
mumps (Table_1) provide presumptive rather than
absolute evidence of immunity. Occasionally, a person who meets the criteria for
presumptive immunity can contract and transmit disease. Specific criteria for
documentation of immunity have been established for certain persons (e.g.,
health-care workers, international travelers, and students at post-high school
educational institutions) who are at increased risk for exposure to measles,
rubella, and mumps (Table_1). Criteria accepted as
evidence of immunity for the purpose of meeting school or college entry
requirements or other government regulations may vary among state and local
jurisdictions. Measles
Persons generally can be presumed immune to measles (Table_1)
if they have documentation of adequate vaccination, laboratory evidence of
immunity to measles, documentation of physician-diagnosed measles, or were born
before 1957. Criteria for adequate vaccination currently vary depending on state
and local vaccination policy because of differences in the way states have
implemented the two-dose measles vaccination schedule. All states are strongly
encouraged to take immediate steps to implement the two-dose MMR vaccination
schedule so that, by 2001, adequate vaccination of children will be defined in
all 50 states as follows:
For preschool-aged children: documentation of at least one dose of MMR
vaccine administered on or after the first birthday.
For children in kindergarten through grade 12: documentation of two doses
of MMR vaccine separated by at least 28 days (i.e., 1 month), with the first
dose administered no earlier than the first birthday.
Doses of MMR and other measles-containing vaccines administered before the
first birthday should not be counted when determining adequacy of measles
vaccination.
When measles virus is introduced into a community, persons who work in
health-care facilities are at greater risk for acquiring measles than the
general population (92). Because persons working in medical settings have been
infected with and have transmitted measles to patients and coworkers, rigorous
criteria for immunity among health-care workers have been established. For
persons born during or after 1957 who work in health-care facilities, adequate
vaccination consists of two doses of MMR or other live measles-containing
vaccine separated by at least 28 days, with the first dose administered no
earlier than the first birthday (Table_1). In
addition, although birth before 1957 is generally considered acceptable evidence
of measles immunity (Table 1), measles has occurred in some unvaccinated persons
born before 1957 who worked in health-care facilities. Therefore, health-care
facilities should consider recommending a dose of MMR vaccine for unvaccinated
workers born before 1957 who lack a history of measles disease or laboratory
evidence of measles immunity (see Health-Care Facilities).
The previously described criteria apply only to routine vaccination. During
measles outbreaks, evidence of adequate vaccination for school-aged children,
adolescents, and adults born during or after 1957 who are at risk for measles
exposure and infection consists of two doses of measles-containing vaccine
separated by at least 28 days, with the first dose administered no earlier than
the first birthday (see Measles Outbreak Control). During outbreaks involving
preschool-aged children, authorities should consider extending this criterion to
all children aged greater than or equal to 12 months.
In the past, the most commonly used laboratory test for assessing immunity to
measles was the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) test but more sensitive assays
(e.g., the enzyme immunoassay {EIA} or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
{ELISA}) are now used in most laboratories. Persons who have measles-specific
antibody that is detectable by any serologic test are considered immune. Persons
with an "equivocal" test result should be considered susceptible unless they
have other evidence of measles immunity (Table_1) or
subsequent testing indicates they are immune. All new cases of suspected measles
should be confirmed by laboratory testing (see Measles Case Investigation
Laboratory Diagnosis). Rubella
Persons generally can be presumed immune to rubella (Table 1) if they have
documentation of vaccination with at least one dose of MMR or other live
rubella-containing vaccine administered on or after the first birthday,
laboratory evidence of rubella immunity, or were born before 1957 (except women
who could become pregnant). Birth before 1957 is not acceptable evidence of
rubella immunity for women who could become pregnant because it provides only
presumptive evidence of rubella immunity and does not guarantee that a person is
immune (see Women of Childbearing Age). Rubella can occur among some
unvaccinated persons born before 1957 and congenital rubella and CRS can occur
among the offspring of women infected with rubella during pregnancy.
Persons who have an "equivocal" serologic test result should be considered
susceptible to rubella unless they have evidence of adequate vaccination or a
subsequent serologic test result indicates rubella immunity. Although only one
dose of rubella-containing vaccine is required as acceptable evidence of
immunity to rubella, children should receive two doses of MMR vaccine. The first
dose is administered routinely when the child is aged 12-15 months and the
second before the child enters school (i.e., at age 4-6 years)(see Routine
Vaccination).
The clinical diagnosis of rubella is unreliable and should not be considered
in assessing immune status. Because many rash illnesses may mimic rubella
infection and many rubella infections are unrecognized, the only reliable
evidence of previous rubella infection is the presence of serum rubella
immunoglobulin G (IgG). Laboratories that regularly perform antibody testing
generally provide the most reliable results because their reagents and
procedures are more likely to be strictly standardized (see Rubella Case
Investigation and Outbreak Control).
Postinfection immunity to rubella appears to be long-lasting and is probably
lifelong. However, as with other viral diseases, re-exposure to natural rubella
occasionally leads to reinfection without clinical illness or detectable viremia.
The risk for CRS among infants born to women reinfected with rubella during
pregnancy is minimal (93,94). Although data from several studies indicate that
levels of vaccine-induced rubella antibodies may decline with time, data from
surveillance of rubella and CRS suggest that waning immunity with increased
susceptibility to rubella disease does not occur (28)(CDC, unpublished data).
HI antibody testing was formerly the method most frequently used to screen
for rubella antibodies. However, the HI test has been supplanted by other assays
of equal or greater sensitivity. EIAs are the most commonly used of these newer
commercial assays, but latex agglutination, immunofluorescence assay (IFA),
passive hemagglutination, hemolysis-in-gel, and virus neutralization tests are
also available.
Any antibody level above the standard positive cutoff value of the assay with
which it is measured can be considered evidence of immunity, if the assay is
licensed. When serum specimens from adults who did not produce antibodies
detectable by HI after vaccination were examined with an equivalently specific
but more sensitive test, almost all had detectable antibody (95,96). A few
children who initially developed antibody detectable by HI apparently "lost"
this antibody during follow-up intervals of up to 16 years (77,97,98). However,
almost all had antibody detectable by more sensitive tests. In several of these
cases, immunity was confirmed by documenting a booster response (i.e., absence
of IgM antibody and a rapid rise in IgG antibody) after revaccination (62,99).
Occasionally, persons with documented histories of rubella vaccination have
rubella serum IgG levels that are not clearly positive by ELISA. Such persons
can be administered a dose of MMR vaccine and need not be retested for serologic
evidence of rubella immunity. Mumps
Persons generally can be presumed immune to mumps (Table_1)
if they have documentation of vaccination with live mumps virus vaccine on or
after the first birthday, laboratory evidence of mumps immunity, documentation
of physician-diagnosed mumps, or were born before 1957.
The demonstration of mumps IgG antibody by any commonly used serologic assay
is acceptable evidence of mumps immunity. Persons who have an "equivocal"
serologic test result should be considered susceptible to mumps unless they have
other evidence of mumps immunity (Table_1) or
subsequent testing indicates they are immune. All new cases of suspected mumps
should be confirmed by an appropriate serologic assay (see Mumps Case
Investigation, Laboratory Diagnosis).
Live mumps vaccine was not used routinely before 1977. Before the vaccine was
introduced, the age-specific incidence of the disease peaked among children aged
5-9 years. Therefore, most persons born before 1957 are likely to have been
infected naturally between 1957 and 1977 and may be presumed immune, even if
they have not had clinically recognizable mumps disease. However, birth before
1957 does not guarantee mumps immunity. Therefore, during mumps outbreaks, MMR
vaccination should be considered for persons born before 1957 who may be exposed
to mumps and who may be susceptible. Laboratory testing for mumps susceptibility
before vaccination is not necessary. ROUTINE VACCINATION Preschool-Aged Children
Children should receive the first dose of MMR vaccine at age 12-15 months
(i.e., on or after the first birthday). In areas where risk for measles is high,
initial vaccination with MMR vaccine is recommended for all children as soon as
possible upon reaching the first birthday (i.e., at age 12 months). An area
where measles risk is high is defined as:
a county with a large inner city population,
a county where a recent measles outbreak has occurred among unvaccinated
preschool-aged children, or
a county in which more than five cases of measles have occurred among
preschool-aged children during each of the last 5 years.
These recommendations may be implemented for an entire county or only within
defined areas of a county. This strategy assumes that the benefit of preventing
measles cases among children aged 12-15 months outweighs the slightly reduced
efficacy of the vaccine when administered to children aged less than 15 months.
In addition, almost all children who do not respond immunologically to the first
dose of MMR vaccine will develop measles immunity after receiving a second dose.
HIV-infected children should receive MMR vaccine at age 12 months, if not
otherwise contraindicated (see Special Considerations for Vaccination -- Persons
Infected with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)). School-Aged Children and
Adolescents
The second dose of MMR vaccine is recommended when children are aged 4-6
years (i.e., before a child enters kindergarten or first grade). This
recommended timing for the second dose of MMR vaccine has been adopted jointly
by ACIP, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and the American Academy of
Family Physicians (AAFP). Evidence now indicates that a) the major benefit of
administering the second dose is a reduction in the proportion of persons who
remain susceptible because of primary vaccine failure, b) waning immunity is not
a major cause of vaccine failure and has little influence on measles
transmission, and c) revaccination of children who have low levels of measles
antibody produces only a transient rise in antibody levels (55,57-59,100,101).
Because approximately 5% of children who receive only one dose of MMR vaccine
fail to develop immunity to measles, ACIP recommends that all states implement a
requirement that all children entering school have received two doses of MMR
vaccine (with the first dose administered no earlier than the first birthday) or
have other evidence of immunity to measles, rubella, and mumps (see
Documentation of Immunity). In addition, to achieve complete immunization of all
school-aged children and hasten progress toward measles elimination, states are
strongly encouraged to take immediate steps to ensure that, by 2001, all
children in grades kindergarten through 12 have received two doses of MMR
vaccine.
As part of comprehensive health services for all adolescents, ACIP, AAP, and
AAFP recommend a health maintenance visit at age 11-12 years. This visit should
serve as an opportunity to evaluate vaccination status and administer MMR
vaccine to all persons who have not received two doses at the recommended ages.
Children who do not have documentation of adequate vaccination against
measles, rubella, and mumps or other acceptable evidence of immunity to these
diseases (see Documentation of Immunity) should be admitted to school only after
administration of the first dose of MMR vaccine. If required, the second MMR
dose should be administered as soon as possible, but no sooner than 28 days
after the first dose. Children who have already received two doses of MMR
vaccine at least 1 month apart, with the first dose administered no earlier than
the first birthday, do not need an additional dose when they enter school.
Adults
Persons born in 1957 or later who are aged greater than or equal to 18 years
and who do not have a medical contraindication should receive at least one dose
of MMR vaccine unless they have
documentation of vaccination with at least one dose of measles-, rubella-,
and mumps-containing vaccine or b) other acceptable evidence of immunity to
these three diseases (Table_1). Persons born
before 1957 generally can be considered immune to measles and mumps. In
addition, persons born before 1957, except women who could become pregnant,
generally can be considered immune to rubella.
MMR vaccine (one dose or two doses administered at least 28 days apart) may
be administered to any person born before 1957 for whom the vaccine is not
contraindicated. Adults who may be at increased risk for exposure to and
transmission of measles, mumps, and rubella should receive special consideration
for vaccination. These persons include international travelers, persons
attending colleges and other post-high school educational institutions, and
persons who work at health-care facilities. In addition, all women of
childbearing age should be considered susceptible to rubella unless they have
received at least one dose of MMR or other live rubella virus vaccine on or
after the first birthday or have serologic evidence of immunity. Vaccination
recommendations for these high-risk groups follow. Women of Childbearing Age
MMR vaccine should be offered to all women of childbearing age (i.e.,
adolescent girls and premenopausal adult women) who do not have acceptable
evidence of rubella immunity whenever they make contact with the health-care
system. Opportunities to vaccinate susceptible women include occasions when
their children undergo routine examinations or vaccinations. The continuing
occurrence of rubella among women of childbearing age indicates the need to
continue vaccination of susceptible adolescent and adult women of childbearing
age, and the absence of evidence of vaccine teratogenicity indicates that the
practice is safe (102). Vaccination of susceptible women of childbearing age
should
be part of routine general medical and gynecologic outpatient care;
take place in all family-planning settings; and
be provided routinely before discharge from any hospital, birthing center,
or other medical facility, unless a specific contraindication exists (see
Precautions and Contraindications).
Outbreaks of rubella in the United States recently have occurred among women
of Hispanic ethnicity, many of whom were born outside the fifty states. Efforts
should be made to ensure that all susceptible women of childbearing age,
especially those who grew up outside the fifty states in areas where routine
rubella vaccination may not occur, are vaccinated with MMR vaccine or have other
acceptable evidence of immunity (Table_1).
Ascertainment of rubella-immune status of women of childbearing age and the
availability of rubella vaccination should be components of the health-care
program in places where the risks for disease exposure and transmission are
substantial (e.g., day care facilities, schools, colleges, jails, and prisons).
No evidence indicates that administration of rubella-containing vaccine virus
to a pregnant woman presents a risk for her fetus, although such a risk cannot
be excluded on theoretical grounds. Therefore, women of childbearing age should
receive rubella-containing vaccines (i.e., rubella, MR, or MMR vaccine) only if
they state that they are not pregnant and only if they are counseled not to
become pregnant for 3 months after vaccination. Because of the importance of
protecting women of childbearing age against rubella, reasonable practices in
any immunization program include a) asking women if they are pregnant, b) not
vaccinating women who state that they are pregnant, c) explaining the potential
risk for the fetus to women who state that they are not pregnant, and d)
counseling women who are vaccinated not to become pregnant during the 3 months
following MMR vaccination. Routine Vaccination of Women Who Are Not Pregnant.
Women of childbearing age who do not have documentation of rubella vaccination
or serologic evidence of rubella immunity should be vaccinated with MMR, if they
have no contraindications to the vaccine. Birth before 1957 is not acceptable
evidence of immunity for women who could become pregnant (Table_1).
The use of MMR vaccine provides the potential additional benefit of protection
against measles and mumps. Serologic testing before vaccination is not necessary
and might present a barrier to timely vaccination. Routine testing for rubella
antibody during clinic visits for routine health care, premarital evaluation,
family planning, or diagnosis and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases may
identify women who are not immune to rubella before they become pregnant. Such
routine serologic testing is not useful unless it is linked to timely follow-up
and vaccination of women who are susceptible (103). Prenatal Screening and
Postpartum Vaccination. Prenatal serologic screening of women who have
acceptable evidence of rubella immunity is generally not necessary, but is
indicated for all pregnant women who lack acceptable evidence of rubella
immunity (Table_1). Upon completion or termination
of their pregnancies, women who do not have serologic evidence of rubella
immunity or documentation of rubella vaccination should be vaccinated with MMR
before discharge from the hospital, birthing center, or abortion clinic (104).
They should be counseled to avoid conception for 3 months after vaccination.
Postpartum rubella vaccination of all women not known to be immune could prevent
up to half of CRS cases (105-108) (CDC, unpublished data). Colleges and Other
Post-High School Educational Institutions
Risks for transmission of measles, rubella, and mumps at post-high school
educational institutions can be high because these institutions may bring
together large concentrations of persons susceptible to these diseases
(109-113). Therefore, colleges, universities, technical and vocational schools,
and other institutions for post-high school education should require that all
undergraduate and graduate students have received two doses of MMR vaccine or
have other acceptable evidence of measles, rubella, and mumps immunity (Table_1)
before enrollment.
College entry requirements for measles immunity substantially reduce the risk
for measles outbreaks on college campuses where they are implemented and
enforced (111). State requirements for pre-enrollment vaccination ensure the
best protection against widespread measles transmission among students at
college campuses and other post-high school educational institutions. States are
strongly encouraged to adopt such regulations. Students who do not have
documentation of live measles, rubella, or mumps vaccination or other acceptable
evidence of immunity at the time of enrollment (Table_1)
should be admitted to classes only after receiving the first dose of MMR
vaccine. These students should be administered a second dose of MMR vaccine 1
month (i.e., at least 28 days) later. Students who have documentation of having
received only one dose of measles-containing vaccine on or after the first
birthday should receive a second dose of MMR before enrollment, provided at
least 1 month has elapsed since the previous dose. Students who have a medical
contraindication to receiving any of the components of MMR vaccine should be
given a letter of explanation to present to the health officials of their
educational institution. Health-Care Facilities
When measles virus is introduced into a community, persons who work in
health-care facilities are at increased risk for acquiring measles compared with
the general population (92,114,115). During 1985-1991, at least 795 measles
cases (1.1% of all reported cases) occurred among adult health-care workers. Of
these, 29% occurred among nurses, 15% among physicians, 11% among persons in
other health-care occupations (e.g., laboratory and radiology technicians,
etc.), 11% among clerks, 4% among nursing assistants, and 4% among medical and
nursing students (115) (CDC, unpublished data). A general decline in measles
incidence occurred after 1991. However, 15 of the 75 measles outbreaks reported
during 1993-1996 involved transmission in a medical facility, and a total of 36
measles cases (1.8% of all reported cases) occurred among persons working in
health-care facilities (CDC, unpublished data). Although similar surveillance
data are not available for rubella, outbreaks have occurred in health-care
settings, and health-care workers have transmitted rubella to patients (116)
(CDC, unpublished data).
