Randomised Vaccine Trial of Single Dose of Killed Leishmania Major Plus Bcg Against Anthroponotic Cutaneous Leishmaniasis in Bam, Iran Publisher Pubmed



Sharifi I¹ ; Fekri AR¹ ; Aflatonian MR² ; Khamesipour A³ ; Nadim A⁴ ; Ahmadi Mousavi MR¹ ; Momeni AZ⁵ ; Dowlati Y³ ; Godal T⁶ ; Zicker F⁶ ; Smith PG⁷ ; Modabber F^{6, 8} Show Affiliations
Source: Lancet Published:1998

Abstract

Background. A vaccine consisting of a single dose of whole-cell autoclave-killed Leishmania major (ALM) mixed with BCG was assessed in comparison with BCG alone against anthroponotic (human to human transmission) cutaneous leishmaniasis in a randomised double-blind trial in Bam, Iran. Methods. 3637 schoolchildren, aged 6-15 years, with no history of cutaneous leishmaniasis and no response to a leishmanin skin test, were randomly assigned to receive 1 mg ALM mixed with BCG (n = 1839), or BCG alone (n = 1798). Safety of the vaccine and the incidence of confirmed cases of cutaneous leishmaniasis were followed up for 2 years. Findings. Side-effects were those usually associated with BCG vaccination, but tended to persist longer in the ALM+BCG group. After exclusion of four cases occurring within 80 days of vaccination (one in the ALM+BCG group and three in the BCG group), the 2-year incidence of cutaneous leishmaniasis did not differ significantly between vaccine and BCG groups: 2.8% vs 3.3%, respectively (total cases 112). A sex-stratified analysis showed that in boys the vaccine conferred a protective efficacy of 18% and 78% for the first and second years, respectively - a crude 2-year overall protection of 55% (95% CI 19-75%, p < 0.01). In the first 9 months after vaccination, there was a non-significant excess of cases in the ALM+BCG group (25 vs 16), whereas the incidence of cutaneous leishmaniasis thereafter was significantly reduced in the ALM+BCG group (27 vs 44, p < 0.05). Interpretation. A single dose of ALM+BCG was safe and more immunogenic than BCG alone, as measured by leishmanin skin test. The exact reason for the apparent protective effect of the vaccine in boys is unknown, and may be a chance finding. However, since boys are more exposed to the infection, which is indicated by higher disease prevalence in boys in this study population, the preferential protective effect in boys may have resulted from a greater booster effect produced by repeated exposure to infected sandflies. Booster injections or alternative adjuvants should be tried to improve the potential efficacy of this vaccine.