Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
  • Listen to CMAJ podcasts
Commentary

Reining in the “100-day cough”: unfinished business

Nicole Le Saux and Ian Gemmill
CMAJ November 01, 2016 188 (16) 1135-1136; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.161048
Nicole Le Saux
Faculty of Medicine (Le Saux), University of Ottawa; Division of Infectious Diseases (Le Saux), Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ont.; Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox & Addington Public Health (Gemmill), Kingston, Ont.
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
Ian Gemmill
Faculty of Medicine (Le Saux), University of Ottawa; Division of Infectious Diseases (Le Saux), Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ont.; Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox & Addington Public Health (Gemmill), Kingston, Ont.
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Although rare today, a shocking 1374 deaths due to pertussis occurred in Canada in 1923.1 Vaccination played a pivotal role in decreasing cases of pertussis. The adverse-event profile of the whole-cell vaccine prompted a switch to the acellular vaccine in the late 1990s. Although still cyclical, the incidence of pertussis in children declined overall within a few years.2 In the early 2000s, an increase in cases among teenagers prompted the recommendation for a booster dose in adolescents and, subsequently, in adults. However, the findings of a linked research paper show that there has been an increase in both outbreaks and sporadic disease, despite good vaccine coverage in Canada and globally.3,4

In their study, Schwartz and colleagues4 used linked databases from the public health laboratory and population-based health administrative data in Ontario to determine vaccine effectiveness over time. The adjusted vaccine effectiveness was 80% (95% confidence interval [CI] 71%–86%) at 15–364 days, 84% (95% CI 77%–89%) at one to three years, 62% (95% CI 42%–75%) at four to seven years and 41% (95% CI 0%–66%) at eight or more years since last vaccination.4 Their results yielded good news (the acellular vaccine works) and bad (the effectiveness does not last forever).

The group then exploited the presence of the two cohorts (pertussis positive and pertussis negative) to create a case–control study and compared those who had been “primed” or not with whole-cell vaccine. People who received only the acellular vaccine had a 2.2 times higher odds of pertussis than those primed with three doses of whole-cell pertussis vaccine, and a 1.82 times higher odds than those who had at least one priming dose of a whole-cell vaccine. This suggests that even one prior dose of whole-cell vaccine conferred added protection.

After seeing success in decreasing disease, why are we witnessing a resurgence of pertussis that has apparently accelerated in a cohort that received only the acellular vaccine? This phenomenon is not completely understood, but these epidemiologic studies are critical in understanding the biology of prevention. Other factors, such as increased reporting and the discovery of pertactin-negative pertussis strains (or other genetic variants), could also be operating, but they appear to be of less importance currently.

At the heart of the issue is the current pertussis vaccine. Both the acellular and whole-cell vaccines in human and animal models induce high, protective antibody titers to pertussis toxins and therefore confer protection against disease, at least in the short term.5 However, the antibody decay may be faster with the acellular vaccine than was seen with the whole-cell vaccine. Using epidemiologic modelling of disease incidence in the United States, investigators were able to show that even a small decrease in efficacy and duration of protection with the acellular vaccine compared with the whole-cell vaccine could account for the increased incidence of pertussis and the curious shifts in high incidence from adolescents to preadolescents in the last decade.6 If waning immunity is the only issue, why does the current study find incremental increases in incidence, even after adolescent doses were added? Why does having at least one dose of whole-cell vaccine add a protective effect to a series of acellular vaccine?7

New research into the cellular arm of the immune response has provided insights into the biology of pertussis that may help to explain the findings of Schwartz and colleagues. Detailed immunologic studies using an animal model have provided contemporary information concerning the cellular immune responses to vaccines and natural pertussis disease. The data from a baboon pertussis model indicate that, although acellular vaccines induce primarily a T helper cell (Th) 2 or mixed Th2/Th1 response, whole-cell vaccination induced a strong, more persistent Th1 response.8 Smits and colleagues9 showed that a higher proportion of children (88%) aged nine to twelve years who had received priming with the whole-cell vaccine had a broader cytokine and T-cell proliferative response than children primed with the acellular vaccine, suggesting that the difference in later immune response was qualitative rather than quantitative. Thus, these and other data support the premise that infant priming with whole-cell vaccination may produce longer-lasting immunity, and may explain the higher odds of clinical pertussis in people who did not receive the whole-cell vaccine in this study.