All persons who work in health-care facilities should be immune to measles
and rubella (Table_1). Because any health-care
worker (i.e., medical or nonmedical, paid or volunteer, full- or part-time,
student or nonstudent, with or without patient-care responsibilities) who is not
immune to measles and rubella can contract and transmit these diseases, all
health-care facilities (i.e., inpatient and outpatient, private and public)
should ensure that those who work in their facilities are immune to measles and
rubella (Table_1) *.
Health-care workers have a responsibility to avoid transmitting these
diseases and thereby causing harm to patients. Adequate vaccination for
health-care workers born during or after 1957 consists of two doses of a live
measles-containing vaccine and at least one dose of a live rubella-containing
vaccine (Table_1). Health-care workers who need a
second dose of measles-containing vaccine should be revaccinated 1 month (at
least 28 days) after their first dose.
Although birth before 1957 is generally considered acceptable evidence of
measles and rubella immunity (Table_1), health-care
facilities should consider recommending a dose of MMR vaccine to unvaccinated
workers born before 1957 who do not have a history of physician-diagnosed
measles or laboratory evidence of measles immunity AND laboratory evidence of
rubella immunity.
Rubella vaccination or laboratory evidence of rubella immunity is
particularly important for female health-care workers who could become pregnant,
including those born before 1957. In addition, during rubella outbreaks,
health-care facilities should strongly consider recommending a dose of MMR
vaccine to unvaccinated health-care workers born before 1957 who do not have
serologic evidence of immunity. Serologic surveys of hospital workers indicate
that 5%-9% of those born before 1957 do not have detectable measles antibody
(117,118) and about 6% do not have detectable rubella antibody (119). In
addition, during 1985-1992, 643 measles cases were reported among health-care
workers whose year of birth was known; 27% of these persons were born before
1957 (CDC, unpublished data). Comparable surveillance data are not available for
rubella.
Serologic screening need not be done before vaccinating for measles and
rubella unless the medical facility considers it cost-effective (91,120,121).
Serologic testing is appropriate only if persons who are identified as
susceptible are subsequently vaccinated in a timely manner. Serologic screening
ordinarily is not necessary for persons who have documentation of appropriate
vaccination or other acceptable evidence of immunity (Table_1).
During outbreaks of measles or rubella, serologic screening before vaccination
is not generally recommended because rapid vaccination is necessary to halt
disease transmission.
Transmission of mumps has occurred in medical settings (122). Therefore,
immunity to mumps is highly desirable for all health-care workers (Table_1).
Adequate mumps vaccination for health-care workers born during or after 1957
consists of one dose of live mumps-containing vaccine.
MMR vaccine generally should be used whenever any of its component vaccines
is indicated. However, if the prospective vaccinee has acceptable evidence of
immunity to one or two of the components of MMR vaccine (Table_1),
a monovalent or bivalent vaccine can be used. International Travel
Measles, rubella, and mumps are endemic in many countries. Protection against
measles is especially important for persons planning foreign travel, including
adolescents and adults who have not had measles disease and have not been
adequately vaccinated, and infants aged 6-11 months. Similarly, protection
against rubella is especially important for women of childbearing age who are
not immune to the disease. Although proof of vaccination is not required for
entry into the United States, persons traveling or living abroad should ensure
that they are immune to measles, rubella, and mumps.
Persons who travel or live abroad and who do not have acceptable evidence of
measles, rubella, and mumps immunity (Table_1)
should be vaccinated with MMR. Children who travel or live abroad should be
vaccinated at an earlier age than recommended for children remaining in the
United States. Before their departure from the United States, children aged
greater than or equal to 12 months should have received two doses of MMR vaccine
separated by at least 28 days, with the first dose administered on or after the
first birthday. Children aged 6-11 months should receive a dose of monovalent
measles vaccine before departure. If monovalent measles vaccine is not
available, no specific contraindication exists to administering MMR to children
aged 6-11 months. However, because the risk for serious disease from either
mumps or rubella infection among infants is relatively low and because children
aged less than 12 months are less likely to develop serologic evidence of
immunity when vaccinated with measles, mumps, and rubella antigens than are
older children, mumps vaccine and rubella vaccine generally are administered
only to children aged greater than or equal to 12 months. Children administered
monovalent measles vaccine or MMR before the first birthday should be considered
potentially susceptible to all three diseases and should be revaccinated with
two doses of MMR, the first of which should be administered when the child is
aged 12-15 months (12 months if the child remains in an area where disease risk
is high) and the second at least 28 days later.
Parents who travel or reside abroad with infants aged less than 12 months
should have acceptable evidence of immunity to rubella and mumps (Table_1),
as well as measles, so they will not become infected if their infants contract
these diseases. Infants aged less than 6 months are usually protected against
measles, rubella, and mumps by maternally derived antibodies and ordinarily do
not require additional protection unless the infant's mother is diagnosed with
measles (see Use of Vaccine and Immune Globulin Among Persons Exposed to
Measles, Rubella, or Mumps). SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR VACCINATION Persons
Infected with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)
Although the risk for measles exposure is currently low in most areas of the
United States and the Western Hemisphere, this risk remains high in many other
regions and measles continues to be imported into the United States.
HIV-infected persons are at increased risk for severe complications if infected
with measles (126,127). Among HIV-infected persons who did not have evidence of
severe immunosuppression (Table_2), no serious or
unusual adverse events have been reported after measles vaccination (123-126).
Therefore, MMR vaccination is recommended for all asymptomatic HIV-infected
persons who do not have evidence of severe immunosuppression and for whom
measles vaccination would otherwise be indicated. MMR vaccination should also be
considered for all symptomatic HIV-infected persons who do not have evidence of
severe immunosuppression (Table_2) (128,129).
Testing asymptomatic persons for HIV infection is not necessary before
administering MMR or other measles-containing vaccine (130).
Transient increases in HIV viral load have been observed after administration
of other vaccines to HIV-infected persons (131,132). The clinical significance
of these increases is not known. Theoretically, a similar increase also may
occur after MMR vaccination of HIV-infected persons.
Because the immunologic response to live and killed-antigen vaccines may
decrease as HIV disease progresses, vaccination early in the course of HIV
infection may be more likely to induce an immune response (133). Therefore,
HIV-infected infants without severe immunosuppression should routinely receive
MMR vaccine as soon as possible upon reaching the first birthday (i.e., at age
12 months)(130). Consideration should be given to administering the second dose
of MMR vaccine as soon as 28 days (i.e., 1 month) after the first dose rather
than waiting until the child is ready to enter kindergarten or first grade. In
addition, if at risk for exposure to measles, HIV-infected infants who are not
severely immunocompromised should be administered single-antigen measles vaccine
or MMR vaccine at age 6-11 months. These children should receive another dose,
administered as MMR vaccine, as soon as possible upon reaching the first
birthday, provided at least 1 month has elapsed since the administration of the
previous dose of measles-containing vaccine. An additional dose of MMR vaccine
can be administered as early as 1 month after the second dose. If otherwise
indicated, newly diagnosed HIV-infected children and adults without acceptable
evidence of measles immunity (Table_1) should
receive MMR vaccine as soon as possible after diagnosis, unless they have
evidence of severe immunosuppression (Table_2). Data
indicate that, of the HIV-infected infants born in the United States annually,
approximately 5% (i.e., 50 children per year) would be classified as severely
immunocompromised at age 12 months, when the first dose of MMR vaccine is
recommended.
Measles vaccine is not recommended for HIV-infected persons with evidence of
severe immunosuppression (Table_2) for several
reasons:
a case of progressive measles pneumonitis occurred in a person with AIDS
and severe immunosuppression to whom MMR vaccine was administered (134);
evidence indicates a diminished antibody response to measles vaccine among
severely immunocompromised HIV-infected persons (133);
morbidity related to measles vaccination has been reported among persons
with severe immunosuppression unrelated to HIV infection (135-138); and
in the United States, the incidence of measles is presently very low.
Serious illness associated with administration of rubella or mumps vaccines
to HIV-infected persons has not been reported. MMR vaccine is not
contraindicated for the close contacts of immunocompromised persons. All family
and other close contacts of HIV-infected persons should be vaccinated with MMR
vaccine, unless they have acceptable evidence of measles immunity.
Severely immunocompromised patients and other symptomatic HIV-infected
patients who are exposed to measles should receive immune globulin (IG)
prophylaxis regardless of vaccination status because they may not be protected
by the vaccine. For patients receiving intravenous immune globulin (IGIV)
therapy, a standard dose of 100-400 mg/kg should be sufficient to prevent
measles infection after exposures occurring within 3 weeks after administration
of IGIV; for patients exposed to measles greater than 3 weeks after receiving a
standard IGIV dose, an additional dose should be considered. Although no data
are available concerning the effectiveness of IGIV in preventing measles, high
dose IGIV may be as effective as immune globulin administered intramuscularly.
Persons receiving regular (e.g., monthly) IGIV therapy for HIV infection or
other indications may not respond to MMR or its component vaccines because of
the continued presence of high levels of passively acquired antibody (see
Precautions and Contraindications, Recent Administration of Immune Globulin). If
indicated, MMR vaccine should be administered at least 2 weeks before beginning
IGIV therapy. Use of Vaccine and Immune Globulin Among Persons Exposed to
Measles, Rubella, or Mumps Use of Vaccine
Exposure to measles is not a contraindication to vaccination. MMR or measles
vaccine, if administered within 72 hours of initial measles exposure, may
provide some protection (139-143). For most persons aged greater than or equal
to 12 months who are exposed to measles in most settings (e.g., day care
facilities, schools, colleges, health-care facilities), administration of MMR or
measles vaccine is preferable to using immune globulin (IG). For susceptible
persons aged greater than or equal to 6 months who are 0household contacts of
measles patients, use of vaccine within 72 hours of initial exposure is also
acceptable. However, measles often is not recognized as such until greater than
72 hours after onset. Therefore, administration of IG to susceptible household
contacts who are not vaccinated within 72 hours of initial exposure is
recommended (see Use of Immune Globulin). Infants vaccinated before age 12
months must be revaccinated on or after the first birthday with two doses of MMR
vaccine separated by at least 28 days (see Routine Vaccination).
Measles-containing vaccine is not recommended for postexposure measles
prophylaxis in immunocompromised persons or pregnant women (see
Contraindications).
Postexposure MMR vaccination does not prevent or alter the clinical severity
of rubella or mumps. However, widespread vaccination during a mumps outbreak may
help terminate such outbreaks (144).
If exposure to measles, rubella, or mumps does not cause infection,
postexposure vaccination with MMR should induce protection against subsequent
infection. If the exposure results in infection, no evidence indicates that
administration of MMR vaccine during the presymptomatic or prodromal stage of
illness increases the risk for vaccine-associated adverse events. Use of Immune
Globulin
If administered within 6 days of exposure, IG can prevent or modify measles
in a nonimmune person. However, any immunity conferred is temporary unless
modified or typical measles occurs (139). The usual recommended dose of IG is
0.25 mL/kg (0.11 mL/lb) of body weight (maximum dose = 15 mL). However, the
recommended dose of IG for immunocompromised persons is 0.5 mL/kg of body weight
(maximum dose = 15 mL). For persons receiving IGIV therapy, administration of at
least 100 mg/kg within 3 weeks before measles exposure should be sufficient to
prevent measles infection.
IG is indicated for susceptible household contacts of measles patients,
particularly those for whom the risk for complications is increased (i.e.,
infants aged less than or equal to 12 months, pregnant women, or
immunocompromised persons). Infants less than 6 months of age are usually immune
because of passively acquired maternal antibodies. However, if measles is
diagnosed in a mother, unvaccinated children of all ages in the household who
lack other evidence of measles immunity should receive IG. IG prophylaxis is not
indicated for household contacts who have received a dose of measles vaccine on
or after the first birthday, unless they are immunocompromised. Only if
administered within 72 hours of initial measles exposure is MMR vaccine
acceptable for postexposure prophylaxis in household contacts aged greater than
or equal to 6 months except pregnant women, immunocompromised patients, and
others for whom vaccine is contraindicated (see Use of Vaccine). IG should not
be used to control measles outbreaks.
Any person exposed to measles who lacks evidence of measles immunity (Table_1)
and to whom IG is administered should subsequently receive MMR vaccine, which
should be administered no earlier than 5-6 months after IG administration,
provided the person is then aged greater than or equal to 12 months and the
vaccine is not otherwise contraindicated. Passively acquired measles antibodies
can interfere with the immune response to measles vaccination (see Recent
Administration of Immune Globulins). The interval required to avoid such
interference varies (Table_3).
IG does not prevent rubella or mumps infection after exposure and is not
recommended for that purpose. Although administration of IG after exposure to
rubella will not prevent infection or viremia, it may modify or suppress
symptoms and create an unwarranted sense of security. Therefore, IG is not
recommended for routine postexposure prophylaxis of rubella in early pregnancy
or any other circumstance. Infants with congenital rubella have been born to
women who received IG shortly after exposure. Administration of IG should be
considered only if a pregnant woman who has been exposed to rubella will not
consider termination of pregnancy under any circumstances. In such cases,
intramuscular administration of 20 mL of immune globulin within 72 hours of
rubella exposure may reduce -- but will not eliminate -- the risk for rubella
(145,146). Revaccination of Persons Vaccinated According to Earlier
Recommendations
Some persons vaccinated according to earlier recommendations for use of
measles, rubella, mumps, and MMR vaccines should be revaccinated to ensure that
they are adequately protected. Unless one of its component vaccines is
contraindicated, MMR vaccine should be used for this purpose. Previous
vaccination with live measles, rubella, and mumps vaccines. Persons vaccinated
with live measles, rubella, or mumps vaccines before the first birthday who were
not revaccinated on or after the first birthday should be considered
unvaccinated. Unless they have other acceptable evidence of immunity to measles,
rubella, and mumps (Table_1), these persons should
be revaccinated with MMR.
Live attenuated Edmonston B measles vaccine (distributed from 1963 to 1975)
was usually administered with IG or high-titer measles immune globulin (MIG; no
longer available in the United States). Vaccination with this product,
administered on or after the first birthday, is considered an effective first
dose of vaccine. If indicated, a second dose of MMR vaccine should be
administered (see Documentation of Immunity).
IG or MIG administered simultaneously with further attenuated measles
vaccines (i.e., vaccines containing the Schwarz or Moraten virus strains) may
have impaired the immune response to vaccination. Persons who received measles
vaccine of unknown type or further attenuated measles vaccine accompanied by IG
or MIG should be considered unvaccinated and should be administered two doses of
MMR vaccine. Persons vaccinated with other previously licensed live rubella
vaccines that were not administered with IG or MIG (i.e., HPV-77 or Cendehill
vaccines) need not be revaccinated against rubella.
Previous vaccination with inactivated measles vaccine or measles vaccine of
unknown type. Inactivated (killed) measles vaccine was available in the United
States only from 1963 to 1967 but was available through the early 1970s in some
other countries. It was frequently administered as a series of two or three
injections. Because persons who received inactivated vaccine are at risk for
developing severe atypical measles syndrome when exposed to the natural virus,
they should receive two doses of MMR or other live measles vaccine, separated by
at least 28 days (147). Persons who received inactivated vaccine followed within
3 months by live virus vaccine should also be revaccinated with two more doses
of MMR or other live measles vaccine. Revaccination is particularly important
when the risk for exposure to natural measles virus is increased (e.g., during
international travel).
Persons vaccinated during 1963-1967 with vaccine of unknown type may have
received inactivated vaccine and also should be revaccinated. Persons who
received a vaccine of unknown type after 1967 need not be revaccinated unless
the original vaccination occurred before the first birthday or was accompanied
by IG or MIG. However, such persons should receive a second dose before entering
college, beginning work in a health-care facility, or undertaking international
travel.
Some recipients of inactivated measles vaccine who were later revaccinated
with live measles vaccine have had adverse reactions to the live vaccine; the
percentage who reported adverse reactions ranges from 4% to 55% (148). In most
cases, these reactions were mild (e.g., local swelling and erythema, low-grade
fever lasting 1-2 days), but rarely more severe reactions (e.g., prolonged high
fevers, extensive local reactions) have been reported. However, natural measles
infection is more likely to cause serious illness among recipients of
inactivated measles vaccine than is live measles virus vaccine.
Previous vaccination with inactivated mumps vaccine or mumps vaccine of
unknown type. A killed mumps virus vaccine was licensed for use in the United
States from 1950 through 1978. Although this vaccine induced antibody, the
immunity was transient. The number of doses of killed mumps vaccine administered
between licensure of live attenuated mumps vaccine in 1967 until the killed
vaccine was withdrawn in 1978 is unknown but appears to have been limited.
Revaccination with MMR should be considered for certain persons vaccinated
before 1979 with either killed mumps vaccine or mumps vaccine of unknown type
who are at high risk for mumps infection (e.g., persons who work in health-care
facilities during a mumps outbreak). No evidence exists that persons who have
had mumps disease or who have previously received mumps vaccine (killed or live)
are at increased risk for local or systemic reactions upon receiving MMR or live
mumps vaccine. ADVERSE EVENTS AFTER MMR VACCINATION
Adverse events associated with administration of MMR vaccine range from local
pain, induration, and edema to rare systemic reactions such as anaphylaxis. Side
effects tend to occur among vaccine recipients who are nonimmune and therefore
are very rare after revaccination (see Revaccination). Expert committees at the
Institute of Medicine (IOM) recently reviewed all evidence concerning the causal
relationship between MMR vaccination and various adverse events (149,150). The
IOM determined that evidence establishes a causal relation between MMR
vaccination and anaphylaxis, thrombocytopenia, febrile seizures, and acute
arthritis. Although vasculitis, otitis media, conjunctivitis, optic neuritis,
ocular palsies, Guillain-Barre syndrome, and ataxia have been reported after
administration of MMR or its component vaccines and are listed in the
manufacturer's package insert, no causal relationship has been established
between these events and MMR vaccination.
Evidence does not support a causal association of administration of
measles-containing vaccine with risk for Crohn disease, a hypothesis proposed by
some researchers in the United Kingdom and Sweden (151-156). Other researchers
have been unable to replicate the laboratory findings that were reported to
support this hypothesized association (157,158). Concerns also have been raised
about the methods used in the epidemiologic studies that suggested an
association between Crohn disease and measles vaccination (159-163). Other data
do not support an association between measles vaccination and risk for Crohn
disease or other inflammatory bowel disease (164,165).
Infection with mumps virus may trigger the onset of diabetes mellitus in some
persons. However, no association has been established between vaccination with
MMR or other mumps virus vaccine and pancreatic damage or subsequent development
of diabetes mellitus (150). Fever, Rash, Lymphadenopathy, or Parotitis
Measles, rubella, and mumps vaccines may cause fever after vaccination; the
measles component of MMR vaccine is most often associated with this adverse
event. Approximately 5% of children develop a temperature of greater than or
equal to 103 F (greater than or equal to 39.4 C) after MMR vaccination. Such
febrile reactions usually occur 7-12 days after vaccination and generally last
1-2 days (166). Most persons with fever are otherwise asymptomatic.
Measles- and rubella-containing vaccines (including MMR) can cause transient
rashes, which usually appear 7-10 days after vaccination, in approximately 5% of
vaccinated persons. Transient lymphadenopathy sometimes occurs following
administration of MMR or other rubella-containing vaccine, and parotitis has
been reported rarely following administration of MMR or other mumps-containing
vaccine. Allergic Reactions
Hypersensitivity reactions, usually consisting of urticaria or a wheal and
flare at the injection site, occur rarely after administration of MMR or any of
its component vaccines. Immediate anaphylactic reactions to these vaccines are
very rare. More than 70 million doses of MMR vaccine have been distributed in
the United States since the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) was
implemented in 1990. The reported rate of possible anaphylaxis after vaccination
with measles-containing vaccine is less than 1 case per 1 million doses
distributed (CDC, unpublished data). Allergic reactions including rash, pruritus,
and purpura have been temporally associated with mumps vaccination but are
uncommon, usually mild, and of brief duration. Thrombocytopenia
Surveillance of adverse reactions in the United States and other countries
indicates that MMR vaccine can, in rare instances, cause clinically apparent
thrombocytopenia within 2 months after vaccination. In prospective studies, the
reported frequency of clinically apparent thrombocytopenia after MMR vaccination
ranged from 1 case per 30,000 vaccinated children in Finland and Great Britain
(167,168) to 1 case per 40,000 in Sweden (169), with a temporal clustering of
cases occurring 2-3 weeks after vaccination. Based on passive surveillance, the
reported frequency of thrombocytopenia was approximately 1 case per 100,000
vaccine doses distributed in Canada (170) and France (171), and approximately 1
case per 1 million doses distributed in the United States (172). The clinical
course of these cases was usually transient and benign, although hemorrhage
occurred rarely (172). The risk for thrombocytopenia during rubella or measles
infection is much greater than the risk after vaccination (173). Based on case
reports, the risk for MMR-associated thrombocytopenia may be increased for
persons who have previously had immune thrombocytopenic purpura, particularly
for those who had thrombocytopenic purpura after an earlier dose of MMR vaccine
(150,174,175). Neurological Events
Adverse neurological events after administration of MMR vaccine are rare.
Reports of nervous system illness following MMR vaccination do not necessarily
denote an etiologic relationship between the illness and the vaccine. Although
several cases of sensorineural deafness have been reported after administration
of MMR vaccine, evidence from these case reports (e.g., timing of onset and
other features) is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relation between MMR
vaccination and sensorineural deafness. Aseptic Meningitis
Aseptic meningitis has been clearly associated with administration of the
Urabe strain mumps vaccine virus but not with the Jeryl Lynn strain, which is
the only mumps vaccine used in the United States (176-178). Sentinel
surveillance laboratories in the United Kingdom identified thirteen aseptic
meningitis cases (91 cases per 1 million doses distributed) that occurred after
administration of the Urabe strain vaccine during 1988-1992 (168). Since the
United Kingdom switched to Jeryl Lynn strain vaccine in 1992, no mumps
vaccine-associated aseptic meningitis cases have been reported by the
surveillance laboratories (178). Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis (SSPE)
Measles vaccination substantially reduces the occurrence of SSPE as evidenced
by the near elimination of SSPE cases after widespread measles vaccination. SSPE
has been reported rarely among children who had no history of natural measles
infection, but who had received measles vaccine. Evidence indicates that at
least some of these children had unrecognized measles infection before they were
vaccinated and that the SSPE was directly related to the natural measles
infection. The administration of live measles vaccine does not increase the risk
for SSPE, even among persons who have previously had measles disease or received
live measles vaccine (150,179). Encephalopathy/Encephalitis
Encephalitis with resultant residual permanent central nervous system (CNS)
impairment (encephalopathy) develops in approximately 1 per 1,000 persons
infected with measles virus. Whether attenuated live viral measles vaccine can
also produce such a syndrome has been a concern since the earliest days of
measles vaccine use. In 1994, the IOM noted that most data were from case
reports, case series, or uncontrolled observational studies, and concluded that
the evidence was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relation (150).
The British National Childhood Encephalopathy Study (NCES) identified a
fourfold elevation in risk for encephalopathy or convulsions among children who
received measles vaccine during 1976-1979, compared with the risk for these
conditions among unvaccinated children (180). Among previously normal children,
the attributable risk for acute encephalopathy or convulsions was 1 case per
87,000 vaccinations. Findings of a subsequent 10-year follow-up study of persons
diagnosed with convulsions or acute encephalopathy in the NCES indicated little
difference in risk for persisting neurological abnormality among those who had
received measles vaccine compared with those who had not (E. Miller, personal
communication).
Although cases of encephalopathy have been reported after administration of
measles-containing vaccine (181), lack of a unique clinical syndrome or specific
laboratory test has hampered causality assessment. However, four independent
passive surveillance systems in the United States (i.e., CDC measles
surveillance from 1963 to 1971, the Monitoring System for Adverse Events
Following Immunizations {MSAEFI} from 1979 to 1990, the Vaccine Adverse Event
Reporting System {VAERS} from 1991 to 1996, and the Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program {VICP}) have reported cases of encephalopathy in which a similar timing
of reported events following vaccine administration is apparent. In all four
case series, onset of encephalopathies follows a non-random distribution with
onset approximately 10 days after vaccination, a timing consistent with onset of
encephalopathy after infection with wild measles virus (182). Although this
pattern may be in part attributable to consistent biases of these passive
surveillance systems, it is also consistent with a causal relationship between
measles vaccine and encephalopathies (183). During the period these four systems
have collected data, 166 cases of encephalopathy occurring 6-15 days after
vaccination have been identified and an estimated 313 million doses of
measles-containing vaccines have been distributed (i.e., approximately 1 case
per 2 million doses distributed). Thus, encephalopathy occurs much less
frequently after administration of measles vaccine than after measles infection.
Febrile Seizures and Personal and Family History of Convulsions
MMR vaccination, like other causes of fever, may cause febrile seizures. The
risk for such seizures is approximately 1 case per 3,000 doses of MMR vaccine
administered (168). Studies have not established an association between MMR
vaccination and residual seizure disorders (150). Although children with
personal or family histories of seizures are at increased risk for idiopathic
epilepsy, febrile seizures after vaccinations do not increase the probability
that epilepsy or other neurologic disorders will subsequently develop in these
children. Most convulsions that occur after measles vaccination are simple
febrile seizures, which affect children who do not have other known risk factors
for seizure disorders.
Antipyretics may prevent febrile seizures after MMR vaccination if
administered before the onset of fever and continued for 5-7 days. However,
antipyretics are difficult to use for this purpose because the onset of fever is
often sudden and occurs unpredictably. Seizures can occur early in the course of
fever. Parents should be vigilant for fever that occurs after vaccination and
should be counseled regarding its appropriate treatment. Use of aspirin during
some illnesses in childhood is associated with the occurrence of Reye syndrome.
Therefore, aspirin generally should not be used to prevent or control fever
among children and adolescents.
The 5%-7% of children who have either a personal history of convulsions or a
parent or sibling with history of convulsions may be at increased risk for
febrile convulsions after MMR vaccination (184). The precise risk has not been
measured, but appears to be minimal. On the other hand, febrile seizures occur
commonly among children in whom measles disease develops, and the risk for
acquiring measles is substantial. Therefore, the benefits of administering MMR
vaccine to children with a personal or family history of convulsions
substantially outweigh the risks and these children should be vaccinated
following the recommendations for children who have no contraindications.
Children who are being treated with anticonvulsants should continue to take
them after measles vaccination. Because protective levels of most currently
available anticonvulsant drugs (e.g., phenobarbital) are not achieved for some
time after therapy is initiated, prophylactic use of these drugs is not
feasible.
The parents of children who have either a personal or family history of
seizures should be advised of the benefits of vaccination and the minimal
increased risk for seizures, which generally occur 5-14 days after measles
vaccination. Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)
Cases of GBS occurring after administration of MMR or its component vaccines
have been reported, but the IOM judged the evidence insufficient to accept or
reject a causal relationship (150). Recent studies provide evidence against this
potential association (185,186). After recent mass vaccination campaigns that
involved approximately eight million doses of measles-rubella vaccine in the
United Kingdom and greater than 70 million doses of measles vaccine in Latin
America, evaluations of GBS incidence demonstrated no increases over background
rates. Arthralgia, Arthritis, and Persistent or Recurrent Arthropathy
Joint symptoms are associated with the rubella component of MMR. Among
susceptible persons who receive rubella vaccine, arthralgia and transient
arthritis occur more frequently among adults than among children and more
frequently among postpubertal females than among males. Acute arthralgia or
arthritis are rare among children who receive RA 27/3 vaccine (187). By
contrast, arthralgia develops among approximately 25% of susceptible
postpubertal females after RA 27/3 vaccination and approximately 10% have acute
arthritis-like signs and symptoms (188,189). Although rare reports of transient
peripheral neuritic complaints have occurred, insufficient evidence exists to
indicate a causal relation between RA 27/3 vaccine and peripheral neuropathies
(149,190). When acute joint symptoms occur, or when pain and/or paresthesias not
associated with joints occur, they generally begin 1-3 weeks after vaccination,
persist for 1 day to 3 weeks, and rarely recur. Adults who experienced acute
joint symptoms after rubella vaccination usually have not had to disrupt work
activities (189,190,191).
A 1991 report by the IOM stated that although some data were consistent with
a causal relation between RA27/3 rubella vaccine and chronic arthritis among
adult women, the evidence was limited in scope and confined to reports from a
single institution (149). Several more recently published studies have found no
evidence of increased risk for new onset of chronic arthropathies among women
vaccinated with RA 27/3 vaccine (192-194). In addition, data from a recent
prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial by the same group that
initially reported chronic arthropathy after rubella vaccination demonstrated
only a small excess risk for persistent joint symptoms among persons who
received rubella vaccine (relative risk {RR} = 1.58; 95% confidence interval =
1.01-2.45) (195). Neither the duration of arthropathy nor timing of onset was
reported. The occurrence of arthropathy described as moderate or severe did not
differ between vaccine and placebo recipients and was rare in both groups.
Interference with Tuberculin Skin Tests
Tuberculin testing is not a prerequisite for vaccination with MMR or any of
its component vaccines. MMR vaccine may interfere with the response to a
tuberculin test (196-198). Therefore, tuberculin testing, if otherwise
indicated, can be done either on the same day MMR vaccine is administered or 4-6
weeks later. Revaccination
No evidence indicates that administration of live measles, mumps, or rubella
vaccine increases the risk for adverse reactions among persons who are already
immune to these diseases as a result of previous vaccination or natural disease.
Data indicate that only persons who are not immune when vaccinated tend to have
postvaccination side effects similar to the disease symptoms (139). No evidence
exists that persons who have previously received killed mumps vaccine or had
mumps disease are at increased risk for local or systemic reactions from
receiving live mumps vaccine. Some recipients of inactivated measles vaccine who
were later revaccinated with live measles vaccines have had adverse reactions to
the live vaccine (see Revaccination of Persons Vaccinated According to Earlier
Recommendations). REPORTING ADVERSE EVENTS
Reporting of serious adverse events that occur after administration of MMR or
its component vaccines helps identify adverse events that may be caused by these
vaccines. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 requires health-care
providers to report serious adverse events that occur after vaccination with MMR
and its component vaccines to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System
(VAERS). Persons other than health-care workers can also report adverse events
to VAERS. Events that must be reported after MMR vaccination are listed in the
reportable events table within the Act and include anaphylaxis or anaphylactic
shock occurring within 7 days of vaccination, encephalopathy (or encephalitis)
occurring within 7 days of vaccination, and any events described in the
manufacturer's package insert as contraindications to additional doses of
vaccine (199). Other adverse events occurring after administration of a vaccine,
especially events that are serious or unusual, also should be reported to VAERS,
regardless of the provider's opinion of the causality of the association. VAERS
reporting forms and information are available 24 hours a day by calling
1-800-822-7967 or via the World Wide Web at http:www.cdc.gov/nip/vaers.htm.
VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION
The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, established by the National
Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, is a system under which compensation may
be paid on behalf of a person thought to have been injured or to have died as a
result of receiving a vaccine covered by the program. The program is intended as
an alternative to civil litigation under the traditional tort system because
negligence need not be proven.
The Act establishes a) a Vaccine Injury Compensation Table that lists the
vaccines covered by the program; b) the injuries, disabilities, and conditions
(including death) for which compensation may be paid without proof of causation;
and c) the period after vaccination during which the first symptom or
substantial aggravation of the injury must appear. Modifications to the Vaccine
Injury Table became effective March 24, 1997 (199). Persons may be compensated
for an injury listed in the established table or one that can be demonstrated to
result from administration of a listed vaccine. Additional information about the
program is available. * PRECAUTIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS Pregnancy
MMR and its component vaccines should not be administered to women known to
be pregnant. Because a risk to the fetus from administration of these live virus
vaccines cannot be excluded for theoretical reasons, women should be counseled
to avoid becoming pregnant for 30 days after vaccination with measles or mumps
vaccines and for 3 months after administration of MMR or other
rubella-containing vaccines. Routine precautions for vaccinating postpubertal
women with MMR should be followed in all vaccination programs (see Routine
Vaccination -- Women of Childbearing Age). If a pregnant woman is vaccinated or
if she becomes pregnant within 3 months after vaccination, she should be
counseled about the theoretical basis of concern for the fetus, but MMR
vaccination during pregnancy should not ordinarily be a reason to consider
termination of pregnancy. Rubella-susceptible women who are not vaccinated
because they state they are or may be pregnant should be counseled about the
potential risk for CRS and the importance of being vaccinated as soon as they
are no longer pregnant.
Because birth defects are noted in 3%-5% of all births, confusion about the
etiology of birth defects may result if vaccine is administered during
pregnancy. Although of theoretical concern, no cases of congenital rubella
syndrome or abnormalities attributable to infection with measles, rubella, or
mumps vaccine virus infection have been observed among infants born to
susceptible mothers who received any of these vaccines during pregnancy. From
January 1971 through April 1989, CDC followed to term 321 known
rubella-susceptible pregnant women who had been vaccinated with live rubella
vaccine within 3 months before or 3 months after conception. Ninety-four women
received HPV-77 or Cendehill vaccines, one received vaccine of unknown strain,
and 226 received RA 27/3 vaccine (the only rubella vaccine presently used in the
United States). None of the 324 infants born to these mothers had malformations
compatible with congenital rubella infection. This total included five infants
who had serologic evidence of subclinical infection; three of the infants were
exposed to HPV-77 or Cendehill vaccine and two were exposed to RA 27/3 vaccine.
Based on these data, the estimated risk for serious malformations attributable
to RA 27/3 rubella vaccine ranges from zero to 1.6%. If the infants exposed to
other rubella vaccines are included, the estimated risk is zero to 1.2%,
substantially less than the greater than or equal to 20% risk for CRS associated
with maternal infection during the first trimester of pregnancy (200). Moreover,
the observed risk for CRS with both the HPV-77 or Cendehill and RA 27/3 strains
of vaccine is zero.
