Infant Pertussis: What to Do Next?
E D I T O R I A L C O M M E N TA R Y
Infant Pertussis: What to Do Next?
C. Mary Healy1,2 and Carol J. Baker1,2,3
1Center for Vaccine Awareness and Research, Texas Children's Hospital; 2Departments of Pediatrics, and 3Molecular Virology and Microbiology, Baylor College of
Medicine, Houston, Texas
(See the Major Article by Skowronski et al, on pages 318–27.)
Received 5 October 2011; accepted 6 October 2011;
electronically published 8 December 2011.
Correspondence: C. Mary Healy, MD, Section of Infectious
Diseases/Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of
Medicine, 1102 Bates St, Ste 1120, Houston, TX 77030
().
Clinical Infectious Diseases 2012;54(3):328–30
Ó The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on
behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All
rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.
.
DOI: 10.1093/cid/cir846
deaths in the United States in the 21st
century.
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice (ACIP) of the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention addressed
this public health issue in 2006 by recommending cocooning of infants [9].
Cocooning is the targeted immunization
of postpartum women and all contacts of
their infants during the first year of life,
preferably before theirbirth or hospital
discharge. It had been estimated that, when
perfectly implemented, cocooning could
potentially reduce pertussis cases in infants
,3 months old by 70% [1]. The ACIP
recommendation was based on similar
proposals in other countries and concurred with the Global Pertussis Initiative
view that, notwithstanding the absence
of outcome and cost-effectiveness data,
cocooning was worth pursuing because
‘‘even protecting just some infants
would be considered a success’’ [1].
Implementation of cocooning has been
challenging. Logistic and reimbursement
issues have hampered hospital and
healthcare organizations from immunizing postpartum women with tetanus
and reduced diphtheria toxoids and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine. Reports
from the few programs implementing
Tdap for postpartum women indicate
that such programs require an intense
focus on parental education and must
either have longer than usual windows
of opportunity to administer Tdap to
328 d CID 2012:54 (1 February) d EDITORIAL COMMENTARY
parents (eg, when infants are admitted
to neonatal intensive care units), or innovative strategies with dedicated funding sources and provide vaccine without
reimbursement [10–13]. Financial constraints are major barriers to successful
cocooning.
In this issue of the Journal, Skowronski
et al [14] provide one of the first costeffectiveness evaluations of a parental
cocooning strategy applied to 2 Canadian
provinces, Quebec and British Columbia,
both currently experiencing record low
rates of pertussis. By use of provincespecific pertussis surveillance trends
from 1990 to 2010 and contemporary
infant pertussis illness rates, hospitalization data, and mortality data, coupled
with infant illness rates attributable to
parent exposure and vaccine-effectiveness
rates from the literature, they report that
immunization of new parents with Tdap
(ie, partial cocooning) is expensive and
resource intensive in areas where pertussis incidence is low. The number needed
to vaccinate exceeds 10 000 to prevent
1 infant hospitalization, 100 000 to
prevent 1 infant intensive care admission, and .1 million to prevent 1 infant
death. This epidemiologic construct
contradicts more optimistic outcome
estimates but provides useful data for
financially strapped public health agencies. The findings of Skowronski et al
[14] are not necessarily applicable to
areas experiencing high rates of endemic
The resurgence of pertussis during the
past 30 years, despite record high immunization rates in infants and children,
has led some to label pertussis as the most
poorly controlled vaccine-preventable
disease in the developed world. The
high incidence of pertussis disease in
infants too young to be immunized,
resulting in substantial morbidity and
mortality, is the driving force behind recent prevention strategies [1, 2]. As many
as 75% of pertussis-infected infants acquire the disease from a household contact, most often a parent [3–7]. The need
for effective preventive strategies was
emphasized during the widespread 2010
pertussis outbreak in California. More
persons were affected than had been in
any single year during the prior 6 decades; the outbreak resulted in an infection
rate of 435 cases per 100 000 population
in infants ,6 months old and 10 infant
deaths, all ,3 months of age [8]. Unfortunately, young infants have accounted for .90% of pertussis-related
Interference with antibody responses
to other recommended vaccines of
varying degrees was noted in all but one
study and sometimes persisted into the
second year of life [18–20]. Thus, although neonatal immunization is worthy of further investigation, the facts to
date appear to limit this approach.
Maternal immunization mimics nature’s gift of passive immunity to the
newborn infant. Theoretically, achieving
high maternal pertussis-specific immunoglobulin G would passively protect the
infant for the first few months of life.
Anecdotal data from the prevaccine period appear to support this concept [22].
Maternal immunization with whole-cell
pertussis vaccine late in pregnancy was
reported to be safe for mothers and infants
and resulted in high levels of pertussisspecific antibodies in infants. Contemporary studies confirm that active placental
transfer of naturally acquired and vaccineinduced pertussis-specific antibodies occurs, and durability of such passively
acquired antibody has been demonstrated
[23–28]. Despite concerns that high
concentrations of maternal antibodies
could interfere with the infant’s immune
response to active immunization with
DTaP vaccine, data suggest that naturally
acquired maternal pertussis-specific antibodies do not significantly interfere
with an infant’s immune response to active
immunization with acellular pertussis
vaccines [29]. Although phase 1 maternal
Tdap immunization studies are ongoing, these combined data suggest that
Tdap immunization in late pregnancy
should induce concentrations of maternal
pertussis-specific antibodies in the infant
that are high enough to protect against
pertussis through the period of highest
risk, and may be more cost-effective than
cocooning. In June 2011, ACIP recommended Tdap immunization in the third
or late in the second trimester of pregnancy in preference to cocooning, to
prevent pertussis-related mortality in
young infants [30]. It was noted that this
strategy should be combined with efforts
to cocoon the infant by immunizing as
many infant contacts as possible, because
passively acquired maternal antibodies
to pertussis were unlikely to persist
in protective concentrations beyond
3 months of age. Furthermore, maternal
immunization would probably have little impact on disease rates in preterm
infants in whom the risk of mortality (...truncated)