Browsing by Author "Rashmi Arora"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4

Correction to: Impact of the indigenous rotavirus vaccine Rotavac in the Universal Immunization Program in India during 2016–2020 (Nature Medicine, (2025), 31, 11, (3871-3878), 10.1038/s41591-025-03998-9)
(Nature Research, 2025) Nayana P. Nair; Samarasimha Nusi Reddy; Sidhartha Giri; Tintu Varghese; Varunkumar Thiyagarajan; Jayaprakash Muliyil; Priya Hemavathy; Shainey Alokit Khakha; Rashmi Arora; Mohan Digambar Gupte; Jacqueline Elizabeth Tate; Umesh D. Parashar; Venkata Raghava Mohan; Gagandeep Kang; Mahima Mittal; Sunil Kumar Rao; Vineeta Gupta; Vipin M. Vashishtha; Sanjeev Kumar Verma; Kulandaivel Murugiah; Ramasubramaniam Pitchumani; Sridevi A. Naaraayan; Priyadarishini Dorairaj; Girish Kumar Chethrapilly Purusothaman; Senthilnathan Subramanian; Sumanth Amperayani; Sundaram Balasubramanian; Jayanta Kumar Goswami; Amrit Koirala; Shakti Lamichhane; Koshy C. George; Asolie Chase; Bhupesh Jain; Suresh C. Goyal; Dalpat Rajpurohit; Prabhu Prakash; Sunil Kothari; Vikash Katewa; Pramod Sharma; Shailja Vajpayee; Alok Kumar Goyal; Bharti Malhotra; R. K. Gupta; Prachi Chaudhary; Hemant Jain; Mannancheril Abraham Mathew; Asit Mansingh; Rashmi Patnaik; Samarendra Mahapatro; Subrat Kumar Majhi; Prasantajyoti Mohanty; Rajib Kumar Ray; Subrant Kumar Mohanty; Manas Kumar Nayak; Nirmal Kumar Mohakud; Mamata Devi Mohanty; J. Bikrant Kumar Prusty; Jasashree Choudhury; Mrutunjay Dash; Saroj Kumar Satpathy; Subal Kumar Pradhan; Jyoti Sharma; Sanjeev Chaudhary; Pancham Kumar; Shayam L. Kaushik; Rajesh Kumar; Bhavneet Bharti; Mini Pritam Singh; Muralidharan P. Jayashree; Akshay Kumar Saxena; Kushaljit Singh Sodhi; Arun Bansal; Ravi Prakash Kanojia; Adarsh Bansal; Madhu Gupta; Preeti Raikwar; Manoj Rawal; Anil Kumar Goel; Suraj Chawla; Poonam Dalal; Geeta Gathwala; Manohar Badur; Gorthi Rajendra Prasad; K. Kameswari; Padmalatha Pamu; Jeeru Bhaskara Reddy; J. Manikyamba; Krishna Babu Goru; G. S. Rama Prasad; G. V. Rama Devi; Suhasini Mekala; Sowmiya V. Senthamizh; Sunita Bidari
Correction to: Nature Medicinehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-025-03998-9, published online 7 October 2025. In the version of the article initially published, Tintu Varghese (The Wellcome Trust Research Laboratory, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India) was missing from the author list and is now included, while the affiliation numbers shown for some Collaborators of the rotavirus vaccine effectiveness and impact assessment network members were incorrect. The author list and affiliations are now updated in the HTML and PDF versions of the article. © The Author(s) 2025.