Rubella vaccine virus has been isolated from the aborted fetus of one (3%) of
35 rubella-susceptible women who received RA 27/3 strain vaccine during
pregnancy. In contrast, vaccine virus was isolated from the fetuses of 17 (20%)
of 85 women to whom HPV-77 or Cendehill vaccines were administered (201). This
finding provides additional evidence that the RA 27/3 vaccine poses no greater
risk for teratogenicity than did the HPV-77 or Cendehill vaccines.
Breast feeding is not a contraindication to vaccination. Although a woman can
excrete rubella vaccine virus in breast milk and transmit the virus to her
infant, the infection remains asymptomatic (202-205). Otherwise, persons who
receive MMR or its component vaccines do not transmit measles, rubella, or mumps
vaccine viruses (206,207). Thus, MMR vaccine can be administered safely to
susceptible children or other persons with household contacts who are pregnant
to help protect these pregnant women from exposure to wild rubella virus.
All suspected cases of CRS, whether presumed to be due to wild-virus or
vaccine-virus infection, should be reported to state and local health
departments. Suspected or confirmed cases of CRS can also be reported to the
VAERS (see Reporting Adverse Events). Severe Illness
Because of the importance of protecting susceptible children against measles,
mumps, and rubella, medical personnel should use every opportunity to vaccinate
susceptible persons. The decision to vaccinate or postpone vaccination of a
person who currently has or recently has had an acute febrile illness depends
largely on the cause of the illness and the severity of symptoms. Minor
illnesses, with or without fever (e.g., diarrhea, upper respiratory infection,
otitis media) are not contraindications for vaccination and vaccination should
not be postponed because of them. Data indicate that seroconversion rates for
each component of MMR vaccine among persons with mild febrile illness are
similar to those among healthy persons (208,209). Similarly, performing routine
physical examinations or measuring temperatures are not prerequisites for
vaccinating persons who appear to be in good health. In childhood vaccination
programs, appropriate procedures include a) asking the parent or guardian if the
child is ill, b) postponing vaccination of children who have moderate or severe
febrile illnesses, and c) vaccinating children who do not have other
contraindications.
Vaccination of persons with moderate or severe febrile illnesses should
generally be deferred until they have recovered from the acute phase of their
illness. This wait avoids superimposing adverse effects of vaccination on the
underlying illness or mistakenly attributing a manifestation of the underlying
illness to the vaccine. Data are generally not available regarding the safety
and immunogenicity of MMR vaccine among persons with moderate or severe febrile
illness.
Persons under treatment for tuberculosis have not experienced exacerbations
of the disease when vaccinated with MMR. Although no studies have been reported
concerning the effect of MMR vaccine on persons with untreated tuberculosis, a
theoretical basis exists for concern that measles vaccine might exacerbate
tuberculosis. Consequently, before administering MMR to persons with untreated
active tuberculosis, initiating antituberculous therapy is advisable. Tuberculin
testing is not a pre-requisite for routine vaccination with MMR or other
measles-containing vaccines. Allergies
Among persons who are allergic to eggs, the risk for serious allergic
reactions such as anaphylaxis following administration of measles- or
mumps-containing vaccines is extremely low and skin-testing with vaccine is not
predictive of allergic reaction to vaccination (210-212). Therefore, skin
testing is not required before administering MMR (or other measles- and
mumps-containing vaccines) to persons who are allergic to eggs. Similarly, the
administration of gradually increasing doses of vaccine is not required. In the
past, persons with a history of anaphylactic reactions (i.e., hives, swelling of
the mouth or throat, difficulty breathing, hypotension, and shock) following egg
ingestion were considered to be at increased risk for serious reactions after
administration of measles- or mumps-containing vaccines, which are produced in
chick embryo fibroblasts. Although protocols have been developed for skin
testing and vaccination of persons who experience anaphylactic reactions to egg
ingestion, data indicate that most anaphylactic reactions to measles- and
mumps-containing vaccines are not associated with hypersensitivity to egg
antigens but to other components of the vaccines (213-217).
The literature contains several case reports of persons with an anaphylactic
sensitivity to gelatin who had anaphylactic reactions after receiving MMR
vaccine (218-220). MMR and its component vaccines contain hydrolyzed gelatin as
a stabilizer. Therefore, extreme caution should be exercised when administering
MMR or its component vaccines to persons who have a history of an anaphylactic
reaction to gelatin or gelatin-containing products. Before administering MMR or
its component vaccines to such persons, skin testing for sensitivity to gelatin
can be considered. However, no specific protocols for this purpose have been
published.
Because MMR and its component vaccines contain trace amounts of neomycin (25
ug), persons who have experienced anaphylactic reactions to topically or
systemically administered neomycin should not receive these vaccines. However,
neomycin allergy is most often manifested as a delayed or cell-mediated immune
response (i.e., a contact dermatitis), rather than anaphylaxis. In persons who
have such a sensitivity, the adverse reaction to the neomycin in the vaccine is
an erythematous, pruritic nodule or papule appearing 48-96 hours after
vaccination. A history of contact dermatitis to neomycin is not a
contraindication to receiving MMR vaccine. MMR vaccine does not contain
penicillin and therefore a history of penicillin allergy is not a
contraindication to MMR vaccination.
Although anaphylaxis after vaccination is extremely rare and no anaphylaxis
deaths associated with administration of MMR vaccine have been reported, this
adverse event can be life threatening (150). Epinephrine should be available for
immediate use at any site where vaccines are administered in case symptoms of
anaphylaxis occur. Thrombocytopenia
Children who have a history of thrombocytopenia or thrombocytopenic purpura
may be at increased risk for developing clinically significant thrombocytopenia
after MMR vaccination (172,175). Although thrombocytopenia can be life
threatening, no deaths have been reported as a direct consequence of
vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia. The decision to vaccinate with MMR should
depend on the benefits of immunity to measles, mumps, and rubella and the risks
for recurrence or exacerbation of thrombocytopenia after vaccination or during
natural infection with measles or rubella. The benefits of primary immunization
are usually greater than the potential risks, and administration of MMR vaccine
is justified, particularly with regard to the even greater risk for
thrombocytopenia after measles or rubella disease. However, avoiding a
subsequent dose of MMR vaccine may be prudent if an episode of thrombocytopenia
occurred within approximately 6 weeks after a previous dose of the vaccine.
Serologic evidence of measles immunity among such persons may be sought in lieu
of MMR vaccination.
Recent Administration of Immune Globulins Recent evidence indicates that high
doses of immune globulins can inhibit the immune response to measles and rubella
vaccine for 3 or more months (221, 222). The duration of this interference with
the immune response depends on the dose of immune globulin administered. The
effect of immune globulin preparations on the response to mumps vaccine is
unknown. Blood (e.g., whole blood, packed red blood cells, and plasma) and other
antibody-containing blood products (e.g., IG, specific immune globulins, and
IGIV) can reduce the immune response to MMR or its component vaccines.
Therefore, these vaccines should be administered to persons who have received an
immune globulin preparation only after the recommended intervals have elapsed (Table_3)
(80). However, postpartum administration of MMR or rubella vaccine to women who
are susceptible to rubella should not be delayed because anti-Rho(D) immune
globulin (human) or any other blood product was received during the last
trimester of pregnancy or at delivery. Such rubella-susceptible women should be
vaccinated immediately after delivery and tested at least 3 months later to
ensure that they are immune to rubella and measles.
Immune globulin preparations generally should not be administered
simultaneously with MMR or its component vaccines. If administration of an
immune globulin preparation becomes necessary because of imminent exposure to
disease, MMR or its component vaccines can be administered simultaneously with
the IG preparation, although vaccine-induced immunity may be compromised.
Usually, vaccine virus replication and stimulation of immunity will occur 1-2
weeks after vaccination. Thus, if the interval between administration of any of
these vaccines and administration of an IG preparation is less than 14 days,
vaccination should be repeated after the recommended interval (Table_3),
unless serologic testing indicates that the vaccinated person's immune system
has produced antibodies to each vaccine component (i.e., measles, rubella, and
mumps). The vaccine should be administered at an anatomic site remote from that
chosen for the IG injection. Altered Immunocompetence
Enhanced replication of vaccine viruses may occur in persons who have immune
deficiency diseases and in other persons who are immunosuppressed. Severe
immunosuppression may be caused by many disease conditions (e.g., congenital
immunodeficiency, HIV infection, hematologic or generalized malignancy) and by
therapy with immunosuppressive agents, including large doses of corticosteroids.
For some of these conditions, all affected persons are severely
immunocompromised. For other conditions (e.g., HIV infection), the degree to
which the immune system is compromised depends on the severity of the condition,
which in turn depends on the disease or treatment stage. Ultimately, the
patient's physician must assume responsibility for determining whether the
patient is severely immunocompromised based on clinical and laboratory
assessment.
Case reports have linked vaccine-associated measles infection to the deaths
of some severely immunocompromised persons (150,223). Therefore, MMR vaccine
should not be administered to severely immunocompromised persons. To reduce the
risk for measles, rubella, and mumps exposure of immunocompromised patients,
their susceptible close contacts should be vaccinated with MMR. No case reports
exist linking MMR or mumps- or rubella-containing vaccines with clinically
significant infection caused by mumps or rubella vaccine virus among
immunocompromised vaccine recipients. HIV-Infected Persons
Among asymptomatic and symptomatic HIV-infected patients who are not severely
immunosuppressed, MMR vaccination has been associated with variable antibody
responses but not with severe or unusual adverse events. Asymptomatic persons do
not need to be evaluated and tested for HIV infection before MMR and other
measles-containing vaccines are administered. MMR vaccine is recommended for all
asymptomatic HIV-infected persons who are not severely immunosuppressed and who
lack evidence of measles immunity. MMR vaccination of symptomatic HIV-infected
persons should be considered if they a) do not have evidence of severe
immunosuppression and b) lack evidence of measles immunity. MMR and other
measles-containing vaccines are not recommended for HIV-infected persons with
evidence of severe immunosuppression (see Special Considerations for Vaccination
-- Persons Infected with Human Immunodeficiency Virus {HIV}) (Table_2).
Steroids
Systemically absorbed corticosteroids can suppress the immune system of an
otherwise healthy person. However, neither the minimum dose nor the duration of
therapy sufficient to cause immune suppression are well defined. Most experts
agree that steroid therapy usually does not contraindicate administration of
live virus vaccines such as MMR and its component vaccines when therapy is: a)
short term (i.e., less than 14 days) low-to-moderate dose; b) low-to-moderate
dose administered daily or on alternate days; c) long term alternate day
treatment with short-acting preparations; d) physiologic maintenance doses
(replacement therapy); or e) administered topically (skin or eyes), by aerosol,
or by intra-articular, bursal, or tendon injection. Although the
immunosuppressive effects of steroid treatment vary, many clinicians consider a
steroid dose that is equivalent to or greater than a prednisone dose of 2 mg/kg
of body weight per day or a total of 20 mg per day sufficiently
immunosuppressive to raise concern about the safety of administration of live
virus vaccines. Persons who have received systemic corticosteroids in these or
greater doses daily or on alternate days for an interval of greater than or
equal to 14 days should avoid vaccination with MMR and its component vaccines
for at least 1 month after cessation of steroid therapy. Persons who have
received prolonged or extensive topical, aerosol, or other local corticosteroid
therapy that causes clinical or laboratory evidence of systemic
immunosuppression should also avoid vaccination with MMR for at least 1 month
after cessation of therapy. Persons who receive doses of systemic
corticosteroids equivalent to a prednisone dose of greater than or equal to 2
mg/kg of body weight or greater than or equal to 20 mg total daily or on
alternate days during an interval of less than 14 days generally can receive MMR
or its component vaccines immediately after cessation of treatment, although
some experts prefer waiting until 2 weeks after completion of therapy. MMR or
its component vaccines generally should not be administered to persons who have
a disease that, in itself, suppresses the immune response and who are receiving
either systemic or locally administered corticosteroids. Leukemia
Persons with leukemia in remission who were not immune to measles, rubella,
or mumps when diagnosed with leukemia may receive MMR or its component vaccines.
At least 3 months should elapse after termination of chemotherapy before
administration of the first dose of MMR vaccine. Management of Patients with
Contraindications to Measles Vaccine
If immediate protection against measles is required for persons with
contraindications to measles vaccination, 0.25 mL/kg (0.11 mL/lb) of body weight
(maximum dose = 15 mL) of IG should be administered as soon as possible after
known exposure (See Use of Vaccine and Immune Globulin Among Persons Exposed to
Measles, Rubella, or Mumps). Exposed symptomatic HIV-infected and other
immunocompromised persons should receive IG regardless of their previous
vaccination status. Because IG in usual doses may not be effective for
immunocompromised persons, the recommended dose is 0.5 mL/kg of body weight if
IG is administered intramuscularly (maximum dose = 15 mL). This corresponds to a
dose of IgG protein of approximately 82.5 mg/kg (maximum dose = 2,475 mg).
Intramuscular IG may not be needed if a patient is receiving at least 100-400
mg/kg IGIV at regular intervals and exposure occurs within 3 weeks after
administration of the last dose of IGIV. Because the amounts of protein
administered are similar, high-dose IGIV may be as effective as intramuscular IG.
However, no data are available concerning the effectiveness of IGIV in
preventing measles.
The effectiveness of IG or IGIV for preventing mumps or rubella is unknown.
These products should not be used for prophylaxis among immunocompromised
persons exposed to these diseases. SURVEILLANCE AND OUTBREAK CONTROL
Surveillance for vaccine preventable diseases has four primary purposes: a)
to provide important data on program progress and long term trends, b) to
provide the basis for changes in disease prevention strategies, c) to help
define groups in greatest need of vaccination, and d) to evaluate vaccine safety
and effectiveness (e.g., protective efficacy, duration of vaccine-induced
immunity, and occurrence of adverse effects). As the incidence of measles,
rubella, and mumps declines in the United States, enhanced surveillance becomes
increasingly important.
Any person aware of a suspected or known cases of measles, rubella,
congenital rubella syndrome, or mumps should report the case to the local or
state health department. The designated public health authorities should
investigate the case immediately. The purpose of the investigation is to
classify the case, identify the characteristics of the case and the source of
exposure, and prevent further spread.
Cases of measles, rubella, and congenital rubella syndrome are reportable in
all states, and mumps is reportable in most states. Data from measles, rubella,
congenital rubella syndrome, and mumps cases are routinely reported by state and
local health departments to CDC and published weekly in the Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report. Measles Case Investigation and Outbreak Control Case
Definition
A suspected measles case is defined as any febrile illness accompanied by
rash. Suspected and known cases of measles should be reported immediately to the
local or state health department. The designated public health authorities
should quickly initiate an investigation of the reported case. Rapid case
reporting and investigation can help limit further transmission.
A clinical case of measles is defined as an illness characterized by
a generalized rash lasting greater than or equal to 3 days, and
a temperature of greater than or equal to 38.3 C (greater than or equal to
101 F), and
cough, coryza, or conjunctivitis. A probable case of measles
meets the clinical case definition for measles, and
is not epidemiologically linked to a confirmed case, and
has not been serologically or virologically tested or has noncontributory
serologic or virologic results. A confirmed case of measles
meets the laboratory criteria for measles or
meets the clinical case definition and is epidemiologically linked to a
confirmed case.
Confirmed measles cases are routinely reported to CDC by state health
departments. Laboratory Diagnosis
The laboratory criteria for measles diagnosis are:
a positive serologic test for measles IgM antibody, or
a significant rise in measles antibody level by any standard serologic
assay, or
isolation of measles virus from a clinical specimen.
A laboratory-confirmed case need not meet the clinical case definition.
Serologic confirmation should be attempted for every suspected case of measles
and is particularly important for any case that cannot be epidemiologically
linked through a chain of transmission to a confirmed case. However, reporting
of suspected or probable cases, investigation of cases, and the implementation
of control activities should not be delayed pending laboratory results.
Blood for serologic testing should be collected during the first clinical
encounter with a person who has suspected or probable measles. The serum should
be tested for measles IgM antibody as soon as possible using an assay that is
both sensitive and specific (e.g., direct-capture IgM EIA method). Correct
interpretation of serologic data depends on the timing of specimen collection in
relation to rash onset and on the characteristics of the antibody assay used.
This timing is especially important for interpreting negative results because
IgM antibody may not be detectable with some less sensitive assays until at
least 72 hours after rash onset. Measles IgM may be detectable at the time of
rash onset, peaks approximately 10 days after rash onset, and is usually
undetectable 30-60 days after rash onset. In general, if measles IgM is not
detected in a serum specimen obtained in the first 72 hours after rash onset
from a person whose illness meets the clinical case definition for measles,
another specimen should be obtained at least 72 hours after rash onset and
tested for measles IgM antibody. Measles IgM is detectable for at least 1 month
after rash onset. Persons with febrile rash illnesses who are seronegative for
measles should be tested for rubella.
As measles becomes rare in the United States, the likelihood of obtaining
false positive serologic results from measles IgM antibody testing increases.