Why is there continued transmission despite more booster doses? One of the truisms of infectious diseases epidemiology is that, for infection to persist in populations, transmission to susceptible individuals must occur at sufficiently high numbers. Substantial herd immunity, however, is impossible to achieve if colonization persists despite vaccination. Using this premise, the animal model noted that neither vaccine completely prevented the Bordetella pertussis from colonizing the upper airway (though carriage was shorter with whole-cell vaccination).8 Despite having antibodies, these colonized animals were able to transmit B. pertussis and cause disease to naive, susceptible animals. Why was this? Studies of the cellular immune response showed that natural pertussis disease produced a newly described Th17 response, felt to be critical to the induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of bacterial colonization. Neither the acellular nor whole-cell vaccines, however, was able to elicit a Th17 response.8,10 These early findings may provide us with tantalizing information about why current vaccines are effective at preventing disease in people who are vaccinated but in whom bacteria are still allowed to persist and, potentially, transmit to others who are susceptible owing to age or low antibody levels. Thus, although prior focus has been mainly on humoral immune responses, characterizing the more complex cellular immune responses to vaccines and natural disease may pave the way to the development of newer pertussis vaccines.11

What can public health do currently to tame the stubborn cough and to protect infants from exposure? Given that we know that the current vaccine works, the first step assuredly lies in timely, complete vaccine coverage in all age groups. However, until newer vaccines with a longer duration of protection and the ability to create mucosal immunity are available, a rethinking of the optimal use of the current pertussis vaccine is needed. Perhaps a booster at ten years of age should be recommended to reduce the incidence among preadolescents, or perhaps regular boosting throughout life is needed. We don’t yet have a clear answer.

The new business plan will require engagement of immunologists and epidemiologists with the practical, steady hand of public health to succeed. This study is a great start.

Key points
  • After seeing a decrease in pertussis, we are now witnessing a resurgence of the disease despite good vaccine coverage in Canada and globally; this may be due to effectiveness of the acellular vaccine waning over time.

  • Even a small decrease in efficacy and duration of protection with the acellular vaccine compared with the whole-cell vaccine could account for the increased incidence of pertussis in particular age groups in the last decade.

  • The pertussis vaccination schedule needs careful reconsideration given emerging evidence.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None declared.

  • This article was solicited and has not been peer reviewed.

  • See also www.cmaj.ca/lookup/doi/10.1503/cmaj.160193

  • Contributors: Both authors wrote the commentary, gave final approval of the version to be published and agreed to act as guarantors of the work.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Varughese P
    . Incidence of pertussis in Canada. CMAJ 1985;132:1041–2.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Bettinger JA,
    2. Halperin SA,
    3. De Serres G,
    4. et al
    . The effect of changing from whole-cell to acellular pertussis vaccine on the epidemiology of hospitalized children with pertussis in Canada. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2007;26:31–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Tan T,
    2. Dalby T,
    3. Forsyth K,
    4. et al
    . Pertussis across the globe: recent epidemiologic trends from 2000 to 2013. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2015;34:e222–32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Schwartz K,
    2. Kwong J,
    3. Deeks SL,
    4. et al
    . Effectiveness of pertussis vaccination and duration of immunity. CMAJ 2016 Sept. 26 [Epub ahead of print].
  5. ↵
    1. Edwards KM,
    2. Meade BD,
    3. Decker MD,
    4. et al
    . Comparison of 13 acellular pertussis vaccines: overview and serologic response. Pediatrics 1995;96:548–57.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Gambhir M,
    2. Clark TA,
    3. Cauchemez S,
    4. et al
    . A change in vaccine efficacy and duration of protection explains recent rises in pertussis incidence in the United States. PLoS Comput Biol 2015;11:e1004138.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Klein NP,
    2. Bartlett J,
    3. Fireman B,
    4. et al
    . Comparative effectiveness of acellular versus whole-cell pertussis vaccines in teenagers. Pediatrics 2013;131:e1716–22.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Warfel JM,
    2. Zimmerman LI,
    3. Merkel TJ
    . Acellular pertussis vaccines protect against disease but fail to prevent infection and transmission in a nonhuman primate model. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014;111:787–92.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Smits K,
    2. Pottier G,
    3. Smet J,
    4. et al
    . Different T cell memory in preadolescents after whole-cell or acellular pertussis vaccination. Vaccine 2013;32:111–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Kolls JK,
    2. Khader SA
    . The role of Th17 cytokines in primary mucosal immunity. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev 2010;21:443–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Locht C,
    2. Mielcarek N
    . Live attenuated vaccines against pertussis. Expert Rev Vaccines 2014;13:1147–58.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 188 (16)
CMAJ
Vol. 188, Issue 16
1 Nov 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Reining in the “100-day cough”: unfinished business
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Reining in the “100-day cough”: unfinished business
Nicole Le Saux, Ian Gemmill
CMAJ Nov 2016, 188 (16) 1135-1136; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.161048

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Reining in the “100-day cough”: unfinished business
Nicole Le Saux, Ian Gemmill
CMAJ Nov 2016, 188 (16) 1135-1136; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.161048
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Highlights
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • How can Canada’s health systems improve care for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease?
  • Minimally invasive procedures in gender-affirming care: the case for public funding across Canada
  • Time for Canada to align with global innovations in treatment for tuberculosis
Show more Commentary

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Epidemiology & epidemiological methods
    • Infectious diseases
    • Pediatrics
    • Vaccination

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: [email protected]

CMA Civility, Accessibility, Privacy

 

Powered by HighWire