Vaccination
of Very Premature Infants
By
F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
The
number of infants born prematurely has been steadily increasing in
the United States. Very small and very premature infants are
now surviving in increasing numbers.
The
CDC has decided that in the majority of cases, infants born
prematurely, regardless of birth weight, should be vaccinated with
the same dose(s), at the same chronological age and according to the
same schedule and precautions as full-term infants and children.
D’Angio
et al of the Vaccine Research Unit at the University of Rochester
have reported that during the first six months of life, extremely
pre-term infants mount lower antibody responses to vaccines than term
infants.
Accordingly,
the risks and benefits of the ever increasing number of mandated
pediatric vaccines from birth to six months need to be carefully
re-examined for that specific group of infants.
------------------
When
it comes to information about vaccines and vaccination research, it
is becoming extremely difficult, even for professionals, to sort out
the facts.
On
March 6, 2007, a good friend in New Zealand who is well aware of my
interest in MMR vaccination sent me a report originally filed by
WMTW-TV Channel 8 in Auburn, Maine. The station is the ABC
affiliate covering the greater Portland, ME area, a gorgeous part of
New England, situated just three hours away by car from my home.
The
title of the news item was
“Vaccines
Safe For Preemies, Study Says –
MMR,
Chicken Pox Shots Work In Pre-Term Infants
Vaccines
for measles-mumps-rubella and or chicken pox are effective
in extremely preterm infants,
according to a new study .
The
rest of the news report read:
Pediatricians had assumed
they would work, even though preemies' immune systems may not be
fully developed.
"No one had formally
researched the subject," said study author Dr. Carl D'Angio of
the University of Rochester Medical Center. "I'm happy to
be able to reassure my colleagues and parents that it is OK."
The study included 16 full-term
and 16 extremely preterm infants born between May 2002 and May
2005.
It examined the antibody levels of the diseases before and after
vaccination. It was published in this month's issue of
Pediatrics.
The same number of infants in
each group reached a level considered protective.
"Now we can all breathe a
sigh of relief. We were right," D'Angio said.”
http://www.wmtw.com/health/11172803/detail.html
It
is entirely possible that an uninformed reader or young parent would
interpret the above jubilant report as proving that the MMR and
chickenpox vaccines were safe and effective in extremely preterm
infants, like those often seen on television with breathing tubes and
IV lines in incubators.
In
fact, the infants who participated in the investigational study –
all 32 of them - were healthy and 15 months old when they were
vaccinated.
Relative
to the safety statement, the infants were just seen twice, 3 to 6
weeks apart, and “safety” was
assessed “by parental recall of
vaccine-related adverse events and by active, prospective collection
of blood-draw-associated adverse events”.
It
should be noted that all MMR vaccine safety studies conducted by the
vaccine industry have been notoriously short. Only two studies
extended to eight weeks.
***
A
friend in Wales also sent me information about the same Rochester
University study that she had received via EurekAlert Science News
Service.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-03/uorm-mcp030207.php
The
tone of that news item was more restrained but its message was no
less decisive.
“MMR,
chicken pox vaccines work for preemies”
Vaccines for
measles-mumps-rubella and varicella, or chicken pox, are effective in
extremely preterm infants, even though preemies' immune systems are
not as developed as full-term babies. This confirms a long-held
assumption by pediatricians and neonatologists across the country.”
"The assumption has always
been that it would be OK, that very early babies would have enough
immunity, but no one had formally researched the subject," said
Carl D'Angio, M.D., associate professor of Pediatrics at the
University of Rochester Medical Center, and author of a paper on the
subject in Pediatrics this month. "I'm happy to be able to
reassure my colleagues and parents that it is OK."
The
Principal Investigator (PI) was again quoted as saying "Now we
can all breathe a sigh of relief. We were right,"
According
to the news report, the study was funded by the National Institute of
Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the National Center for Research
Resources of the National Institutes of Health.
***
The
Official Study Record
MMR
and Varicella Vaccine in Premature Infants
This
study has been completed.
|
Sponsored by:
|
University of Rochester
|
|
Information
provided by:
|
University of Rochester
|
|
ClinicalTrials.gov
Identifier:
|
NCT00156559
|
|
http://tinyurl.com/36v2l9
The
purpose of the study was listed as follows:
“This
research is designed to address the question, “Does the relative
deficit in vaccine immunogenicity in extremely premature infants
persist beyond the first 6 months of life?”