Impact of the indigenous rotavirus vaccine Rotavac in the Universal Immunization Program in India during 2016–2020
(Nature Research, 2025) Nayana P. Nair; Samarasimha Nusi Reddy; Sidhartha Giri; Tintu Varghese; Varunkumar Thiyagarajan; Jayaprakash Muliyil; Priya Hemavathy; Shainey Alokit Khakha; Rashmi Arora; Mohan Digambar Gupte; Jacqueline Elizabeth Tate; Umesh D. Parashar; Venkata Raghava Mohan; Gagandeep Kang; Mahima Mittal; Sunil Kumar Rao; Vineeta Gupta; Vipin M. Vashishtha; Sanjeev Kumar Verma; Kulandaivel Murugiah; Ramasubramaniam Pitchumani; Sridevi A. Naaraayan; Priyadarishini Dorairaj; Girish Kumar Chethrapilly Purusothaman; Senthilnathan Subramanian; Sumanth Amperayani; Sundaram Balasubramanian; Jayanta Kumar Goswami; Amrit Koirala; Shakti Lamichhane; Koshy C. George; Asolie Chase; Bhupesh Jain; Suresh C. Goyal; Dalpat Rajpurohit; Prabhu Prakash; Sunil Kothari; Vikash Katewa; Pramod Sharma; Shailja Vajpayee; Alok Kumar Goyal; Bharti Malhotra; R. K. Gupta; Prachi Chaudhary; Hemant Jain; Mannancheril Abraham Mathew; Asit Mansingh; Rashmi Patnaik; Samarendra Mahapatro; Subrat Kumar Majhi; Prasantajyoti Mohanty; Rajib Kumar Ray; Subrant Kumar Mohanty; Manas Kumar Nayak; Nirmal Kumar Mohakud; Mamata Devi Mohanty; J. Bikrant Kumar Prusty; Jasashree Choudhury; Mrutunjay Dash; Saroj Kumar Satpathy; Subal Kumar Pradhan; Jyoti Sharma; Sanjeev Chaudhary; Pancham Kumar; Shayam L. Kaushik; Rajesh Kumar; Bhavneet Bharti; Mini Pritam Singh; Muralidharan P. Jayashree; Akshay Kumar Saxena; Kushaljit Singh Sodhi; Arun Bansal; Ravi Prakash Kanojia; Adarsh Bansal; Madhu Gupta; Preeti Raikwar; Manoj Rawal; Anil Kumar Goel; Suraj Chawla; Poonam Dalal; Geeta Gathwala; Manohar Badur; Gorthi Rajendra Prasad; K. Kameswari; Padmalatha Pamu; Jeeru Bhaskara Reddy; J. Manikyamba; Krishna Babu Goru; G. S. Rama Prasad; G. V. Rama Devi; Suhasini Mekala; Sowmiya V. Senthamizh; Sunita Bidari
In 2016, India introduced Rotavac (G9P[11]), an indigenous oral rotavirus vaccine administered at 6, 10 and 14 weeks of age through the Universal Immunization Program. Evaluating its effectiveness under routine programmatic conditions is critical, given the variable performance of rotavirus vaccines in low- and middle-income countries. Here we assessed Rotavac’s real-world effectiveness and impact across 31 hospitals in 9 states between 2016 and 2020 using a test-negative case–control design. Overall, 24,624 children were enrolled in surveillance (62% male and 38% female). Of 8,372 children aged 6–59 months eligible for effectiveness analysis (1,790 rotavirus-positive cases and 5,437 rotavirus-negative controls), 6,646 received 3 doses and 581 were unvaccinated. The adjusted vaccine effectiveness of 3 doses against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis was 54% (95% confidence interval (CI) 45% to 62%), with 1,574 vaccinated cases versus 5,072 vaccinated controls. Among children aged 6–23 months (1,486 vaccinated cases and 4,595 vaccinated controls), genotype-specific adjusted vaccine effectiveness was 51% (95% CI 36% to 62%) for G3P[8], 81% (95% CI 73% to 87%) for G1P[8] and 64% (95% CI 21% to 83%) for G1P[6]. Following vaccine introduction, rotavirus positivity among hospitalized children declined from 40% to 20%. These findings confirm that Rotavac provides substantial protection against severe rotavirus disease, including nonvaccine strains, and performs comparably to internationally licensed vaccines in similar settings. © The Author(s) 2025.
Infectious etiology of intussusception in Indian children less than 2 years old: a matched case-control analysis
(BioMed Central Ltd, 2024) Ira Praharaj; Samarasimha Nusi Reddy; Nayana Prabhakaran Nair; Jacqueline Elizabeth Tate; Sidhartha Giri; Varunkumar Thiyagarajan; Venkata Raghava Mohan; Rajendiran Revathi; Kalaivanan Maheshwari; Priya Hemavathy; Nirmal Kumar; Mohan Digambar Gupte; Rashmi Arora; Sowmiya Senthamizh; Suhasini Mekala; Krishna Babu Goru; Padmalatha Pamu; Manohar Badur; Subal Pradhan; Mrutunjay Dash; Nirmal Kumar Mohakud; Rajib Kumar Ray; Geetha Gathwala; Madhu Gupta; Ravi Kanojia; Rajkumar Gupta; Suresh Goyal; Pramod Sharma; Mannancheril Abraham Mathew; Tarun John Kochukaleekal Jacob; Balasubramanian Sundaram; Chethrapilly Purusothaman Girish Kumar; Priyadarshini Dorairaj; Ramasubramaniam Pitchumani; Raghul Maniam; Sambandan Kumaravel; Hemant Jain; Jayanta Kumar Goswami; Ashish Wakhlu; Vineeta Gupta; Jie Liu; Eric R. Houpt; Umesh D. Parashar; Gagandeep Kang
Background: Enteric infections are hypothesized to be associated with intussusception in children. A small increase in intussusception following rotavirus vaccination has been seen in some settings. We conducted post-marketing surveillance for intussusception following rotavirus vaccine, Rotavac introduction in India and evaluated association of intussusception with enteric pathogens. Methods: In a case-control study nested within a large sentinel hospital-based surveillance program in India, stool samples from 272 children aged less than 2 years admitted for intussusception and 272 age-, gender- and location-matched controls were evaluated with Taqman array card based molecular assays to detect enteric viruses, bacterial enteropathogens and parasites. Matched case-control analysis with conditional logistic regression evaluated association of enteropathogens with intussusception. Population attributable fractions (PAF) were calculated for enteropathogens significantly associated with intussusception. Results: The most prevalent enteropathogens in cases and controls were enteroaggregative Escherichia coli, adenovirus 40/41, adenovirus C serotypes and enteroviruses. Children with intussusception were more likely to harbor adenovirus C serotypes (adjusted odds-ratio (aOR) = 1.74; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06–2.87) and enteroviruses (aOR = 1.77; 95% CI 1.05–2.97) than controls. Rotavirus was not associated with increased intussusception risk. Adenovirus C (PAF = 16.9%; 95% CI 4.7% − 27.6%) and enteroviruses (PAF = 14.7%; 95% CI 4.2% − 24.1%) had the highest population attributable fraction for intussusception. Conclusion: Adenovirus C serotypes and enteroviruses were significantly associated with intussusception in Indian children. Rotavirus was not associated with risk of intussusception. © The Author(s) 2024.