False positive results have been obtained by using a commercially available
ELISA assay for measles IgM in persons with parvovirus infection (fifth disease)
(224). Confirmatory testing by using an assay that is both sensitive and
specific (e.g., direct-capture IgM EIA method) should be considered when IgM is
detected in a patient with suspected measles who has no identified source of
infection and no epidemiologic linkage to another confirmed case. The Measles
Virus Laboratory of CDC's National Center for Infectious Diseases has provided
training to all state public health laboratories to perform such testing.
Serologic diagnosis of measles can also be confirmed by a significant rise in
antibody titer between acute- and convalescent-phase serum specimens. Typically,
the acute-phase serum specimen is obtained within 1-3 days after rash onset and
the convalescent-phase specimen is obtained approximately 2-4 weeks later. This
method has been largely supplanted by IgM assays which can be done on a single
serum specimen obtained soon after rash onset.
Asymptomatic measles reinfection can occur among persons who have previously
developed antibodies from vaccination or from natural disease. Symptomatic
reinfections accompanied by rises in measles antibody titers are rare, and those
resulting in detectable measles IgM antibody occur even more rarely.
Molecular characterization of measles virus isolates has become an important
tool for defining the epidemiologic features of measles during periods of low
disease incidence and for documenting the impact of measles elimination efforts
(16). In addition to serologic confirmation, a specimen (e.g., urine or
nasopharyngeal mucus) for measles virus isolation and genetic characterization
should be collected as close to the time of rash onset as possible. Delay in
collection of these clinical specimens reduces the chance of isolating measles
virus. Clinicians who have a patient with suspected measles should immediately
contact their local or state health departments concerning additional
information about collecting and shipping urine and nasal specimens for measles
virus isolation. Molecular characterization of the measles virus isolated from
urine or nasopharyngeal specimens requires considerable time and cannot be used
for diagnosis of measles. Use of oral fluid in tests for detecting measles IgM
and IgG antibodies is being investigated (225). Measles Outbreak Control
The local or state health department should be contacted immediately when
suspected cases of measles occur in a community. All reports of suspected
measles cases should be investigated promptly. Because of the potential for
rapid spread of the disease, one confirmed case of measles in a community is an
urgent public health situation. Once a case is confirmed, prompt vaccination of
susceptible persons at risk for exposure may help prevent dissemination of
measles. Control activities should not be delayed pending the return of
laboratory results from persons with suspected or probable cases. Persons who
cannot readily provide acceptable evidence of measles immunity (Table_1)
should be vaccinated or excluded from the setting of the outbreak (e.g., school,
day care facility, hospital, clinic). Almost all persons who are excluded from
an outbreak area because they lack acceptable evidence of immunity quickly
comply with vaccination requirements. Persons exempted from measles vaccination
for medical, religious, or other reasons should be excluded from involved
institutions in the outbreak area until 21 days after the onset of rash in the
last case of measles. Mass revaccination of entire communities generally is not
necessary. Staff of the National Immunization Program, CDC, are available to
assist health departments in developing an outbreak control strategy. Measles
Outbreaks Among Preschool-Aged Children
Although most infants are protected from measles by maternal antibody, the
disease is often more severe when it affects children aged less than 12 months.
If cases are occurring among infants aged less than 12 months, measles
vaccination of infants aged as young as 6 months may be undertaken as an
outbreak control measure. Monovalent measles vaccine is preferred, but MMR
vaccine may be administered if the monovalent vaccine is not readily available
(see Routine Vaccination -- International Travel). Children vaccinated with
measles or MMR vaccine before the first birthday should be revaccinated at age
12-15 months and again before entering school.
Passive immunization with IG may be preferred for infants aged less than 12
months who are household contacts of measles patients, both because it is likely
they will have been exposed greater than 72 hours before diagnosis of the
disease in the household member and because they are at highest risk for
complications from the disease (see Use of Vaccine and Immune Globulin Among
Persons Exposed to Measles, Rubella, or Mumps). IG should not be used to control
measles outbreaks. Measles Outbreaks in Day Care Facilities, Schools, and Other
Educational Institutions
During an outbreak in a day care facility, revaccination with MMR is
recommended for all attendees and their siblings who have not received two doses
of measles-containing vaccine on or after the first birthday and who do not have
other evidence of measles immunity. Facility personnel (e.g., employees,
volunteers, service providers) who cannot provide acceptable evidence of
immunity (Table_1) also should be vaccinated with
MMR. Revaccination also should be considered for unaffected child care
facilities in the community that may be at risk for measles exposure and
transmission.
During outbreaks in schools (elementary, middle, junior and senior high
schools, colleges and other institutions of higher education), a program of
revaccination with MMR vaccine is recommended in the involved schools.
Revaccination of students and personnel of unaffected schools in the same
geographic area who may be at risk for measles transmission also should be
considered. Revaccination should include all students and their siblings and all
school personnel born during or after 1957 who cannot provide documentation of
adequate measles vaccination or other acceptable evidence of measles immunity.
For persons born in 1957 or later, adequate vaccination consists of two doses of
measles-containing vaccine separated by at least 28 days with the first dose
administered no earlier than the first birthday (Table_1)
(see Documentation of Immunity). Persons who cannot readily provide
documentation of acceptable evidence of measles immunity should be vaccinated or
excluded from the day care facility, school, or other educational institution.
Revaccinated persons, as well as persons who receive their first dose as part of
the outbreak control program, may be readmitted to school immediately. Persons
exempted from measles vaccination for medical, religious, or other reasons, and
those who refuse vaccination for any reason, should be excluded from the day
care facility, school, or other educational institution until 21 days after the
onset of rash in the last case of measles. Measles Outbreaks in Health-Care
Settings
If a measles outbreak occurs within a health-care facility (e.g., hospital,
clinic, physician office) or in the areas served by the facility, all persons
working at the facility who cannot provide documentation of two doses of
measles-containing vaccine separated by at least 28 days with the first dose
administered on or after the first birthday, or who do not have other evidence
of measles immunity (Table_1), should receive a dose
of MMR vaccine. If indicated, health-care workers born during or after 1957
should receive a second dose of MMR vaccine at least 28 days after the previous
dose (see Documentation of Immunity). Some health-care workers born before 1957
have acquired measles in health-care facilities and have transmitted the disease
to patients or coworkers (see Health-care Facilities). Therefore, during
outbreaks, health-care facilities also should strongly consider recommending a
dose of MMR vaccine to unvaccinated health-care workers born before 1957 who do
not have serologic evidence of immunity or a history of measles disease.
Serologic testing of health-care workers before vaccination is not generally
recommended during an outbreak because arresting measles transmission requires
rapid vaccination of susceptible health-care workers. The need to screen, wait
for results, and then contact and vaccinate susceptible persons can impede the
rapid vaccination needed to curb the outbreak.
Susceptible health-care workers (Table_1) exposed
to measles should receive a dose of MMR vaccine and should be removed from all
patient contact and excluded from the facility from the fifth to the 21st day
after the exposure. They may return to work on the 22nd day after exposure.
However, susceptible health-care workers who are not vaccinated after exposure
should be removed from all patient contact and excluded from the facility from
the fifth day after their first exposure to the 21st day after the last
exposure, even if they receive postexposure IG. Personnel who become ill with
prodromal symptoms or rash should be removed from all patient contact and
excluded immediately from the facility until 4 days after the onset of their
rash. Use of Quarantine
Imposing quarantine measures for outbreak control is usually both difficult
and disruptive to schools and other organizations. Under special circumstances
(i.e., during outbreaks in schools attended by large numbers of persons who
refuse vaccination), restriction of an event or other quarantine measures might
be warranted (226). However, such action is not recommended as a routine measure
for control of most outbreaks. Rubella Case Investigation and Outbreak Control
Case Definition
A suspected rubella case is any generalized rash illness of acute onset. A
clinical case of rubella is defined as an illness characterized by all of the
following clinical features:
acute onset of generalized maculopapular rash; and
a temperature of greater than 37.2 C (greater than 99 F), if measured; and
arthralgia/arthritis, or lymphadenopathy, or conjunctivitis.
Cases meeting the measles case definition are excluded, as are cases with
serologic findings compatible with recent measles virus infection.
A probable case of rubella
meets the clinical case definition for rubella, and
has no or noncontributory serologic or virologic testing, and
is not epidemiologically linked to a laboratory-confirmed case.
A confirmed rubella case
meets the laboratory criteria for rubella, or
meets the clinical case definition and is epidemiologically linked to a
laboratory confirmed case.
Suspected and known rubella cases should be reported immediately to local
health departments. Aggressive case finding and intensified surveillance for CRS
should follow. Rubella surveillance is complicated by the nonspecific nature of
the symptoms of the clinical disease. Rubella can be confused with other
illnesses, including measles. Thus, all rubella cases, particularly isolated
cases that do not occur as part of an outbreak, should be confirmed by
laboratory testing. Confirmed rubella cases are reported to the CDC by state
health departments. Cases of febrile rash illness that are laboratory-negative
for rubella may be measles (rubeola) and the patients should be tested for
measles IgM.
Laboratory confirmation of suspected cases of CRS also is necessary because
the constellation of findings of CRS varies. Case reports of indigenous
congenital rubella syndrome are sentinel events, indicating the presence of
rubella infections in the community that may previously have been unrecognized.
The diagnosis of one or more indigenous CRS cases in a community should trigger
intensified rubella and CRS surveillance.
A confirmed case of CRS has laboratory confirmation of rubella infection and
at least one defect in each of the two following categories: a)
cataracts/congenital glaucoma (either or both count as one), congenital heart
disease, loss of hearing, pigmentary retinopathy; and, b) purpura, splenomegaly,
jaundice, microcephaly, mental retardation, meningoencephalitis, radiolucent
bone disease.
A probable case of CRS has any two conditions listed in category a) or one
from category a) and one from category b) and lacks evidence of any other
etiology. A case with laboratory evidence of rubella infection but no clinical
symptoms or signs of CRS is classified "infection only." Laboratory Diagnosis
The criteria for laboratory diagnosis of rubella are
a positive serologic test for rubella IgM antibody; or
a significant rise between acute- and convalescent-phase titers in serum
rubella IgG antibody level by any standard serologic assay; or
the isolation of rubella virus from an appropriately collected clinical
specimen.
The clinical diagnosis of acute rubella should be confirmed by laboratory
testing (230). The demonstration of rubella-specific IgM antibody is the most
commonly used method to obtain serologic confirmation of acute rubella
infection. Rubella-specific IgM antibody usually becomes detectable shortly
after rash onset. The IgM antibody peaks approximately 7 days after rash onset
and remains detectable for 4-12 weeks, although it is more likely to be
detectable if the serum specimen is obtained within 4-5 weeks after rash onset.
Occasionally, rubella-specific IgM antibody can be detected up to 1 year after
acute infection.
To test for IgM, one serum specimen can be obtained as early as 1-2 days
after rash onset. If IgM is not detectable in this first specimen, a second
serum specimen should be collected 5 days after the onset of rash or as soon as
possible thereafter. False-negative rubella IgM antibody test results may
sometimes occur even if the specimen is appropriately drawn. False-positive IgM
test results may occur among persons with certain viral infections (e.g., acute
infectious mononucleosis, cytomegalovirus, or parvovirus) and among persons who
are rheumatoid factor positive.
For IgG assays, the criteria for a significant rise in rubella antibody level
vary by type of assay and by laboratory. For HI assays, a fourfold rise in the
titer of antibody indicates recent infection. The acute-phase serum specimen
should be obtained as soon after rash onset as possible, preferably within 7
days. The convalescent-phase serum specimen should be drawn at least 10 days
after the acute-phase serum specimen. The acute- and convalescent-phase serum
specimens should be tested simultaneously in the same laboratory. If the
acute-phase serum specimen is drawn greater than 7 days (and occasionally even
if obtained within 7 days) after rash onset, a significant rise in antibody
titer may not be detected by most commonly used IgG assays.
In the absence of rash illness, the diagnosis of subclinical cases of rubella
can be facilitated by obtaining the acute-phase serum specimen as soon as
possible after exposure. The convalescent-phase specimen should be drawn at
least 28 days after exposure. If acute- and convalescent-phase paired sera
provide inconclusive results, rubella-specific IgM antibody testing can be
performed. Expert consultation may be necessary to interpret the data.
Among pregnant women of unknown immune status who experience a rash illness
or who are exposed to rubella, laboratory confirmation of rubella infection may
be difficult. A serum specimen should be obtained as soon as possible.
Unfortunately, serologic results are often nonconfirmatory. Such situations can
be avoided by performing routine prenatal serologic screening of women who do
not have acceptable evidence of rubella immunity (see Documentation of Immunity
and Women of Childbearing Age). In addition, health-care providers should
request that laboratories performing prenatal serologic screening retain such
specimens until delivery, in case retesting is necessary. Congenital Rubella
Suspected cases of CRS should be managed with contact isolation (228). While
diagnostic confirmation is pending, children with suspected CRS should be cared
for only by personnel known to be immune to rubella. Confirmation of diagnosis
by virus isolation can be done by culturing nasopharyngeal and urine specimens.
Serologic confirmation can be obtained by testing cord blood for the presence of
rubella-specific IgM antibodies. An alternative method for infants aged greater
than or equal to 3 months is to document rubella-specific antibody levels that
do not decline at the rate expected from passive transfer of maternal antibody
(i.e., the equivalent of a twofold decline in HI titer per month). However, some
infected infants may have low antibody levels because of agammaglobulinemia or
dysgammaglobulinemia.
In some infants with CRS, rubella virus can persist and can be isolated from
nasopharyngeal and urine cultures throughout the first year of life or longer
(229). Children with CRS should be presumed infectious at least through the
first year of life unless nasopharyngeal and urine cultures are negative for
virus after age 3 months (230). Some authorities suggest that an infant who has
CRS should be considered infectious until two cultures of clinical specimens
obtained 1 month apart are negative for rubella virus (230). Precautions should
be taken to ensure that infants with CRS do not cause additional rubella
outbreaks. Specifically, all persons who have contact with a child with CRS
(e.g., care givers, household contacts, medical personnel, laboratory workers)
should be immune to rubella (Table_1) (see
Documentation of Immunity and Routine Vaccination). Rubella Outbreak Control
Outbreak control is important for eliminating CRS. Aggressive responses to
outbreaks may interrupt chains of transmission and can increase vaccination
coverage among persons who might not be protected otherwise. Although methods
for controlling rubella outbreaks are evolving, the main strategy should be to
define target populations for rubella vaccination, ensure that susceptible
persons within the target populations are vaccinated rapidly (or excluded from
exposure if a contraindication to vaccination exists), and maintain active
surveillance to permit modification of control measures as needed.
Control measures should be implemented as soon as a case of rubella is
confirmed in a community. This approach is especially important in any outbreak
setting involving pregnant women (e.g., obstetric-gynecologic and prenatal
clinics). All persons at risk who cannot readily provide laboratory evidence of
immunity or a documented history of vaccination on or after the first birthday
should be considered susceptible and should be vaccinated unless vaccination is
contraindicated (Table_1) (see Documentation of
Immunity). Rubella Outbreaks in Schools or Other Educational Institutions
An effective means of terminating rubella outbreaks and increasing rates of
vaccination quickly is to exclude from possible contact persons who cannot
provide valid evidence of immunity. Experience with measles outbreak control
indicates that almost all students who are excluded from school because they
lack evidence of immunity quickly comply with vaccination requirements and are
promptly readmitted to school. Persons exempted from rubella vaccination for
medical, religious, or other reasons should also be excluded from attendance.
Exclusion should continue for 3 weeks after the onset of rash of the last
reported case in the outbreak setting. Less rigorous approaches (e.g., voluntary
appeals for vaccination) have not been effective in terminating outbreaks.
Rubella Outbreaks in Health-Care Settings
During rubella outbreaks in health-care settings where pregnant women may be
exposed, mandatory exclusion and vaccination of health-care workers who lack
evidence of rubella immunity (Table_1) should be
practiced. Exposed health-care workers who lack evidence of immunity should be
excluded from duty from the seventh day after first exposure through the
twenty-first day after their last exposure or until 5 days after the rash
appears. In addition, because birth before 1957 does not guarantee rubella
immunity, health-care facilities should strongly consider recommending a dose of
MMR vaccine to unvaccinated health-care workers born before 1957 who do not have
serologic evidence of immunity. Although rubella vaccination during an outbreak
has not been associated with substantial personnel absenteeism (116,191),
vaccination of susceptible persons before an outbreak occurs is preferable
because vaccination causes far less absenteeism and disruption of routine work
activities than does rubella infection. Mumps Case Investigation and Outbreak
Control Case Definition
A clinical case of mumps is defined as an illness characterized by acute
onset of unilateral or bilateral tender, self-limited swelling of the parotid or
other salivary gland lasting greater than or equal to 2 days, and without other
apparent cause (as reported by a health professional).
A probable case of mumps
meets the clinical case definition of mumps, and
is not epidemiologically linked to a confirmed or probable case, and
has noncontributory or no serologic or virologic testing.
A confirmed case of mumps
meets the laboratory criteria for mumps, or
meets the clinical case definition and is epidemiologically linked to a
confirmed or probable case.
A laboratory-confirmed case need not meet the clinical case definition. Two
probable cases that are epidemiologically linked are considered confirmed, even
in the absence of laboratory confirmation.
Reporting of mumps often has been based solely on clinical diagnosis without
laboratory confirmation. However, parotitis may have other infectious and
noninfectious causes. Therefore, serologic confirmation of the diagnosis is
preferred. Use of criteria for clinical diagnosis that are both stricter and
more reliable, combined with laboratory confirmation, can be expected to
decrease the number of false positive mumps cases reported and allow a more
accurate assessment of mumps incidence.
Probable or confirmed cases of mumps should be reported immediately to state
and local health departments. Recommended procedures to enhance the
comprehensiveness of reporting include identification of all contacts, follow-up
of susceptible contacts, and serologic testing of all probable cases to confirm
the diagnosis. Laboratory Diagnosis
The laboratory criteria for the diagnosis of mumps are
isolation of the mumps virus from a clinical specimen, or
a significant rise between acute and convalescent-phase titers in serum
mumps IgG antibody level by any standard serologic assay, or
a positive serologic test for mumps IgM antibody.
In a prospective study in the practices of family practitioners in a Canadian
community, one-third of persons with clinically diagnosed cases of mumps had no
serologic evidence of recent mumps infection (28). Serum mumps IgM IFA tests are
commercially available. However, until more data are available concerning the
use and interpretation of these tests, laboratory confirmation of mumps should
be based on tests of demonstrated reliability. State health department
laboratories can provide guidance when testing for acute mumps infection is
necessary. Mumps Outbreak Control
The strategy for outbreak control includes three main elements. The target
population (transmission setting) must be defined. Persons within the population
who are susceptible to mumps must be identified and vaccinated. Consideration
should be given to excluding susceptible persons who are exempt from vaccination
(for medical, religious, or other reasons) from the affected institution or
setting until the outbreak is terminated. Active surveillance for mumps should
be conducted until two incubation periods (i.e., 5-6 weeks) have elapsed since
onset of the last case. School-based Mumps Outbreaks
Exclusion of susceptible students from schools affected by a mumps outbreak
(and other, unaffected schools judged by local public health authorities to be
at risk for transmission of the disease) should be considered among the means to
control mumps outbreaks. Excluded students can be readmitted immediately after
they are vaccinated. Experience with outbreak control for other
vaccine-preventable diseases indicates that almost all students who are excluded
from the outbreak area because they lack evidence of immunity quickly comply
with requirements and can be readmitted to school. Pupils who have been exempted
from mumps vaccination for medical, religious, or other reasons should be
excluded until at least 26 days after the onset of parotitis in the last person
with mumps in the affected school. Mumps Outbreaks in Health-Care Settings
Sporadic nosocomial cases of mumps have occurred in long-term care facilities
housing adolescents and young adults (122). However, mumps virus is less
transmissible than measles and other respiratory viruses. The low level of mumps
transmission in the community results in a low risk for introduction of the
disease into health-care facilities. Because mumps is shed by infected persons
before clinical symptoms become evident and because infected persons often
remain asymptomatic, an effective routine MMR vaccination program for
health-care workers is the best approach to prevent nosocomial transmission.
To prevent droplet transmission of the disease, respiratory isolation
precautions for persons with mumps should be maintained for 9 days after onset
of symptoms (e.g., parotitis). If exposed to mumps, health-care workers who lack
acceptable evidence of immunity (Table_1) should be
excluded from the health-care facility from the 12th day after the first
exposure through the 26th day after the last exposure. Workers in whom the
disease develops should be excluded from work until 9 days after the onset of
symptoms.
References
Bloch AB, Orenstein WA, Stetler HC, et al. Health impact of measles
vaccination in the United States. Pediatrics 1985;76:524-32.
Siegel M, Fuerst HT. Low birth weight and maternal virus diseases: a
prospective study of rubella, measles, mumps, chickenpox, and hepatitis. JAMA
1966;197:680-4.
Jespersen CS, Littauer J, Sagild U. Measles as a cause of fetal defects.
Acta Paediatr Scand 1977;66:367-72.
Atmar RL, Englund JA, Hammill H. Complications of measles during
pregnancy. Clin Infect Dis 1992;14:217-26.
Eberhart-Phillips JE, Frederick PD, Baron RC, Mascola L. Measles in
pregnancy: a descriptive study of 58 cases. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:797-801.
Markowitz LE, Chandler FW, Roldan EO, et al. Fatal measles pneumonia
without rash in a child with AIDS. J Infect Dis 1988;158:480-3.
CDC. Measles in HIV-infected children, United States. MMWR 1988;37:183-6.
CDC. Measles surveillance report No.11, 1977-1981. September 1982;6-89.
CDC. Summary of notifiable diseases, United States-1993. MMWR 1993;42:67.
CDC. Reported vaccine-preventable diseases--United States, 1993, and the
Childhood Immunization Initiative. MMWR 1994;43:57-60.
The National Vaccine Advisory Committee. The measles epidemic: the
problems, barriers, and recommendations. JAMA 1991;266:1547-52.
Atkinson WL. Epidemiology and prevention of measles. Dermatol Clin
1995;13:553-9.
CDC. Status report on the Childhood Immunization Initiative: reported
cases of selected vaccine-preventable diseases--United States, 1996. MMWR
1997;46:665-71.
Pan American Health Organization. Measles elimination by the year 2000.
EPI Newsletter 1994;16:1-2.
Rota JS, Rota PA, Redd SC, Pattamadilok S, Bellini WJ. Genetic analysis of
measles viruses isolated in the United States, 1995-1996. J Infect Dis
1998;177:204-8.
Watson JC, Redd SC, Rhodes PH, Hadler SC. The interruption of transmission
of indigenous measles in the United States during 1993. Pediatr Infect Dis J
1998;17:363-6.
Peckham CS. Clinical and laboratory study of children exposed in utero to
maternal rubella. Arch Dis Child 1972;47:571-7.
CDC. Rubella and congenital rubella syndrome--United States, 1984-1985.
MMWR 1986;35:129-35.
Cochi SL, Edmonds LD, Dyer K, et al. Congenital rubella syndrome in the
United States, 1970-1985: on the verge of elimination. Am J Epidemiol
1989;129:349-61.
Mellinger AK, Cragan JD, Atkinson WL, et al. High incidence of congenital
rubella syndrome after a rubella outbreak. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1995;14:573-8.
Dales LG, Chin J. Public health implications of rubella antibody levels in
California. Am J Public Health 1982;72:167-72.
Dales LG, Chin J. An outbreak of congenital rubella. West J Med
1981;135:266-70.
Lamprecht C, Schauf V, Warren D, Nelson K, Northrop R, Christiansen M. An
outbreak of congenital rubella syndrome in Chicago. JAMA 1982;247:1129-33.
Kaplan KM, Cochi SL, Edmonds LD, Zell ER, Preblud SR. A profile of mothers
giving birth to infants with congenital rubella syndrome: an assessment of
risk factors. Am J Dis Child 1990;144:118-23.
Lee SH, Ewert DP, Frederick PD, Mascola L. Resurgence of congenital
rubella syndrome in the 1990's: report on missed opportunities and failed
prevention policies among women of childbearing age. JAMA 1992;267:2616-20.
Johnson CE, Kumar ML, Whitwell J, et al. Antibody persistence after
primary measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and response to a second dose given at
four to six vs. eleven to thirteen years. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1996;15:687-92.
Falk WA, Buchan K, Dow M, et al. The epidemiology of mumps in Southern
Alberta, 1980-1982. Am J Epidemiol 1989;130:736-49.
Cooney MK, Fox JP, Hall CE. The Seattle Virus Watch. VI. Observations of
infections with and illness due to parainfluenza, mumps, and respiratory
syncytial viruses and mycoplasma pneumoniae. Am J Epidemiol 1971;94:467-72.
Philip RN, Reinhard KR, Lackman DB. Observations on a mumps epidemic in a
"virgin" population. Am J Hygiene 1959;69:91.
CDC. Mumps outbreaks on university campuses--Illinois, Wisconsin, South
Dakota. MMWR 1987;36:496-8,504-5.
Hersh BS, Fine PEM, Kent WK, et al. Mumps outbreak in a highly vaccinated
population. J Pediatr 1991;119:187-93.
CDC. Mumps surveillance, January 1977-December 1982. Atlanta, US
Department of Health and Human Services, US Public Health Service, 1984.
Werner CA. Mumps orchitis and testicular atrophy: I. Occurrence. Ann
Intern Med 1950;32:1066.
McGuiness AC, Gall EA. Mumps at army camps in 1943. War Med 1944;5:95.
Reed D, Brown G, Merrick R, Sever J, Feltz E. A mumps epidemic on St.
George Island, Alaska. JAMA 1967;199:133-7.
Russell RR, Donald JC. The neurological complications of mumps. Br Med J
1958;2:27.
Bray PF. Mumps--a cause of hydrocephalus? Pediatrics 1972;49:446.
Miller HG, Stanton JB, Gibbons JL. Para-infectious encephalomyelitis and
related syndromes. Q J Med 1956;25:247.
Hall R, Richards H. Hearing loss due to mumps. Arch Dis Child 1987;62:189.
Vuori M, Lahikainen EA, Peltonen T. Perceptive deafness in connection with
mumps: a study of 298 servicemen suffering with mumps. Acta Otolaryngol
1962;55:231.
Westmore GA, Pickard BH, Stern H. Isolation of mumps virus from the inner
ear after sudden deafness. Br Med J 1979;1:14.
Siegel MS, Fuerst HT, Peress NS. Comparative fetal mortality in maternal
virus diseases: a prospective study on rubella, measles, mumps, chickenpox,
and hepatitis. N Engl J Med 1966;274:768-71.
Siegel MS. Congenital malformations following chickenpox, measles, mumps
and hepatitis: results of a cohort study. JAMA 1973;226:1521-4.
Chaiken BP, Williams NM, Preblud SR, Parkin W, Altman R. The effect of a
school entry law on mumps activity in a school district. JAMA
1987;257(18):2455-8.
Van Loon FPL, Holmes SJ, Sirotkin BI, et al. Mumps surveillance--United
States, 1988-1993. MMWR 1995;44(No. SS-3):1-14.
Cochi SL, Preblud SR, Orenstein WA. Perspectives on the relative
resurgence of mumps in the United States. Am J Dis Child 1988;142:499-507.
CDC. Measles prevention: recommendations of the Immunization Practices
Advisory Committee (ACIP). MMWR 1989;38(No. S-9):1-18.
American Academy of Pediatrics. Mumps. In: Peter G, ed. 1997 Red
Book--report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases. Elk Grove Village, IL:
American Academy of Pediatrics, 1997:366-9.
Watson JC, Pearson JA, Markowitz LE, et al. An evaluation of Measles
revaccination among school-entry-aged children. Pediatrics 1996;97:613-8.
Markowitz LE, Preblud SR, Fine PE, Orenstein WA. Duration of live measles
vaccine-induced immunity. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1990;9:101-10.
Krugman S. Further-attenuated measles vaccine: characteristics and use.
Rev Infect Dis 1983;5:477-81.
Markowitz LE, Albrecht P, Orenstein WA, Lett SM, Pugliese TJ, Farrell D.
Persistence of measles antibody after revaccination. J Infect Dis
1992;166:205-8.
Mathias RG, Meekison WG, Arcand TA, Schechter MA. The role of secondary
vaccine failures in measles outbreaks. Am J Public Health 1989;79:475-8.
Edmonson MB, Davis JP, Hopfensperger DJ, Berg JL, Payton LA. Measles
vaccination during the respiratory virus season and risk of vaccine failure.
Pediatrics 1996;98:905-10.
Grillner L, Hedstrom E-E, Bergstrom H, et al. Vaccination against rubella
of newly delivered women. Scand J Infect Dis 1973;5:237-41.
Weibel RE, Villarejos VM, Klein EB, Buynak EB, McLean AA, Hinman AR.
Clinical and laboratory studies of live attenuated RA 27/3 and HPV 77-DE
rubella virus vaccines. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1980;165:44-9.
Balfour HH Jr, Groth KE, Edelman CK, Amren DP, Best JM, Banatvala JE.
Rubella viraemia and antibody responses after rubella vaccination and
reimmunization. Lancet 1981;1078-80.
O'Shea S, Best JM, Banatvala JE. Viremia, virus excretion, and antibody
responses after challenge in volunteers with low levels of antibody to rubella
virus. J Infect Dis 1983;148:639-47.
Baba K, Yabuuchi H, Okuni H, et al. Rubella epidemic in an institution:
protective value of live rubella vaccine and serological behavior of
vaccinated, revaccinated, and naturally immune groups. Biken J 1978;21:25-31.
Maes EF, Gillan A, Stehr-Green PA, Stewart SS, Markowitz LE, Patriarca PA.
Rubella antibody persistence 20 years after immunization {Abstract}. In:
Program and abstracts of the 31st Interscience Congress on Antimicrobial
Agents and Chemotherapy. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology,
1991.
Orenstein WA, Herrman KL, Holmgreen P, et al. Prevalence of rubella
antibodies in Massachusetts schoolchildren. Am J Epidemiol 1986;124:290-8.
Horstmann DM, Schluederberg A, Emmons JE, Evans BK, Randolph MF, Andiman
WA. Persistence of vaccine-induced immune responses to rubella: comparison
with natural infection. Rev Infect Dis 1985;7:580-5.
Plotkin SA, Farquhar JD, Ogra PL. Immunologic properties of RA 27/3
rubella virus vaccine. A comparison with strains presently licensed in the
U.S. JAMA 1973;225:585-90.
Best JM, Banatvala JE, Morgan-Capner P, et al. Fetal infection after
maternal reinfection with rubella: criteria for defining reinfection. Br Med J
1989;299:773-5.
Weibel RE, Sokes J Jr, Buynak EB, Whitman JE Jr, Hilleman MR. Live,
attenuated mumps-virus vaccine: 3. Clinical and serologic aspects in a field
situation. N Engl J Med 1967;276:245-51.
Hilleman MR, Weibel RE, Buynak EB, Stokes J Jr, Whitman JE Jr. Live
attenuated mumps-virus vaccine: 4. Protective efficacy as measured in a field
evaluation. N Engl J Med 1967;276:252-8.
Sugg WC, Finger JA, Levine RH, Pagano JS. Field evaluation of live virus
mumps vaccine. J Pediatr 1968;72:461-6.
Kim-Farley R, Bart S, Stetler H, et al. Clinical mumps vaccine efficacy.
Am J Epidemiol 1985;121:593-7.
Weibel RE, Buyak EB, McLean AA, Roehm RR, Hilleman MR. Follow-up
surveillance for antibody in human subjects following live attenuated measles,
mumps, and rubella virus vaccines. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1979;162:328-32.
Weibel RE, Buyak EB, McLean, Roehm RR, Hilleman MR. Persistence of
antibody in human subjects for 7 to 10 years following administration of
combined live attenuated measles, mumps, and rubella virus vaccines. Proc Soc
Exp Biol Med 1980;165:260-3.
Cochi SL, Wharton M, Plotkin SA. Mumps vaccine. In Plotkin SA, Mortimer
EA, eds. Vaccines. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, WB Saunders, 1988:277-301.
CDC. General recommendations on immunization: recommendations of the
Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR 1994;43(No.
RR-1):1-38.
Briss PA, Fehrs LJ, Parker RA, et al. Sustained transmission of mumps in a
highly vaccinated population: assessment of primary vaccine failure and waning
vaccine-induced immunity. J Infect Dis 1994;169:77-82.
Watson JC, Pearson JA, Markowitz LE, et al. Evaluation of measles
revaccination among school-entry-aged children. Pediatrics 1996;97:613-8.
Bottinger M. Immunity to rubella before and after vaccination against
measles, mumps and rubella(MMR) at 12 years of age of the first generation
offered MMR vaccination in Sweden at 18 months. Vaccine 1995;13:1759-62.
Davidkin I, Valle M, Julkunen I. Persistence of anti-mumps virus
antibodies after a two-dose MMR vaccination. A nine-year follow-up. Vaccine
1995;13:1617-22.
White CC, Koplan JP, Orenstein WA. Benefits, risks, and costs of
immunization for measles, mumps and rubella. Am J Public Health
1985;75:739-44.
Hatziandreu EJ, Brown RE, Halpern MT. A cost benefit analysis of the
measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine. Final report prepared for National
Immunization Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Arlington,
VA: Center for Public Health Research and Evaluation, Battelle Memorial
Institute, 1994.
King GE, Hadler SC. Simultaneous administration of childhood vaccines: an
important public health policy that is safe and efficacious. Pediatr Infect
Dis J 1994;13:394-407.
Shinefield HR, Black S, Morozumi P, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of
concomitant separate administration of MMR-II, DTP with Hib conjugate and
varicella vaccines vs. concomitant injections of MMR-II and DTP with Hib
conjugate vaccines with varicella vaccine given six weeks later (Abstract). In
Program and abstracts, Third International Conference on the Varicella-Zoster
Virus. Palm Beach Gardens, FL: March 9-11, 1997.
