Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 25, 2026
Evaluation of Host-Pathogen Responses and Vaccine Efficacy in Mice
Published on: February 22, 2019
Protective Effect of Contemporary Pertussis Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
T Roice Fulton1,2, Varun K Phadke3, Walter A Orenstein4,5
1Department of Global Health.
Insights
This study found that currently available whole-cell (wP) pertussis vaccines show higher short-term effectiveness than acellular (aP) pertussis vaccines in young children. Both vaccine types offer protection against pertussis disease.
Area of Science:
- Immunology
- Vaccinology
- Public Health
Background:
- Acellular pertussis (aP) and whole-cell (wP) vaccines are presumed to have similar short-term efficacy (<3 years post-primary series).
- Many pertussis vaccine formulations originally studied are no longer available.
- An updated analysis of short-term pertussis vaccine protection using currently available formulations is needed.
Purpose of the Study:
- To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of pertussis vaccine efficacy and effectiveness.
- To evaluate short-term protection (<3 years) of currently available aP and wP vaccine formulations.
- To compare the protective effects of different pertussis vaccine types.
Main Methods:
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies on pertussis vaccine efficacy/effectiveness.
- Included studies evaluated vaccines within 3 years of primary series completion (>3 doses).
- Outcomes based on World Health Organization (WHO) clinical case definitions for pertussis; study quality assessed.
Main Results:
- Acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine efficacy: 84% (95% CI, 81%-87%) based on 2 studies (GSK 3-component, Sanofi-Pasteur 5-component).
- Whole-cell pertussis (wP) vaccine effectiveness: 94% (95% CI, 88%-97%) based on 3 studies (Behringwerke, Pasteur/Mérieux, SmithKline Beecham).
- Both analyses showed no statistical heterogeneity (I(2)=0%).
Conclusions:
- All contemporary aP and wP vaccine formulations provide protection against pertussis disease.
- The point estimate for short-term protection against WHO-defined pertussis was lower for available aP vaccines compared to wP vaccines in this meta-analysis.
- Findings highlight differences in short-term effectiveness among current pertussis vaccine formulations.
Background:
Acellular pertussis (aP) and whole-cell (wP) pertussis vaccines are presumed to have similar short-term (<3 years after completion of the primary series) efficacy. However, vaccine effect varies between individual pertussis vaccine formulations, and many originally studied formulations are now unavailable. An updated analysis of the short-term protective effect of pertussis vaccines limited to formulations currently on the market in developed countries is needed.
Methods:
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies that evaluated pertussis vaccine efficacy or effectiveness within 3 years after completion (>3 doses) of a primary series of a currently available aP or wP vaccine formulation. The primary outcome was based on the World Health Organization (WHO) clinical case definitions for pertussis. Study quality was assessed using the approach developed by the Child Health Epidemiology Research Group. We determined overall effect sizes using random-effects meta-analyses, stratified by vaccine (aP or wP) and study (efficacy or effectiveness) type.
Results:
Meta-analysis of 2 aP vaccine efficacy studies (assessing the 3-component GlaxoSmithKline and 5-component Sanofi-Pasteur formulations) yielded an overall aP vaccine efficacy of 84% (95% confidence interval [CI], 81%-87%). Meta-analysis of 3 wP vaccine effectiveness studies (assessing the Behringwerke, Pasteur/Mérieux, and SmithKline Beecham formulations) yielded an overall wP vaccine effectiveness of 94% (95% CI, 88%-97%) (bothI(2)= 0%).
Conclusions:
Although all contemporary aP and wP formulations protect against pertussis disease, in this meta-analysis the point estimate for short-term protective effect against WHO-defined pertussis in young children was lower for currently available aP vaccines than wP vaccines.
More Related Videos
06:32Protective Efficacy and Pulmonary Immune Response Following Subcutaneous and Intranasal BCG Administration in Mice
Published on: September 19, 2016
13:47Opsono-Adherence Assay to Evaluate Functional Antibodies in Vaccine Development Against Bacillus anthracis and Other Encapsulated Pathogens
Published on: May 19, 2020
Related Concept Videos
01:51Vaccinations
01:21Vaccines
01:30Cancer Vaccines
Cancer vaccines come in two categories: preventive (prophylactic) and treatment (active). Preventive vaccines, such as the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, protect against viruses that cause certain...
01:28Diphtheria
01:25Transmission-based Precautions II: Airborne and Protective Environment
Airborne precautions:
Use airborne precautions when treating patients known or suspected to have diseases that spread through the air—for example, tuberculosis or measles. These organisms are present in smaller droplets expelled by an infected person and...
01:28Antimicrobial Effectiveness