Key result
Monovalent OPV 2 (mOPV2) was more immunogenic than trivalent OPV (76% vs 48% seroconversion; p<0.001), and adding IPV to OPV further improved immunological response.
Why the study?
Does mOPV2 or the addition of IPV to OPV improve immunological response and reduce viral shedding compared to tOPV alone in PV2-seronegative children?
RCT (n=265)
randomized
No
Does mOPV2 or the addition of IPV to OPV improve immunological response and reduce viral shedding compared to tOPV alone in PV2-seronegative children?
Absolute Event Rate: 76% vs 48%
p-value: p=< 0.001
mOPV2 is more immunogenic than tOPV alone, and adding IPV to OPV improves immunological response and reduces viral shedding, supporting WHO recommendations for cVDPV2 outbreak response.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports mOPV2 preference in type 2 outbreaks; confirms IPV addition enhances OPV immunogenicity.
Saleem et al. (2018) conducted an RCT in Poliovirus type 2 (n=265). Monovalent OPV 2 (mOPV2) vs. Trivalent OPV (tOPV) was evaluated on Seroconversion to PV2 (p=< 0.001). Monovalent OPV 2 (mOPV2) was more immunogenic than trivalent OPV (76% vs 48% seroconversion; p<0.001), and adding IPV to OPV further improved immunological response.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: