Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPeacock, SJ
dc.contributor.authorLimmathurotsakul, D
dc.contributor.authorLubell, Y
dc.contributor.authorKoh, GC
dc.contributor.authorWhite, LJ
dc.contributor.authorDay, NP
dc.contributor.authorTitball, RW
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-28T11:25:11Z
dc.date.issued2012-01
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Burkholderia pseudomallei is a Category B select agent and the cause of melioidosis. Research funding for vaccine development has largely considered protection within the biothreat context, but the resulting vaccines could be applicable to populations who are at risk of naturally acquired melioidosis. Here, we discuss target populations for vaccination, consider the cost-benefit of different vaccination strategies and review potential vaccine candidates. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Melioidosis is highly endemic in Thailand and northern Australia, where a biodefense vaccine might be adopted for public health purposes. A cost-effectiveness analysis model was developed, which showed that a vaccine could be a cost-effective intervention in Thailand, particularly if used in high-risk populations such as diabetics. Cost-effectiveness was observed in a model in which only partial immunity was assumed. The review systematically summarized all melioidosis vaccine candidates and studies in animal models that had evaluated their protectiveness. Possible candidates included live attenuated, whole cell killed, sub-unit, plasmid DNA and dendritic cell vaccines. Live attenuated vaccines were not considered favorably because of possible reversion to virulence and hypothetical risk of latent infection, while the other candidates need further development and evaluation. Melioidosis is acquired by skin inoculation, inhalation and ingestion, but routes of animal inoculation in most published studies to date do not reflect all of this. We found a lack of studies using diabetic models, which will be central to any evaluation of a melioidosis vaccine for natural infection since diabetes is the most important risk factor. CONCLUSION: Vaccines could represent one strand of a public health initiative to reduce the global incidence of melioidosis.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipThe study was funded by the Wellcome Trust.S.J.P. is supported by the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre. G.C.K.W.K. is supported by a Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Training Fellowship. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.en_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 6, e1488en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pntd.0001488
dc.identifier.otherPNTD-D-11-01030
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/24618
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherPublic Library of Scienceen_GB
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22303489en_GB
dc.rightsCopyright: 2012 Peacock et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.en_GB
dc.subjectAnimalsen_GB
dc.subjectAustraliaen_GB
dc.subjectBacterial Vaccinesen_GB
dc.subjectBiological Warfare Agentsen_GB
dc.subjectBioterrorismen_GB
dc.subjectBurkholderia pseudomalleien_GB
dc.subjectCost-Benefit Analysisen_GB
dc.subjectDisease Models, Animalen_GB
dc.subjectHumansen_GB
dc.subjectMelioidosisen_GB
dc.subjectPublic Healthen_GB
dc.subjectThailanden_GB
dc.titleMelioidosis vaccines: a systematic review and appraisal of the potential to exploit biodefense vaccines for public health purposesen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2016-11-28T11:25:11Z
exeter.place-of-publicationUnited Statesen_GB
dc.descriptionThis is the final version of the article. Available from the publisher via the DOI in this record.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalPLoS Neglected Tropical Diseasesen_GB
dc.identifier.pmcidPMC3269417
dc.identifier.pmid22303489


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record