The
above question, as stated, suggests that administration of one or
several vaccines once, twice or three times to very small (< 1lb)
and very premature (<28 wk gestation) infants during the first six
months of life, does not provoke immune responses and therefore does
not protect from illness. In a literal sense, all the
administered antigens cannot be referred to as “immunizations”.
If
that is so, then a true re-evaluation of risks and benefits of
vaccinations administered in that population is in order and the
statement by some that infants without exception have the capacity to
respond to an enormous number of antigens
(1)
is invalid.
The
PI goes on to describe the purpose of the study as follows:
“We
propose to measure the immunogenicity of varicella and
mumps-measles-rubella vaccines in relatively healthy, 12-to-15
month-old children born at <29 weeks gestation, when compared to
full-term infants, as measured by the relevant viral serologies.”
In
fact the enrolled infants were not “relatively” healthy.
They had to be healthy.
Inclusion
Criteria:
Subjects
must meet all of the inclusion criteria to participate in this study.
|
1.
|
|
Premature infant <
29 weeks’ gestation at birth or term infant >/= 37 weeks’ gestation
at birth.
|
|
2.
|
|
Postnatal age < 16
months, 0 days.
|
|
3.
|
|
Has not yet received
MMR or varicella vaccines. (There are no restrictions on the
administration of other vaccines at the time of MMR/varicella
vaccination.)
|
|
4.
|
|
Parental permission.
|
|
5.
|
|
Agreement of primary
care pediatrician/ health care provider.
|
|
6.
|
|
Receives primary
pediatric care within an approximate 25-mile radius of the University
of Rochester.
|
|
7.
|
|
Healthy status at
enrollment.
|
Exclusion
Criteria:
|
1.
|
|
Known immunodeficiency.
|
|
2.
|
|
Systemic
corticosteroid therapy at the time of MMR/varicella vaccination.
|
|
3.
|
|
Requiring oxygen
therapy.
|
|
4.
|
|
Clinically significant
findings on review of medical history and physical exam determined by
the investigator or sub-investigator to be sufficient for exclusion.
|
|
5.
|
|
Any condition
determined by the investigator that would interfere with the evaluation
of the vaccine or be a potential health risk to the subject.
|
“Healthy
status at enrollment”
According
to the protocol “subjects will be approached at 9-12 months of age
for inclusion”. They included sixteen ex-very premature
infants had to be healthy, not only on the day they were vaccinated,
but actually three to six months earlier, when they were
registered.
In other words, when the study was being conducted, those infants
were the healthiest very small infants around Rochester, New York.
It
should be pointed out that pediatricians are constantly told that
they can and should vaccinate infants that are not in such pristine
condition. Obeying such directives, pediatricians insist on
vaccinating small preemies on oxygen and monitors, or who have colds
and sniffles, on or close to schedule. Some actually threaten
recalcitrant parents with referral to child protective agencies or
exclusion from the practice.
The
study
Study
start: January 2004; Study completion: December
2005
Last follow-up: May 2005; Data entry closure:
May 2005
Title:
MMR and Varicella Vaccine Responses in Extremely Premature Infants
“Phase:
IV
Population:
16 generally healthy premature infants born at < 29 weeks’
gestation, < 16 months old from the Rochester area 16 generally
healthy 37 weeks’ gestation,³full-term infants born at
< 16 months old from the Rochester area
Number
of Sites: University of Rochester
Study
Duration: 1.5 – 8.5 months
Description
of Agent or Intervention:
Subjects
will make 2 study visits. The first, at 15 months of age, will
coincide with a routine well child visit. Subjects will have 2
mL of blood drawn at the time of their routine, 15-month MMR,
varicella, and pneumococcal conjugate immunizations. At a
second study visit 4-6 weeks later, another 2 mL of blood will be
drawn.
Objectives:
Primary:
We propose to measure the immunogenicity of routinely administered
varicella and mumps-measles-rubella vaccines in relatively healthy,
12-to-15 month-old children born at <29 weeks gestation
(premature), when compared to that in full-term infants…
Safety
will be assessed by parental recall of vaccine-related adverse events
and by active, prospective collection of blood-draw-associated
adverse events.
