↓ Skip to main content

The effect of azithromycin on the immunogenicity of oral poliovirus vaccine: a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial in seronegative Indian infants

Overview of attention for article published in Lancet Infectious Diseases, May 2016
Altmetric Badge
19

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
19 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effect of azithromycin on the immunogenicity of oral poliovirus vaccine: a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial in seronegative Indian infants
Published in
Lancet Infectious Diseases, May 2016
DOI 10.1016/s1473-3099(16)30023-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas C Grassly, Ira Praharaj, Sudhir Babji, Saravanakumar Puthupalayam Kaliappan, Sidhartha Giri, Srinivasan Venugopal, Edward P K Parker, Asha Abraham, Jayaprakash Muliyil, Sridhar Doss, Uma Raman, Jie Liu, John Victor Peter, Meghana Paranjape, Shalini Jeyapaul, Shailaja Balakumar, Jeniffer Ravikumar, Rajan Srinivasan, Sunil Bahl, Miren Iturriza-Gómara, Holm H Uhlig, Eric R Houpt, Jacob John, Gagandeep Kang

Abstract

Oral poliovirus vaccine is less immunogenic and effective in low-income countries than in high-income countries, similarly to other oral vaccines. The high prevalence of intestinal pathogens and associated environmental enteropathy has been proposed to explain this problem. Because administration of an antibiotic has the potential to resolve environmental enteropathy and clear bacterial pathogens, we aimed to assess whether antibiotics would improve oral poliovirus vaccine immunogenicity. We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of the effect of azithromycin on the immunogenicity of serotype-3 monovalent oral poliovirus vaccine given to healthy infants living in 14 blocks of Vellore district, India. Infants were eligible to participate if they were 6-11 months old, available for the study duration, and lacked serum neutralising antibodies to serotype-3 poliovirus. Infants were randomly assigned (1:1) at enrolment to receive oral 10 mg/kg azithromycin or placebo once daily for 3 days, followed by serotype-3 monovalent oral poliovirus vaccine on day 14. The primary outcome was detection of serum neutralising antibodies to serotype-3 poliovirus at a dilution of one in eight or more on day 35 and was assessed in the per-protocol population (ie, all those who received azithromycin or placebo, oral poliovirus vaccine, and provided a blood sample according to the study protocol). Safety outcomes were assessed in all infants enrolled in the study. The trial is registered with the Clinical Trials Registry India, number CTRI/2014/05/004588. Between Aug 5, 2014, and March 21, 2015, 754 infants were randomly assigned: 376 to receive azithromycin and 378 to placebo. Of these, 348 (93%) of 376 in the azithromycin group and 357 (94%) of 378 infants in the placebo group completed the study per protocol. In the azithromycin group, 175 (50%) seroconverted to serotype-3 poliovirus compared with 192 (54%) in the placebo group (risk ratio 0·94, 95% CI 0·81-1·08; p=0·366). Azithromycin reduced faecal biomarkers of environmental enteropathy (calprotectin, myeloperoxidase, α1-antitrypsin) and the prevalence of bacterial but not viral or eukaryotic pathogens. Viral pathogens were associated with lower seroconversion. Three serious adverse events were reported (two in the azithromycin group and one in the placebo group), but none was considered related to the study interventions. Azithromycin did not improve the immunogenicity of oral poliovirus vaccine despite reducing biomarkers of environmental enteropathy and the prevalence of pathogenic intestinal bacteria. Viral interference and innate antiviral immune mechanisms might be more important determinants of the immunogenicity of live-virus oral vaccines. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 113 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 17%
Student > Master 19 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Professor 6 5%
Other 20 18%
Unknown 26 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 25%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 5%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 34 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 July 2016.
All research outputs
#1,965,579
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Lancet Infectious Diseases
#2,193
of 6,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,553
of 312,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lancet Infectious Diseases
#49
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,038 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 92.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,449 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.