Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T15:32:03.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study of maternally derived measles antibody in infants born to naturally infected and vaccinated women

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

R. Brugha ,
M. Ramsay ,
T. Forsey  and
D. Brown
R. Brugha
Affiliation:
Immunisation Division, Public Health Laboratory Service (PHLS) Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ
M. Ramsay*
Affiliation:
Immunisation Division, Public Health Laboratory Service (PHLS) Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ
T. Forsey
Affiliation:
National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, Blanche Lane, South Mimms, Potters Bar, Hertfordshire EN6 3QG
D. Brown
Affiliation:
Virus Reference Division, PHLS Central Public Health Laboratory, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5HT
*
* Author for correspondence.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Maternal, cord and infant measles antibody levels were measured and compared in a group of 411 vaccinated mothers and 240 unvaccinated mothers, and their babies, between 1983 and 1991. Maternal and cord sera were tested by haemagglutination inhibition and/or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and plaque reduction neutralization tests were also used to test infant sera. Geometric mean litres were significantly higher in the unvaccinated than in the vaccinated mothers (P < 0·001). Infants born to mothers with a history of measles had higher antibody levels at birth than infants of vaccinated mothers and, although the difference narrowed over time, continued to have higher levels up to 30 weeks of age. Between 5 and 7 months of age significantly more of the children of vaccinated mothers had plaque reduction neutralization antibody levels below that which would interfere with vaccination. As the boosting effect of circulating natural measles disappears, earlier measles vaccination may need to be considered, perhaps as part of a two-dose policy.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 117 , Issue 3 , December 1996 , pp. 519 - 524
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

