Shared evidence, different recommendations: a comparative analysis of Qdenga (TAK-003) dengue vaccine guidance for travellers across countries.

IF 5.5 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Sarah L McGuinness, Dipti Patel, Helena H Askling, Camilla Rothe, Steven Schofield, Robert Steffen, Leo G Visser, Lin H Chen
{"title":"Shared evidence, different recommendations: a comparative analysis of Qdenga (TAK-003) dengue vaccine guidance for travellers across countries.","authors":"Sarah L McGuinness, Dipti Patel, Helena H Askling, Camilla Rothe, Steven Schofield, Robert Steffen, Leo G Visser, Lin H Chen","doi":"10.1093/jtm/taag065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Dengue is an increasingly important cause of illness in travellers, and Qdenga (TAK-003) is the first dengue vaccine incorporated into guidance for travellers in multiple countries. However, clinicians and travellers may encounter differing recommendations across jurisdictions. This study compared guidance on the use of Qdenga in travellers across countries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a comparative analysis of national guidance on Qdenga use for travellers across countries, using survey data and structured review of publicly available recommendations. Guidance was synthesized according to dengue immune status and mapped across recurring decision domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Survey responses were obtained from 18 advisory bodies across 17 countries between March and April 2026, including 12 non-endemic countries where Qdenga was licensed and guidance published. Guidance was generally more restrictive than regulatory authorization. While there was broad agreement in recommending vaccination for travellers with laboratory-confirmed prior dengue infection, recommendations for those without documented infection varied widely. All advisory bodies considered destination-specific dengue risk but differed in whether and how they used travel duration, repeated or cumulative exposure, traveller characteristics and host susceptibility factors to determine vaccine eligibility. Some recommendations restricted vaccination to travellers with prior dengue infection, whereas others extended eligibility to selected travellers without documented prior infection or recommended vaccination based on exposure risk, irrespective of serostatus. Approaches also differed in assessment of prior dengue infection and whether completion of the two-dose series before travel was required.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Variation in Qdenga guidance reflects differences in how advisory bodies interpret shared evidence and manage uncertainty arising from data gaps and differences between trial populations and travellers. Additional data on vaccine effectiveness and clinical outcomes among seronegative travellers and older adults may help reduce uncertainty and support greater alignment of future recommendations. Regardless, transparency and shared clinical decision-making remain essential when discussing dengue vaccination with travellers.</p>","PeriodicalId":17407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of travel medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13621450/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of travel medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jtm/taag065","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Dengue is an increasingly important cause of illness in travellers, and Qdenga (TAK-003) is the first dengue vaccine incorporated into guidance for travellers in multiple countries. However, clinicians and travellers may encounter differing recommendations across jurisdictions. This study compared guidance on the use of Qdenga in travellers across countries.

Methods: We conducted a comparative analysis of national guidance on Qdenga use for travellers across countries, using survey data and structured review of publicly available recommendations. Guidance was synthesized according to dengue immune status and mapped across recurring decision domains.

Results: Survey responses were obtained from 18 advisory bodies across 17 countries between March and April 2026, including 12 non-endemic countries where Qdenga was licensed and guidance published. Guidance was generally more restrictive than regulatory authorization. While there was broad agreement in recommending vaccination for travellers with laboratory-confirmed prior dengue infection, recommendations for those without documented infection varied widely. All advisory bodies considered destination-specific dengue risk but differed in whether and how they used travel duration, repeated or cumulative exposure, traveller characteristics and host susceptibility factors to determine vaccine eligibility. Some recommendations restricted vaccination to travellers with prior dengue infection, whereas others extended eligibility to selected travellers without documented prior infection or recommended vaccination based on exposure risk, irrespective of serostatus. Approaches also differed in assessment of prior dengue infection and whether completion of the two-dose series before travel was required.

Conclusions: Variation in Qdenga guidance reflects differences in how advisory bodies interpret shared evidence and manage uncertainty arising from data gaps and differences between trial populations and travellers. Additional data on vaccine effectiveness and clinical outcomes among seronegative travellers and older adults may help reduce uncertainty and support greater alignment of future recommendations. Regardless, transparency and shared clinical decision-making remain essential when discussing dengue vaccination with travellers.

共同的证据,不同的建议:对各国旅行者qdena (TAK-003)登革热疫苗指南的比较分析。
背景:登革热是旅行者中日益重要的疾病原因,qdena (TAK-003)是多个国家首次将登革热疫苗纳入旅行者指南。然而,临床医生和旅行者可能会遇到不同司法管辖区的不同建议。这项研究比较了各国旅行者使用Qdenga的指南。方法:我们使用调查数据和对公开建议的结构化审查,对各国旅行者使用qdena的国家指南进行了比较分析。根据登革热免疫状况综合了指导意见,并将其映射到反复出现的决策域。结果:在2026年3月至4月期间,从17个国家的18个咨询机构获得了调查回复,其中包括12个获得qdena许可并发布指南的非流行国家。指导通常比监管授权更具限制性。虽然在建议对实验室确认既往感染登革热的旅行者接种疫苗方面存在广泛共识,但对没有记录感染的旅行者的建议差异很大。所有咨询机构都考虑了目的地特定的登革热风险,但在是否以及如何使用旅行时间、重复或累积暴露、旅行者特征和宿主易感性因素来确定疫苗资格方面存在差异。一些建议将疫苗接种限制在既往有登革热感染的旅行者,而另一些建议将接种资格扩大到先前没有记录感染或建议接种疫苗的选定旅行者,而不考虑基于暴露风险的血清状态。在评估既往登革热感染以及是否需要在旅行前完成两剂系列疫苗接种方面,方法也存在差异。结论:Qdenga指南的差异反映了咨询机构在如何解释共享证据和管理由数据缺口和试验人群与旅行者之间的差异引起的不确定性方面的差异。关于血清阴性旅行者和老年人的疫苗有效性和临床结果的额外数据可能有助于减少不确定性,并支持进一步协调未来的建议。无论如何,在与旅行者讨论登革热疫苗接种时,透明度和共同的临床决策仍然至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of travel medicine
Journal of travel medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
20.90
自引率
5.10%
发文量
143
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Travel Medicine is a publication that focuses on travel medicine and its intersection with other disciplines. It publishes cutting-edge research, consensus papers, policy papers, and expert reviews. The journal is affiliated with the Asia Pacific Travel Health Society. The journal's main areas of interest include the prevention and management of travel-associated infections, non-communicable diseases, vaccines, malaria prevention and treatment, multi-drug resistant pathogens, and surveillance on all individuals crossing international borders. The Journal of Travel Medicine is indexed in multiple major indexing services, including Adis International Ltd., CABI, EBSCOhost, Elsevier BV, Gale, Journal Watch Infectious Diseases (Online), MetaPress, National Library of Medicine, OCLC, Ovid, ProQuest, Thomson Reuters, and the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书