CDC. Yellow fever vaccine: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR 1990;39(No. RR-6):1-6.
Rojanasuphot S, Nachiangmai P, Srijaggrawalong A, Nimmanitya S.
Implementation of simultaneous Japanese encephalitis vaccine in the Expanded
Program of Immunization of infants. Mosquito-Borne Dis Bull 1992;9:86-92.
Grabowsky M, Markowitz L. Serologic screening, mass immunization, and
implications for immunization programs {letter}. J Infect Dis 1991;164:1237-8.
Atkinson WL, Markowitz LE, Adams NC, Seastrom GR. Transmission of measles
in medical settings--United States, 1985-1989. Am J Med 1991;91:320S-4S.
Robinson J, Lemay M, Vaudry WL. Congenital rubella after anticipated
maternal immunity: two cases and a review of the literature. Pediatr Infect
Dis J 1994;13:812-5.
Partridge JW, Flewett TH, Whitehead JE. Congenital rubella affecting an
infant whose mother had rubella antibodies before conception. Br Med J Clin
Res Ed 1981;282:187-8.
O'Shea S, Best JM, Banatvala JE, Marshall WC, Dudgeon JA. Rubella
vaccination: persistence of antibodies for up to 16 years. Br Med J
1982;285:253-5.
Chu SY, Bernier RH, Stewart JA, et al. Rubella antibody persistence after
immunization: sixteen-year follow-up in the Hawaiian Islands. JAMA
1988;259:3133-6.
Hillary IB, Griffith AH. Persistence of antibody 10 years after
vaccination with Wistar RA 27/3 strain live attenuated rubella vaccine. Br Med
J 1980;280:1580-1.
Robinson RG, Dudenhoeffer FE, Holroyd HJ, Baker LR, Bernstein DI, Cherry
JD. Rubella immunity in older children, teenagers, and young adults: a
comparison of immunity in those previously immunized with those unimmunized. J
Pediatr 1982;101:188-91.
Ozanne G, d'Halewyn MA. Secondary immune response in a vaccinated
population during a large measles epidemic. J Clin Microbiol 1992;30:1778-82.
Ward BJ, Boulinanne N, Ratnam S, Guiot MC, Couillard M, De Serres G.
Cellular immunity in measles vaccine failure: demonstration of measles
antigen-specific lymphoproliferative responses despite limited serum antibody
production after revaccination. J Infect Dis 1995;172:1591-5.
Schum TR, Nelson DB, Duma MA, Sedmak GV. Increasing rubella seronegativity
despite a compulsory school law. Am J Public Health 1990;80:66-9.
Lieberman E, Faich GA, Simon PR, Mullan RJ. Premarital rubella screening
in Rhode Island. JAMA 1981;245:1333-5.
Orenstein WA, Bart KJ, Hinman AR, et al. The opportunity and obligation to
eliminate rubella from the United States. JAMA 1984;251:1988-94.
Crawford GE, Gremillion DH. Epidemic measles and rubella in Air Force
recruits: impact of immunization. J Infect Dis 1981;144:403-10.
Ewert DP, Frederick PD, Mascola L. Resurgence of congenital rubella
syndrome in the 1990s. Report on missed opportunities and failed prevention
policies among women of childbearing age. JAMA 1992;267:2616-20.
Kaplan KM, Cochi SL, Edmonds LD, Zell ER, Preblud SR. A profile of mothers
giving birth to infants with congenital rubella syndrome. An assessment of
risk factors. Am J Dis Child 1990; 144:118-23.
CDC. Rubella in colleges--United States, 1983-1984. MMWR 1985;34:228-31.
CDC. Rubella outbreak among office workers--New York City. MMWR
1983;32:349-52.
Baughman AL, Williams WW, Atkinson WL, Cook LG, Collins M. The impact of
college prematriculation requirements on risk for measles outbreaks. JAMA
1994;272:1127-32.
CDC. Mumps outbreaks on university campuses--Illinois, Wisconsin, South
Dakota. MMWR 1987;36:496-8,503-5.
Sosin DM, Cochi SL, Gunn RA, Jennings CE, Preblud SR. Changing
epidemiology of mumps and its impact on university campuses. Pediatrics
1989;84:779-84.
Davis R, Orenstein WA, Frank JA, et al. Transmission of measles in medical
settings. JAMA 1986;255:1295-8.
Atkinson WL. Measles and health care workers {editorial}. Infect Control
Hosp Epidemiol 1994;15:5-7.
Polk BF, White JA, DeGirolami PC, Modlin JF. An outbreak of rubella among
hospital personnel. N Engl J Med 1980;303:541-5.
Wright LJ, Carlquist JF. Measles immunity in employees of a multihospital
healthcare provider. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1994;15:8-11.
Braunstein H, Thomas S, Ito R. Immunity to measles in a large population
of varying age. Significance with respect to vaccination. Am J Dis Child
1990;144:296-8.
Fraser V, Spitznage E, Medoff G, Dunagan WC. Results of a rubella
screening program for hospital employees: a five-year review (1986-1990). Am J
Epidemiol 1993;138:756-64.
Subbarao EK, Amin S, Kumar ML. Prevaccination serologic screening for
measles in health care workers. J Infect Dis 1991;163:876-8.
Sellick JA Jr., Longbine D, Schifeling R, Mylotte JM. Screening hospital
employees for measles immunity is more cost effective than blind immunization.
Ann Int Med 1992;116:982-4.
Wharton M, Cochi SL, Hutcheson RH, Schaffner W. Mumps transmission in
hospitals. Arch Int Med 1990;150:47-9.
Sprauer MA, Markowitz LE, Nicholson JKA, et al. Response of human
immunodeficiency virus-infected adults to measles-rubella vaccination. J AIDS
1993;6:1013-6.
Mclaughlin M, Thomas P, Onorato I, et al. Live virus vaccines in human
immunodeficiency virus-infected children: a retrospective survey. Pediatrics
1988;82:229-33.
Onorato IM, Markowitz LE, Oxtoby MJ. Childhood immunization,
vaccine-preventable diseases and infection with human immunodeficiency virus.
Pediatr Infect Dis J 1988;6:588-95.
Palumbo P, Hoyt L, Demasio K, Oleske J, Connor E. Population-based study
of measles and measles immunization in human immunodeficiency virus-infected
children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1992;11:1008-14.
Markowitz LE, Chandler FW, Roldan EO, et al. Fatal measles pneumonia
without rash in a child with AIDS. J Infect Dis 1988;158:480-3.
CDC. 1993 Revised classification system for HIV infection and expanded
surveillance case definition for AIDS among adolescents and adults. MMWR
1992;41(RR-17):1-19.
CDC. 1994 Revised classification system for human immunodeficiency virus
infection in children less than 13 years of age; Official authorized addenda:
human immunodeficiency virus infection codes and official guidelines for
coding and reporting ICD-9-CM. MMWR 1994;43(RR-12):1-19.
CDC. Use of vaccines and immune globulins in persons with altered
immunocompetence: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization
Practices (ACIP). MMWR 1993;42(No. RR-5)1-5.
O'Brien WA, Grovit-Ferbas K, Namazi A, et al. Human immunodeficiency
virus-type 1 replication can be increased in peripheral blood of seropositive
patients after influenza vaccination. Blood 1995;86:1082-9.
Stanley SK, Ostrowski MA, Justement JS, et al. Effect of immunization with
a common recall antigen on viral expression in patients infected with human
immunodeficiency virus type 1. N Engl J Med 1996;334:1222-30.
Arpadi SM, Markowitz LE, Baughman AL, et al. Measles antibody in
vaccinated human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected children. Pediatrics
1996;97:653-7.
Angel JB, Udem SA, Snydman DR, et al. Measles pneumonitis following
measles-mumps-rubella vaccination of a patient with HIV infection, 1993. MMWR
1996;45:603-6.
Mitus A, Holloway A, Evans AE, Enders JF. Attenuated measles vaccine in
children with acute leukemia. Am J Dis Child 1962;103:243-8.
Bellini WJ, Rota JS, Greer PW, Zaki SR. Measles vaccination death in a
child with severe combined immunodeficiency: report of a case. Lab Invest
1992;66:91A.
Monafo WJ, Haslam DB, Roberts RL, Zaki SR, Bellini WJ, Coffin CM.
Disseminated measles infection following vaccination in a child with a
congenital immune deficiency. J Pediatr 1994; 124:273-6.
Mawhinney H, Allen IV, Beare JM, et al. Dysgammaglobulinaemia complicated
by disseminated measles. Br Med J 1971;2:380-1.
Markowitz LE, Katz SL. Measles vaccine. In: Vaccines. 2nd ed.
Philadelphia, WB Saunders, 1994, p 252-3.
Berkovich S, Starr S. Use of live-measles-virus vaccine to abort an
expected outbreak of measles within a closed population. N Engl J Med
1963;269:75-7.
Fulginiti V. Simultaneous measles exposure and immunization. Arch
Virusforsch 1965;16:300-4.
Ruuskanen O, Salmi TT, Halonen P. Measles vaccination after exposure to
natural measles. J Pediatr 1978;93:43-6.
Fulginiti V, Kempe CH. Measles exposure among vaccine recipients. Am J Dis
Child 1963; 106:450-61.
Wharton M, Cochi SL, Hutcheson RH, Bistowish JM, Schaffner W. A large
outbreak of mumps in the postvaccine era. J Infect Dis 1988;158:1253-60.
Schiff GM. Titered lots of immune globulin. Efficacy in the prevention of
rubella. Am J Dis Child 1969;118:322-7.
Waagner DC. Childhood Exanthems, In: Kaplan SL. Current Therapy in
Pediatric Infectious Diseases. 3rd ed. Mosby-Year Book, Inc., 1993:274-8.
Annunziato D, Kaplan MH, Hall WW, Ichinose H, Balsam D, Paladino VS.
Atypical measles syndrome: pathologic and serologic findings. Pediatrics
1982;70:203-9.
Krause PJ, Cherry JD, Naiditch MJ, Deseda-Tous J, Walbergh EJ.
Revaccination of previous recipients of killed measles vaccine: clinical and
immunologic studies. J Pediatr 1978;93:565-71.
Institute of Medicine. Evidence concerning rubella vaccines and arthritis,
radiculoneuritis, and thrombocytopenic purpura. In: Howson CP, Howe CJ,
Fineberg HV, eds. Adverse effects of pertussis and rubella vaccines.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1991:187-205.
Institute of Medicine. Measles and mumps vaccines. In: Stratton KR, Howe
CJ, Johnston RB, eds. Adverse events associated with childhood vaccines.
Evidence bearing on causality. Washington, DC: National Academy Press,
1994:118-86.
Wakefield AJ, Pittilo RM, Sim R, et al. Evidence of persistent measles
infection in Crohn's disease. J Med Virol 1993;39:345-53.
Wakefield AJ, Ekbom A, Dhillon AP, Pittilo RM, Pounder RE. Crohn's
disease: pathogenesis and persistent measles virus infection. Gastroenterology
1995;108:911-16.
Ekbom A, Adami HO, Helmick CG, Jonzon A, Zack MM. Perinatal risk factors
for inflammatory bowel disease: a case-control study. Am J Epidemiol
1990;132:1111-9.
Ekbom A, Wakefield AJ, Zack MM, Adami HO. Perinatal measles infection and
subsequent Crohn's disease. Lancet 1994;344:508-10. 155. Ekbom A, Daszak P,
Kraaz W, Wakefield AJ. Crohn's disease after in-utero measles exposure. Lancet
1996;348:515-7.
Thompson NP, Montgomery SM, Pounder RE, Wakefield AJ. Is measles
vaccination a risk factor for inflammatory bowel disease? Lancet
1995;345:1071-4.
Liu Y, van Kruiningen HJ, West AB, Cartun RW, Cortot A, Colombel JF.
Immunocytochemical evidence of Listeria, Escherichia coli, and Streptococcus
antigens in Crohn's disease. Gastroenterology 1995;108:1396-404.
Iizuka M, Nakagomi O, Chiba M, Ueda S, Masamune O. Absence of measles
virus in Crohn's disease {letter}. Lancet 1995;345:199.
Farrington P, Miller E. Measles vaccination as a risk factor for
inflammatory bowel disease {letter}. Lancet 1995;345:1362.
MacDonald TT. Measles vaccination as a risk factor for inflammatory bowel
disease {letter}. Lancet 1995;345:1363-4.
Miller D, Renton A. Measles vaccination as a risk factor for inflammatory
bowel disease {letter}. Lancet 1995;345:1363.
Chen RT, DeStefano F. Vaccine adverse events: causal or coincidental
{comment}. Lancet 1998;351:611-2.
Feeney M, Clegg A, Winwood P, Snook J. A case-control study of measles
vaccination and inflammatory bowel disease. Lancet 1997;350:764-6.
Haga Y, Funakoshi O, Kuroe K, et al. Absence of measles viral genomic
sequence in intestinal tissues from Crohn's disease by nested polymerase chain
reaction. Gut 1996;38:211-5.
Peltola H, Heinonen OP. Frequency of true adverse reactions to
measles-mumps-rubella vaccine. A double-blind placebo-controlled trial in
twins. Lancet 1986;1:939-42.
Nieminen U, Peltola H, Syrjala MT, Makipernaa A, Kekomaki R. Acute
thrombocytopenic purpura following measles, mumps and rubella vaccination. A
report on 23 patients. Acta Paediatr 1993;82:267-70.
Farrington P, Pugh S, Colville A, et al. A new method for active
surveillance of adverse events from diphtheria/tetanus/pertussis and
measles/mumps/rubella vaccines. Lancet 1995;345:567-9.
Bottiger M, Christenson B, Romanus V, Taranger J, Strandell
Swedish experience of two dose vaccination programme aiming at
eliminating measles, mumps, and rubella. Br Med J Clin Res Ed.
1987;295:1264-7.
Jonville-Bera A, Autret E, Galy-Eyraud C, Hessel L. Thrombocytopenic
purpura after measles, mumps and rubella vaccination: a retrospective survey
by the French regional pharmacovigilance centres and Pasteur-Merieux Serums et
Vaccins. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1996;15:44-8.
Beeler J, Varricchio F, Wise R. Thrombocytopenia after immunization with
measles vaccines: review of the vaccine adverse events reporting system (1990
to 1994). Pediatr Infect Dis J 1996;15:88-90.
Bayer WL, Sherman FE, Michaels RH, et al. Purpura in congenital and
acquired rubella. N Engl J Med 1965;273:1362-6.
Drachtman RA, Murphy S, Ettinger LJ, et al. Exacerbation of chronic
thrombocytopenic purpura following measles-mumps-rubella immunization. Arch
Pediatr Adolesc Med 1994;148:326-7.
Vlacha V, Forma EN, Miron D, Peter G. Recurrent thrombocytopenic purpura
after repeated measles-mumps-rubella vaccination. Pediatrics 1996;97:738-9.
Institute of Medicine. Measles and mumps vaccines. In: Stratton KR, Howe
CJ, Johnston RB, eds. Adverse events associated with childhood vaccines.
Evidence bearing on causality. Washington, DC: National Academy Press,
1994:130-5.
Black S, Shinefield H, Ray P, et al. Risk of hospitalization because of
aseptic meningitis after measles-mumps-rubella vaccination in one- to
two-year-old children: an analysis of the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD)
Project. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1997;16:500-3.
Miller E, Goldacre M, Pugh S, et al. Risk of aseptic meningitis after
measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine in UK children. Lancet 1993;341:979-95.
American Academy of Pediatrics. Measles. In: Peter G, ed. 1997 Red
Book--report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases. Elk Grove Village, IL:
American Academy of Pediatrics, 1997:344.
Alderslade R, Bellman MH, Rawson NSB, et al. The National Childhood
Encephalopathy Study: a report on 1000 cases of serious neurological disorders
in infants and young children from the NCES research team. In: Department of
Health and Social Security. Whooping cough: reports from the Committee on the
Safety of Medicines and the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization.
London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1981.
Landrigan PJ, Witte JJ. Neurologic disorders following live measles virus
vaccination. JAMA 1973;223:1459-62.
Kumar R, Kumar A, Dubey A, Misra PK. Encephalopathy associated with acute
measles. Ind J Pediatr 1989;56:349-54..
Weibel RE, Caserta V, Benor DE, Evans G. Acute encephalopathy followed by
permanent brain injury or death associated with further attenuated measles
vaccines: a review of claims submitted to the National Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program. Pediatrics 1998;101:383-7.
CDC. Adverse events following immunization. Atlanta: US Department of
Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, CDC, 1989. (Surveillance
Report no. 3, 1985-1986.)
Hughes R, Rees J, Smeeton N, Winer J. Vaccines and Guillain-Barre
syndrome. Lancet 1996;312:1475-6.
Silveira CM, Salisbury DM, de Quadros CA. Measles vaccination and
Guillain-Barre syndrome. Lancet 1997;349:14-6.
Rowlands DF, Freestone DS. Vaccination against rubella of susceptible
schoolgirls in Reading. J Hygiene 1971;69:579-86.
Freestone DS, Prydie J, Smith SG, Laurence G. Vaccination of adults with
Wistar RA 27/3 rubella vaccine. J Hygiene 1971;69:471-7.
Polk BF, Modlin JF, White JA, DeGirolami PC. A controlled comparison of
joint reactions among women receiving one of two rubella vaccines. Am J
Epidemiol 1982;115:19-25.
Schaffner W, Fleet WF, Kilroy AW, et al. Polyneuropathy following rubella
immunization: a follow-up and review of the problem. Am J Dis Child
1974;127:684-8.
Orenstein WA, Heseltine PN, LeGagnoux SJ, Portnoy B. Rubella vaccine and
susceptible hospital employees. Poor physician participation. JAMA
1981;245:711-3.
Slater PE, Ben-Zvi T, Fogel A, Ehrenfield M, Ever-Hadani S. Absence of an
association between rubella vaccination and arthritis in underimmune
postpartum women. Vaccine 1995;13:1529-32.
Frenkel LM, Nielsen K, Garakian A, Jin R, Wolinsky JS, Cherry JD. A search
for persistent rubella virus infection in persons with chronic symptoms after
rubella and rubella immunization and in patients with juvenile rheumatoid
arthritis. Clin Infect Dis 1996;22:287-94.
Ray P, Black S, Shinefield H. Risk of chronic arthropathy among women
after rubella vaccination. JAMA 1997;278:551-6.
Tingle AJ, Mitchell LA, Grace M, et al. Randomised double-blind
placebo-controlled study on adverse effects of rubella immunisation in
seronegative women. Lancet 1997;349:1277-81.
Starr S, Berkovich S. The effects of measles, gamma globulin modified
measles and vaccine measles on the tuberculin test. N Engl J Med
1964;270:386-91.
Brickman HF, Beardry PH, Marks Mi. The timing of tuberculin tests in
relation to immunization with live viral vaccines. Pediatrics 1975;55:392-6.
Berkovich S, Starr S. Effects of live type 1 poliovirus and other live
viruses on the tuberculin test. N Engl J Med 1966;274:67-72.
American Academy of Pediatrics. Appendix III. National Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program--Vaccine injury table. In: Peter G, ed. 1997 Red
Book--report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases. Elk Grove Village, IL:
American Academy of Pediatrics, 1997:681-8.
Preblud SR. Some issues relating to rubella vaccine. JAMA 1985;254:253-6.
Bart SW, Stetler HC, Preblud SR, et al. Fetal risk associated with rubella
vaccine: an update. Rev Infect Dis 1985;7(suppl):S95-102.
Buimovici-Klein E, Hite RL, Byrne T, Cooper LZ. Isolation of rubella virus
in milk after postpartum immunization. J Pediatr 1977;91:939-41.
Klein EB, Byrne T, Cooper LZ. Neonatal rubella in a breast-fed infant
after postpartum maternal infection. J Pediatr 1980;97:774-5.
Losonsky GA, Fishaut JM, Strussenberg J, Ogra PL. Effect of immunization
against rubella on lactation products. II. Maternal-neonatal interactions. J
Infect Dis 1982;145:661-6.
Weibel RE, Stokes J Jr, Buynak EB Jr, Hilleman MR. Live attenuated
mumps-virus vaccine. 3. Clinical and serologic aspects in a field evaluation.
N Engl J Med 1967;276:245-51.
Yamauchi T, Wilson C, Geme JW Jr. Transmission of live, attenuated mumps
virus to the human placenta. N Engl J Med 1974;290:710-2.
King GE, Markowitz LE, Heath J, et al. Antibody response to
measles-mumps-rubella vaccine of children with mild illness at the time of
vaccination. JAMA 1996;275:704-7.
Atkinson W, Markowitz L, Baughman A, et al. Serologic response to measles
vaccination among ill children {Abstract}. In: Program and abstracts of the
32nd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.
Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1992.
Fasano MB, Wood RA, Cooke SK, Sampson HA. Egg hypersensitivity and adverse
reactions to measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine. J Pediatr 1992;120:878-81.
Kemp A, Van Asperen P, Mukhi A. Measles immunization in children with
clinical reactions to egg protein. Am J Dis Child 1990;144:33-5.
James JM, Burks AW, Roberson PK, Sampson HA. Safe administration of
measles vaccine to children allergic to eggs. N Engl J Med 1995;332:1262-6.
American Academy of Pediatrics. Active immunization. In Peter G, ed. 1997
Red Book--report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases. Elk Grove Village,
IL: American Academy of Pediatrics, 1997:4-36.
Lavi S, Zimmermann B, Koren G, Gold R. Administration of measles, mumps,
and rubella virus vaccine (live) to egg-allergic children. JAMA
1990;263:269-71.
Greenberg MA, Birx DL. Safe administration of mumps-measles-rubella
vaccine in egg-allergic children. J Pediatr 1988;13:504-6.
Herman JJ, Radin R, Schneiderman R. Allergic reactions to measles (rubeola)
vaccine in patients hypersensitive to egg protein. J Pediatr 1983;102:196-9.
Stiehm ER. Skin testing prior to measles vaccination for egg-sensitive
patients {editorial}. Am J Dis Child 1990;144:32.
Kelso JM, Jones RT, Yunginger JW. Anaphylaxis to measles, mumps, and
rubella vaccine mediated by IgE to gelatin. J Allergy Infect Dis
1993;91:867-72.
Sakaguchi M, Ogura H, Inouye S. IgE antibody to gelatin in children with
immediate-type reactions to measles and mumps vaccines. J Allergy Infect Dis
1995;96:563-5.
Sakaguchi M, Nakayama T, Inouye S. Food allergy to gelatin in children
with systemic immediate-type reactions, including anaphylaxis, to vaccines. J
Allergy Infect Dis 1996;98:1058-61.
Siber GR, Werner BG, Halsey NA, et al. Interference of immune globulin
with measles and rubella immunization. Pediatrics 193;122:204-11.
American Academy of Pediatrics. Recommended timing of routine measles
immunization for children who have recently received immune globulin
preparations. Pediatrics 1994;93:682-5.
CDC. Measles pneumonitis following measles-mumps-rubella vaccination of a
patient with HIV infection, 1993. MMWR 1996;45(28):603-6.
Jenkerson SA, Beller M, Middaugh JP, Erdman DD. False positive rubeola IgM
tests {letter}. N Engl J Med 1995;332:1103-4.
Helfand RF, Kebede S, Alexander JP Jr, et al. Comparative detection of
measles-specific IgM in oral fluid and serum from children by an
antibody-capture IgM EIA. J Infect Dis 1996;173:1470-4.
CDC. Outbreak of measles among Christian Science students -- Missouri and
Illinois, 1994. MMWR 1994;43(25):463-5.
Hermann KL. Available rubella serologic tests. Rev Infect Dis
1985;7:S108-12.
Garner JS. Guideline for isolation precautions in hospitals. The Hospital
Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol
1996;17:53-80.
Cooper LZ, Preblud SR, Alford CA. Rubella. In: Remington JS, Klein JO,
eds. Infectious diseases of the fetus and newborn infant. Philadelphia: W. B.
Saunders, 1995:268-311.
American Academy of Pediatrics. Rubella. In: Peter G, ed. 1997 Red
Book--report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases. Elk Grove Village, IL:
American Academy of Pediatrics, 1997:456.
Facilities that provide care exclusively for elderly patients who are at
minimal risk for measles and rubella and complications of these diseases are
a possible exception.
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, Health Resources and
Services Administration, Parklawn Building, Room 8-05, 5600 Fishers Lane,
Rockville MD 20857, Telephone: (800) 338-2382 (24-hour recording). Internet
Home Page: "http://www.hrsa.dhhs.gov/ bhpr/vicp/new.htm." Persons wishing to
file a claim for vaccine injury should write to: U.S. Court of Federal
Claims, 717 Madison Place, NW, Washington DC 20005. Telephone: (202)
219-9657.
Table_1
To print large tables and graphs users may have to change their printer
settings to landscape and use a small font size.
TABLE 1. Acceptable presumptive evidence of immunity to measles, rubella, and mumps
============================================================================================================
Routine Persons who work in International Students at post-high
health-care travelers school educational
facilities* institutions
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measles (1) documentation of (1) documented (1) documented (1) documented
adequate administration of administration of administration of
vaccination+: - 2 doses of live 2 doses of live 2 doses of live
preschool-aged measles virus measles virus measles virus
children and adults vaccine+@,or vaccine+**,or vaccine+,or
not at high risk: 1 (2) laboratory (2) laboratory (2) laboratory
dose - school-aged evidence of evidence of evidence of
children (grades K- immunity,or immunity,or immunity,or
12): 2 doses&,or (3) born before (3) born before (3) born before
(2) laboratory 1957&,or 1957,or 1957,or
evidence of (4) documentation of (4) documentation of (4) documentation of
immunity,or physician-diagnosed physician-diagnosed physician-diagnosed
(3) born before measles measles measles
1957,or
(4) documentation of
physician-diagnosed
measles
Rubella (1) documented (1) documented (1) documented (1) documented
administration of one administration of one administration of one administration of one
dose of live rubella dose of live rubella dose of live rubella dose of live rubella
virus, virus vaccine+,or virus vaccine+,or virus vaccine+,or
vaccine+,or (2) laboratory (2) laboratory (2) laboratory
(2) laboratory evidence of evidence of immunity, evidence of
evidence of immunity,or or immunity,or
immunity,or (3) born before 1957 (3) born before 1957 (3) born before 1957
(3) born before 1957 (except women of (except women of (except women of
(except women of childbearing age who childbearing age who childbearing age who
childbearing age who could become could become could become
could become pregnant++) pregnant++) pregnant++)
pregnant++)
Mumps (1) documented (1) documented (1) documented (1) documented
administration of one administration of one administration of one administration of one
dose of live mumps dose of live mumps dose of live mumps dose of live mumps
virus vaccine+,or virus vaccine+ virus vaccine+ virus vaccine+
(2) laboratory (2) laboratory (2) laboratory (2) laboratory
evidence of evidence of evidence of evidence of
immunity,or immunity,or immunity,or immunity,or
(3) born before (3) born before (3) born before (3) born before
1957,or 1957,or 1957,or 1957,or
(4) documentation of (4) documentation of (4) documentation of (4) documentation of
physician-diagnosed physician-diagnosed physician-diagnosed physician-diagnosed
mumps mumps mumps mumps
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Health care workers include all persons (i. e., medical or nonmedical, paid or volunteer, full- or part-
time, student or nonstudent, with or without patient- care responsibilities) who
work in facilities that provide health care to patients (i. e., inpatient and outpatient, private and
public). Facilities that provide care exclusively for elderly patients who are at
minimal risk for measles and rubella and complications of these diseases are a possible exception.
+ The first dose should be administered on or after the first birthday; the second dose of measles-
containing vaccine should be administered no earlier than one month (i. e., minimum of 28 days) after
the first dose. Combined measles- mumps- rubella (MMR) vaccine generally should be used whenever any of
its component vaccines is indicated.
& May vary depending on current state or local requirements.
@ Health- care facilities should consider recommending a dose of MMR vaccine for unvaccinated workers
born before 1957 who are at risk for occupational exposure to measles and who do not have a history
of measles disease or laboratory evidence of measles immunity.
** Children aged 6- 11 months should receive a dose of monovalent measles vaccine (or MMR, if monovalent
vaccine is not available) before departure. Children who receive a dose of measles- containing
vaccine before their first birthdays should be revaccinated with two doses of MMR vaccine, the first
of which should be administered when the child is aged 12- 15 months (12 months if the child remains
in a high- risk area) and the second at least 28 days later.
++ Women of childbearing age are adolescent girls and premenopausal adult women. Because rubella can
occur in some persons born before 1957 and because congenital rubella and congenital rubella
syndrome can occur in the offspring of women infected with rubella virus during pregnancy, birth
before 1957 is not acceptable evidence of rubella immunity for women who could become pregnant.
============================================================================================================
Table_2
To print large tables and graphs users may have to change their printer
settings to landscape and use a small font size.
TABLE 2. Age-specific CD4+ T-lymphocye count and percent of total lymphocytes as criteria for severe immunosuppression in
persons infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
=============================================================================================================================
Age
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<12 mos 1-5 yrs 6-12 yrs>=13 yrs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total CD4+ T- <750/ uL <500/uL <200/uL <200/uL lymphocytes I OR OR OR OR OR <15% <15% <15% <14% CD4+ T-lymphocytes (as % of total lymphocytes) Sources: CDC. 1993 Revised classification system for HIV infection and expanded surveillance case definition for AIDS among adolescents and adults. MMWR 1992;41(RR-17):1-19. ( 125 ) CDC. 1994 Revised classification system for human immunodeficiency virus infection in children less than 13 years of age; official authorized addenda: human immunodeficiency virus infection codes and official guidelines for coding and reporting ICD-9-CM. MMWR 1994; 43(RR-12):1-19. ( 126 )="============================================================================================================================"
Table_3
To print large tables and graphs users may have to change their printer
settings to landscape and use a small font size.
TABLE 3. Suggested intervals between administration of immune globulin prep- arations for various
indications and vaccines containing live-measles virus *
=====================================================================================================
Indications Dose (mg IgG/kg) Interval
(mos) before
measles
vaccination
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tetanus prophylaxis (TIG) 250 units (10 mg IgG/kg) IM 3
Hepatitis A prophylaxis (IG) - 0.02 mL/kg (3.3 mg IgG/kg) IM 3
Contact prophylaxis - 0.06 mL/kg (10 mg IgG/kg) IM 3
International travel
Hepatitis B prophylaxis (HBIG) 0.06 mL/kg (10 mg IgG/kg) IM 3
Rabies prophylaxis (HRIG) 20 IU/kg (22 mg IgG/kg) IM 4
Varicella prophylaxis (VZIG) 125 units/10 kg (20-40 mg IgG/kg) IM 5
(maximum 625 units)
Measles prophylaxis (IG) - 0.25 mL/kg (40 mg IgG/kg) IM 5
Standard (i.e. nonimmuno- 0.50 mL/kg (80 mg IgG/kg) IM 6
compromised contact) -
Immunocompromised contact
Blood transfusion: - Red blood 10 mL/kg (negligible IgG/kg) IV 0
cells (RBCs), washed - RBCs, 10 mL/kg (10 mg IgG/kg) IV 3
adenine-saline added - Packed 10 mL/kg (60 mg IgG/kg) IV 6
RBCs (Hct 65%)+ - Whole blood 10 mL/kg (80-100 mg IgG/kg) IV 6
cells (Hct 35%-50%)+ - 10 mL/kg (160 mg IgG/kg) IV 7
Plasma/platelet products
Replacement therapy for immune 300-400 mg/kg IV (as IVIG) 8
deficiencies&
Respiratory syncytial virus 750 mg/kg IV (as RSV-IGIV) 9
prophylaxis
Immune thrombocytopenic 400 mg/kg IV (as IGIV) 8
purpura(ITP) 1000 mg/kg IV (as IGIV) 10
Kawasaki disease 2 g/kg IV (as IGIV) 11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This table is not intended for determining the correct indications and dosage for the use of
IG preparations. Unvaccinated persons may not be fully protected against measles during the
entire suggested time interval, and additional doses of immune globulin and/or measles
vaccine may be indicated after measles exposure. The concentration of measles antibody in
a particular immune globulin preparation can vary by lot. The rate of antibody clearance after
receipt of an immune globulin preparation can vary. The recommended intervals are extrapo-lated
from an estimated half life of 30 days for passively acquired antibody and an observed
interference with the immune response to measles vaccine for 5 months after a dose of 80 mg
IgG/kg. (See Mason W, Takahashi M, Schneider T. Persisting passively acquired measles
antibody following gamma globulin therapy for Kawaski disease and response to live virus
vaccination. In: Program and abstracts of the 32nd meeting of the Interscience Conference on
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy {Abstract} Los Angeles CA, October 1992.
+ Assumes a serum IgG concentration of 16 mg/mL.
& Measles vaccination is recommended for HIV-infected children aged 36 months who do not
have evidence of severe immunosuppression, but is contraindicated for patients who have
congenital disorders of the immune system (Table 2).
Abbreviations: HBIG=hepatitis B immune globulin; Hct=hematocrit; HRIG=human rabies
immune globulin; IG=serum immune globulin; IGIV=immunoglobulin, intravenous;
IM=intramuscular; IV=intravenous, RBCs=red blood cells; RSV-IGIV=respiratory syncytial virus
immune globulin, intravenous; TIG=tetanus immune globulin; VZIG=varicella zoster immune
globulin.
=====================================================================================================
All MMWR HTML versions of articles are electronic conversions
from ASCII text into HTML. This conversion may have resulted in character
translation or format errors in the HTML version. Users should not rely on this
HTML document, but are referred to the electronic PDF version and/or the
original MMWR paper copy for the official text, figures, and tables. An
original paper copy of this issue can be obtained from the Superintendent of
Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), Washington, DC 20402-9371;
telephone: (202) 512-1800. Contact GPO for current prices.
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.
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth."
-- Albert Einstein, letter to a friend, 1901
"I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William C. Jarvis, September 28, 1820
"What's the point of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from the unvaccinated?"
-- Sandy Gottstein
"Who gets to decide what the greater good is and how many will be sacrificed to it?"