Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T01:24:22.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Further studies with quadruple vaccine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

David S. Dane ,
Margaret Haire ,
George Dick ,
E. Moya Briggs  and
T. J. Connor
David S. Dane
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology, The Queen's University of Belfast, Northern Ireland
Margaret Haire
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology, The Queen's University of Belfast, Northern Ireland
George Dick
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology, The Queen's University of Belfast, Northern Ireland
E. Moya Briggs
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology, The Queen's University of Belfast, Northern Ireland
T. J. Connor
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology, The Queen's University of Belfast, Northern Ireland
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Reactions to the pertussis component of the original commercial batches of quadruple vaccine against poliomyelitis, diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (Quadrilin, Glaxo Laboratories) gave some cause for concern. Severe reactions were found to be more common in infants under 6 months of age than in older infants.

A modified quadruple vaccine, which has been used in N. Ireland since October 1964, was found to give rise to significantly fewer and milder reactions. This vaccine when given in three doses separated by intervals of 6–9 weeks and 6 months to fifty-eight infants most of whom were 6–7 months of age at the start of immunization was found to give a satisfactory immunological response.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 64 , Issue 4 , December 1966 , pp. 475 - 484
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

References

REFERENCES

Beale, A. J. & Mason, P. J. (1962). The measurement of the D-antigen in poliovirus preparations. J. Hyg., Camb. 60, 113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brindle, M. J. & Twyman, D. G. (1962). Allergic reactions to tetanus toxoid. A report of four cases. Br. med. J. i, 1116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dane, D. S., Dick, G. W. A., Briggs, E. M. & Nelson, R. (1961). Antibody to poliovirus in a well-immunised community. Lancet i, 1217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dane, D. S., Dick, G. W. A., Simpson, D. I. H., Briggs, E. M., McAlister, J., Nelson, R. & Field, C. M. B. (1962). New quadruple vaccine. Lancet i, 939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckmann, L. (1963). Tetanus: Prophylaxis and Therapy, p. 26. New York and London: Grune and Stratton Inc.Google Scholar
Eisen, A. H., Cohen, J. J. & Rose, B. (1963). Reaction to tetanus toxoid. Report of a case with immunologic studies. New Engl. J. Med. 269, 1408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, J. M. H. (1961). Illness after whooping cough vaccination. Med. Offr 106, 241.Google Scholar
Medical Research Council (1951). The prevention of whooping cough by vaccination. A Medical Research Council investigation. Br. med. J. i, 1463.Google Scholar
Ministry of Health (1961). Routine immunization against infectious diseases. Br. med. J. ii, 763.Google Scholar
Perkins, F. T. & Evans, D. G. (1959). British standard poliomyelitis antisera types 1, 2 and 3. Br. med. J. i, 1549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Report (1956). Vaccination against whooping cough. Relation between protection in children and results of laboratory tests. A report to the whooping cough immunization committee of the Medical Research Council. Br. med. J. ii, 454.Google Scholar
Report (1959). Vaccination against whooping cough. The final report to the whooping cough immunization committee of the Medical Research Council. Br. med. J. i, 994.Google Scholar