Schematic
of Study Design:
Subjects
will be approached at 9-12 months of age for inclusion, and will
consent at this time or at Visit 1”
--------------
The
study was published in the March 2007 issue of PEDIATRICS.
(1)
A
Medline abstract is available at http://tinyurl.com/36bfne
RESULTS: Preterm children
had lower mumps and rubella geometric mean titers than did term
children before vaccine, and nearly all children were seronegative
for each of the 4 vaccine antigens before immunization.
Measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella geometric mean titers were
similar between groups after vaccine. All children were
seropositive for measles after vaccine, whereas 13 of 14 preterm and
11 of 13 term children were seropositive for mumps, 13 of 14 preterm
and 13 of 13 term children were seropositive for rubella, and 11 of
16 preterm and 9 of 15 term children were seropositive for varicella.
CONCLUSIONS: Preterm
children mounted antibody responses that were similar to those of
term children after measles-mumps-rubella and varicella vaccines at
15 months of age.
The
CDC has long recommended the administration of the first dose of MMR
and chickenpox vaccines at the age of one year and parents are
cajoled and coerced to comply. This study does not guarantee
that the risk taken by having 4 live attenuated virus vaccines
administered simultaneously to small children is warranted.
Indeed, as noted, even vaccination at 15 months of age did not result
in full protection against rubella, mumps and chicken pox.
It
is not clear why the investigators proposed to examine the
immunogenic response between 12 and 15 months but actually waited to
vaccinate the children until they were 15 to 16 months old.
This is certain to raise questions.
The
timing of the vaccinations brings out another indirectly related but
yet very important point.
According
to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the “routine” pediatric
visit at which the MMR and chickenpox (and other) vaccines are
administered should be scheduled at the age of twelve months.
Why then was that “routine visit” actually “scheduled” at age
15 months in Rochester, the site of a major vaccine center?
--------------
The
Principal Investigator is a member of the Department of Pediatrics at
the University of Rochester. He is presently finishing a
similar study on the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine and is in the
process of studying the influenza vaccine. All 32 infants in
this study also received a dose of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine at
the age of 15 months.
The University of Rochester’s Vaccine
Research Unit is renowned.
“The vaccine research effort
at the University of Rochester Medical Center brings together a rare
combination of resources that covers the gamut from basic research,
to vaccine testing, to improving and measuring the availability of
vaccines to people who need them most…. All vaccines depend
on our knowledge of the basic workings of the immune system…
More recently, research done
more than a decade ago by a trio of University virologists has become
crucial to two promising vaccines designed to prevent cervical
cancer. A vaccine to prevent this type of cancer, which kills
more than 250,000 women around the globe every year, is expected to
become available within a year, thanks in large part to technology
developed at the University. The vaccine targets a group of
viruses known as human papillomaviruses (HPV), which cause cervical
cancer.
On the applied side, the
University’s Vaccine and Treatment Evaluation Unit has had a hand
in testing dozens of new vaccine candidates, including nearly every
new vaccine to be approved in the last three decades. The unit
is part of a network that the Federal government turns to for
protecting the nation against infectious threats…
Just as important as creating
or testing the vaccines, is getting them to the people who need them
most. Here again, University doctors are part of virtually
every large national network created to monitor the effectiveness of
vaccines. The Rochester community finds itself one of the best
vaccinated and best monitored in the world, and researchers worldwide
have a grasp on just how well vaccines work, thanks to research by
Rochester doctors.”
http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/pr/current_research/bird_flu/research.cfm
Funding
for vaccine research at the University of Rochester Medical Center is
provided by the National Institutes of Health and has almost doubled
in five years (see graph).
NIH
Funding Continues to Grow at URMC
For
parents in the autism community, the University of Rochester will
always be remembered as the place that produced the Pichichero
Thimerosal study. (2)
Most
of us are still scratching our heads about that study’s
methodology and conclusions.
More
recently, the University of Rochester Vaccine Research Unit offered
to the world (and Merck coffers) the gift of the Human Papilloma
Virus (HPV) vaccine.