Intussusception after rotavirus vaccine introduction in India
(Massachussetts Medical Society, 2020) Samarasimha N. Reddy; Nayana P. Nair; Jacqueline E. Tate; Varunkumar Thiyagarajan; Sidhartha Giri; Ira Praharaj; Venkata R. Mohan; Sudhir Babji; Mohan D. Gupte; Rashmi Arora; Sunita Bidari; Sowmiya Senthamizh; Suhasini Mekala; Krishna B. Goru; Bhaskar Reddy; Padmalatha Pamu; Rajendra P. Gorthi; Manohar Badur; Vittal Mohan; Saroj Sathpathy; Hiranya Mohanty; Mrutunjay Dash; Nirmal K. Mohakud; Rajib K. Ray; Prasantajyoti Mohanty; Geeta Gathwala; Suraj Chawla; Madhu Gupta; Rajkumar Gupta; Suresh Goyal; Pramod Sharma; Mannancheril A. Mathew; Tarun J.K. Jacob; Balasubramanian Sundaram; Girish K.C. Purushothaman; Priyadarishini Dorairaj; Muthukumaran Jagannatham; Kulandaivel Murugiah; Hemanthkumar Boopathy; Raghul Maniam; Rajamani Gurusamy; Sambandan Kumaravel; Ashwitha Shenoy; Hemant Jain; Jayanta K. Goswami; Ashish Wakhlu; Vineeta Gupta; Gopinath Vinayagamurthy; Umesh D. Parashar; Gagandeep Kang
BACKGROUND A three-dose, oral rotavirus vaccine (Rotavac) was introduced in the universal immunization program in India in 2016. A prelicensure trial involving 6799 infants was not large enough to detect a small increased risk of intussusception. Postmarketing surveillance data would be useful in assessing whether the risk of intussusception would be similar to the risk seen with different rotavirus vaccines used in other countries. METHODS We conducted a multicenter, hospital-based, active surveillance study at 27 hospitals in India. Infants meeting the Brighton level 1 criteria of radiologic or surgical confirmation of intussusception were enrolled, and rotavirus vaccination was ascertained by means of vaccination records. The relative incidence (incidence during the risk window vs. all other times) of intussusception among infants 28 to 365 days of age within risk windows of 1 to 7 days, 8 to 21 days, and 1 to 21 days after vaccination was evaluated by means of a self-controlled case-series analysis. For a subgroup of patients, a matched case–control analysis was performed, with matching for age, sex, and location. RESULTS From April 2016 through June 2019, a total of 970 infants with intussusception were enrolled, and 589 infants who were 28 to 365 days of age were included in the self-controlled case-series analysis. The relative incidence of intussusception after the first dose was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.00 to 3.00) in the 1-to-7-day risk window and 0.35 (95% CI, 0.00 to 1.09) in the 8-to-21-day risk window. Similar results were observed after the second dose (relative incidence, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.20 to 2.15] and 1.23 [95% CI, 0.60 to 2.10] in the respective risk windows) and after the third dose (relative incidence, 1.65 [95% CI, 0.82 to 2.64] and 1.08 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.73], respectively). No increase in intussusception risk was found in the case–control analysis. CONCLUSIONS The rotavirus vaccine produced in India that we evaluated was not associated with intussusception in Indian infants. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others.) Copyright © 2020 Massachusetts Medical Society.