References

1.Black, FL, Berman, LL, Borgnono, JM et al. , Geographic variation in infant loss of maternal measles antibody and in prevalence of rubella antibody. Am J Epidemiol 1986; 124: 442–52.Google Scholar
2.Wilkins, J, Wehrle, PF. Evidence for the re-instatement of infants 12 to 14 months of age into routine measles immunization programs. Am J Dis Child 1978; 132: 164–6.Google Scholar
3.Albrecht, P, Ennis, FA, Saltzman, EJ, Krugman, S. Persistence of maternal antibody in infants beyond 12 months: Mechanism of vaccine failure. J Pediatr 1977; 91: 715–8.Google Scholar
4.Krugman, S, Giles, JP, Friedman, H, Stone, S. Studies on immunity to measles. J Pediatr 1965; 66: 471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.ACIP. Measles Prevention: Recommendations of the Immunization Practices Advisory Committee (ACIP). MMWR 1989; 38: S9 (1–18).Google Scholar
6.Guidelines for measles control in Canada. Canada Dis Wkly Rep 1991; 17: 35–9.Google Scholar
7.Department of Health. Immunisation against Infectious Disease. London: HMSO, 1992.Google Scholar
8.CDC. Recommended Childhood Immunization Schedule – United States, January 1995. MMWR 1995; 43: 959–60.Google Scholar
9.Lennon, JL, Black, FL. Maternally derived measles immunity in era of vaccine-protected mothers. J Pediatr 1986; 108: 671–6.Google Scholar
10.Pabst, HF, Donald, WS, Marysysk, RG, Carson, MM, Chui, LW-L, Joffres, MR, Grimsrud, KM. Reduced measles immunity in infants in a well-vaccinated population. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1992; 11: 525–9.Google Scholar
11.Yeager, AS, Harvey, B, Crosson, FJ, Davis, JH, Ross, LA, Halonen, PE. Need for measles revaccination in adolescents: Correlation with birth date prior to 1972. J Pediatr 1983; 102: 191–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Kakica, MA, Venezia, RA, Miller, J, Hughes, PA, Lepow, ML. Measles antibodies in women and infants in the vaccine era. J Med Virol 1995; 45: 227–9.Google Scholar
13.Jenks, PJ, Caul, EO, Roome, APCH. Maternally derived measles immunity in children of naturally infected and vaccinated mothers. Epidemiol Infect 1988; 101: 473–6.Google Scholar
14.Carson, MM, Spady, DW, Albrecht, P et al. , Measles vaccination of infants in a well-vaccinated population. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1995; 14: 17–22.Google Scholar
15.Ferson, MJ, Whybin, LR, Robertson, PW. Pilot study of measles immunity in infants aged four to six months. Commun Dis Intell 1995; 19: 30–1.Google Scholar
16.Kamat, M, Pyati, S, Pildes, RS et al. , Measles antibody litres in early infancy. Arch Pediatr Med 1994;: 694–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Chui, LWL, Maryusyk, RG, Pabst, HF. Measles virus specific antibody in infants in a highly vaccinated society. J Med Virol 1991; 33: 199–204.Google Scholar
18.Medical Research Council. Measles Vaccine Committee. Vaccination against measles: a clinical trial of live measles vaccine given alone and live measles vaccine preceded by killed vaccine. BMJ 1966; i: 441–6.Google Scholar
19.Cremer, NE, Cossen, CK, Shell, G, Diggs, J, Gallo, D, Schmidt, NJ. Enzyme immunoassay versus plaque neutralisation and other methods for determination of immune status to measles and varicella-zoster viruses and versus compliment fixation for serodiagnosis of infections with these viruses. J Clin Micro 1983; 21: 869–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Grist, NR, Ross, CA, Bell, EJ. Diagnostic methods in clinical virology. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1974.Google Scholar
21.Forsey, T, Heath, AB, Minor, PB. The 1st International Standard for anti-measles serum. Biologicals 1991; 19: 237–41.Google Scholar
22.Albrecht, P, Herrman, K, Burns, GR. Role of virus strain in conventional and enhanced measles plaque neutralisation test. J Virol Meth 1981; 3: 251–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Mann, GF, Allison, MC, Copeland, JA, Agostini, CFM, Zuckermann, AJ. A simplified plaque assay system for measles virus. J Biol Stand 1980; 8: 219–25.Google Scholar
24.Finney, DJ. Probit analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971.Google Scholar
25.Chen, RT, Markowitz, LE, Albrecht, P, Stewart, JA, Mofenson, LM, Preblud, SR, Orenstein, WA. Measles antibody: reevaluation of protective litres. J Infect Dis 1990; 162: 1036–42.Google Scholar
26.Burgess, W, Garelick, H, Mann, GF, Tomkins, A. Measurement of prevaccination antibody levels using a plaque inhibition assay to predict the optimum age for measles immunization: 12th International Congress for tropical medicine and malaria; abstract. Kager, PA, Polderman, AM, eds. Amsterdam: Exerpta medica 1988. (Excerpta Medica International Congress Series 810).Google Scholar
27.Wolynetz, MS. Maximum likelihood estimation in a liners model from confined and censored normal data. Appl Stat 1979; 28: 195–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Ramsay, M, Gay, N, Miller, E, Rush, M, White, J, Morgan-Capner, P, Brown, D. The epidemiology of measles in England and Wales: rationale for the 1994 national vaccination campaign. Commun Dis Rep 1994; 4: R141–6.Google Scholar
29.Markowitz, LE, Orenstein, WA. Measles vaccines. Pediatr Clin N Am 1990; 37: 603–25.Google Scholar
30.Christenson, B, Böttiger, M. Measles antibody: comparison of long-term vaccination litres, early vaccination litres and naturally acquired immunity to and booster effects on the measles virus. Vaccine 1994; 12: 129–33.Google Scholar
31.Shasby, DM, Shope, TC, Downs, H et al. , Epidemic measles in a highly vaccinated population. N Engl J Med 1977; 296: 585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Davis, RM, Whitman, ED, Orenstein, WA et al. , A persistent outbreak of measles despite appropriate control measures. Am J Epidemiol 1987; 126: 438.Google Scholar
33. Department of Health Statistics Division. 1995; Form SBL 607, 1966–86; Form KC51, 1987–94.Google Scholar
34.Miller, E. The new measles campaign. BMJ 1994; 309: 1102–3.Google Scholar