See
“How Cow Warts, Clergy Sex Surveys Moved Along Cancer Vaccine” at
http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/pr/current_research/Cervical_Cancer_Vaccine/
“The creation of a successful
vaccine against cervical cancer, approved today by the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration, is the culmination of research that occurred
thanks not only to scientists and physicians, but also to generous
farmers and veterinarians, priests and nuns willing to tell all –
and some very patient cows”(Thursday June 8, 2006)
On
Tuesday February 8, 2007, the University of Rochester Medical Center
published “Preventing V.D. as Valentine’s Day Approaches”.
It
started:
“With Valentine’s Day just
around the corner, the world’s largest study of a vaccine to
protect against genital herpes – a disease that infects
approximately one of every four women and men in the nation – takes
on special significance for Rochester-area women and their male
companions.
Doctors and nurses are
recruiting women in the Rochester area who don’t have genital
herpes to help test a vaccine against the sexually transmitted
disease. So far, 237 women locally have joined the study,
making Rochester one of the lead sites nationally. But more
female participants ages 18 to 30 are needed to effectively test the
vaccine.”
The
statement ended “Men are not part of the study because previous
studies have shown that the vaccine does not work in men.”
That
alone may have ruined the Valentine's Day in Rochester.
http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/pr/news/story.cfm?id=1365
Discussion
All
clinical trials of pediatric vaccines only enroll
healthy infants and children and everyone makes certain that the
infant or child is healthy at the time the vaccine is administered.
There
are no studies where sick or “slightly sick” infants are
vaccinated.
It
is therefore strange that pediatricians are asked to vaccinate less
than perfectly healthy infants and even stranger that they insist to
do so.
In
the recent Rochester study, the 16 ex-small preemies and the 16
normal infants used as controls received the MMR and chickenpox
vaccines at the age of 15 months. In real life, the CDC
recommends that these two vaccines be administered at 12 months of
age when the ex-preemies are often more vulnerable.
“In the majority of cases,
infants born prematurely, regardless of birth weight, should be
vaccinated at the same chronological age and according to the same
schedule and precautions as full-term infants and children.
Birth weight and size are not factors in deciding whether to postpone
routine vaccination of a clinically stable premature infant, except
for hepatitis B vaccine. The full recommended dose of each
vaccine should be used. Divided or reduced doses are not
recommended” (3)
In
the case of live virus vaccines such as MMR, a follow-up period of 3
to 6 weeks is not long enough to evaluate safety.
One
can only wonder why small very premature infants need the rubella,
the mumps and the chickenpox vaccines at the age of twelve months.
Conclusions
The
single most important conclusion that anyone can draw from
“Measles-mumps-rubella and varicella vaccine responses in extremely
preterm infants” is that extremely premature infants have a
relative deficit in vaccine immunogenicity until the age of 6 months.
The
issues that have been identified in this report will tend to
compromise the significance of the study findings and their relevance
to pediatric practice.
Footnote:
“The
Rochester community finds itself one of the best vaccinated and best
monitored in the world…”
http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/pr/current_research/bird_flu/research.cfm
The
United States Congress passed the Children's
Health Act of 2000 and mandated
the establishment of centers of excellence in autism research. In
response, the Institutes of the NIH
Autism Coordinating Committee
have
implemented the STAART (Studies to Advance Autism Research and
Treatment) network program.
One
of the eight US Autism Research Centers of Excellence is located at
the University of Rochester. Patricia Rodier, Ph.D., is the
Director of the Center and Susan Hyman, M.D., FAAP is the
Co-director.
According
to Dr. Hyman, about 50% of Rochester area families with preschool
children on the autistic spectrum use a gluten free and casein free
diet. http://www.nimh.nih.gov/autismiacc/rochesterautism.cfm
References:
|
1.
|
|
D'Angio CT, Boohene PA, Mowrer A,
Audet S,
Menegus MA, Schmid DS, Beeler JA. Measles-mumps-rubella and varicella vaccine responses in
extremely preterm infants. Pediatrics. 2007 Mar;119(3):e574-9
|
|
2.
|
|
Pichichero ME, Cernichiari E, Lopreiato J, Treanor J. Mercury concentrations and metabolism in infants
receiving vaccines containing thiomersal: a descriptive study. Lancet. 2002 Nov 30;360(9347):1737-41.
|
|
3.
|
|
Atkinson WL et al
General Recommendations on Immunization CDC - MMWR February 8,
2002 / 51(RR02);1-36
|
F.
Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
Falmouth,
Massachusetts
©
2007