Key result
Hib conjugate vaccines prevent ~90% of meningitis and bacteremia cases, eliminating Hib disease in Finland.
Why the study?
Polysaccharide-protein conjugate vaccines against invasive Hib infections have been intensively studied in Finland since 1983 to assess immunogenicity, immunologic memory, and protective efficacy.
Do Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) conjugate vaccines prevent invasive Hib infections in young infants and children?
Do Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) conjugate vaccines prevent invasive Hib infections in young infants and children?
Effect estimate: 87-95% protective efficacy
Ten years of experience and large-scale vaccination with Hib conjugate vaccines in Finland demonstrated 87-95% efficacy and led to the elimination of Hib disease.
Supports Hib conjugate vaccination in infants; leaves open questions on long-term global durability and serotype replacement.
Polysaccharide-protein conjugate vaccines against invasive infections caused by Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) bacteria have been studied intensively in Finland since 1983. The vaccines were shown to be immunogenic in young infants and to induce immunologic memory. The protective efficacy against Hib meningitis and bacteremic infections was 87–95% after the primary immunization series in two consecutive efficacy trials. Hib conjugate vaccines also reduced oropharyngeal carriage of Hib bacteria among healthy children. Large scale vaccinations have led to elimination of Hib disease in Finland.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eskola et al. (1996) conducted a review in Invasive infections caused by Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) bacteria. Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) conjugate vaccines was evaluated on Hib meningitis and bacteremic infections (87-95% protective efficacy). Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) conjugate vaccines demonstrated 87-95% protective efficacy against Hib meningitis and bacteremic infections, leading to the elimination of Hib disease in Finland.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: