Study to evaluate prevalence of meningococcal carriage in teenagers

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Feasibility of, and methodological approaches to, a teenage evaluation of MenB vaccination and meningococcal carriage

  • IRAS ID

    212433

  • Contact name

    Adam Finn

  • Contact email

    adam.finn@bristol.ac.uk

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 3 months, 31 days

  • Research summary

    The Meningococcus group C (MenC) vaccine has greatly reduced this serious disease in the UK. But disease due to group B (MenB) still occurs. Most infected people do not get ill, but ‘carry’ the bacteria in their throats; teenagers carry these bacteria more commonly than other age groups. The MenC vaccine was successful largely because it stopped people carrying and spreading the bacteria producing a ‘herd effect’. A MenB vaccine has just been introduced for babies and policy-makers want to understand if it can also produce herd effects. The make-up of the MenB and MenC vaccines differs so the herd effects may not be the same. The only previous study looking at this was inconclusive and only looked at whether the bacteria were present or absent, not whether the quantity of bacteria had changed, and throat swabs were obtained infrequently.
    This study aims to provide an understanding of how we can best design vaccine studies investigating herd effects in future by looking at new sampling and testing techniques, more frequent sampling and the practicalities of conducting this kind of study in schools. We hope that the study may also provide some initial indications of whether the MenB vaccine is likely to affect carriage and transmission of meningococcus in teenagers.
    We will recruit Bristol students at participating 6th form centres, give each student two doses of MenB vaccine, and follow them up for about 6 months, asking them to give us a throat swab 3 times over the study and saliva samples once a week (during term time). We will describe the pattern of bacterial carriage and see if repeated saliva samples give us valuable results beyond those obtained from conventional, less frequent throat swabs. We will also ask the students to give us feedback on how the study was run.

  • REC name

    South West - Frenchay Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    16/SW/0269

  • Date of REC Opinion

    26 Sep 2016

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion