Abstract

Background

Rotaviruses (RVs) are an important cause of acute gastroenteritis in infants and young children worldwide, resulting in more than 600 000 deaths per annum, mainly in developing countries. Since the 1980s, there has been intensive research on the development of RV vaccine candidates, and since 2006 two vaccines have been licensed in many countries.

Sources of data

The scientific literature since the 1970s has been consulted, and the results of original research carried out in authors' laboratories were used.

Areas of agreement

There are firmly established data on virus particle structure, genome composition, gene–protein assignment, protein-function assignment (incomplete), virus classification, the mechanisms of several steps of the replication cycle (adsorption, primary transcription, virus maturation—all partial), several mechanisms of pathogenesis, aspects of the immune response, diagnosis, illness and treatment, epidemiology and vaccine development.

Areas of controversy

Research on the following areas is still in full flux and in part not generally accepted: several steps of the replication cycle (mechanism of viral entry into host cells, mechanisms of packaging and reassortment of viral RNAs, morphogenesis of subviral particles in viroplasms and maturation of virus particles in the rough endoplasmic reticulum (RER) with temporary acquisition and subsequent loss of an envelope), the true correlates of protection and the long-term effectiveness of RV vaccines.

Growing research

Recently, a system that allows carrying out reverse genetics with some of the RV genes has been established which, however, has limitations. There is intensive research ongoing, which is trying to develop better and universally applicable reverse genetics systems. There is broad research on the molecular mechanisms of the immune response and on which immunological parameter correlates best with lasting protection from severe RV disease. Research into other than live attenuated vaccines is growing.

Areas timely for developing research

The establishment of better reverse genetics systems for RVs is the most important research goal for both the understanding of the molecular biology of RVs and the development of new and safe RV vaccines. The black boxes of our knowledge on aspects of RV replication (RNA packaging, RNA replication, control of reassortment and functions of the non-structural RV proteins) are under intensive research.

Introduction

Rotaviruses (RVs) are a major cause of gastroenteritis among children of <5 years of age worldwide1,2 and of acute diarrhoea in the young of many other mammalian species (calves, piglets, lambs, rabbits, etc.) and of birds. In humans, they are responsible for more than 600 000 deaths each year, mostly of infants and young children in developing countries.2 RVs were found to cause human disease in 1973.3,4 Since the 1980s, research has focused on the development of RV vaccines, and since 2006 two vaccines have been licensed in many countries, in some with the aim of their inclusion in the expanded programme of immunization (EPI). Here RVs and their vaccines will be reviewed, and an outlook will be given on further likely developments within the field.

RV structure, genome and gene–protein assignment

The wheel-like structure is the characteristic feature of the RV particle in electron micrographs (Fig. 1) and has given the virus its name (Lat. rota = wheel). The RV genome consists of 11 segments of double-stranded (ds) RNA encoding six structural proteins (VP1–VP4, VP6 and VP7) and six non-structural proteins (NSP1–NSP6) (Fig. 2A). The genomic RNA segments are between 667 (segment 11) and 3302 (segment 1) bp in size, and all share short, moderately conserved motifs within the 3' and 5' untranslated regions. The RV particles consist of an inner layer (‘the core’), containing VP1, VP2 and VP3 and enclosing the genome (Fig. 2B and C), an intermediate layer (‘the inner capsid’, made of VP6) and an outer layer (‘the outer capsid’, consisting of VP7 and projections of VP4) (Fig. 2C). The three-dimensional structure of RV particles has been studied by a number of groups.5–14 According to these findings, the three capsid layers are ordered along 5-, 3- and 2-fold symmetry axes (Fig. 2B–E) and are perforated by 132 aqueous channels of three different symmetry arrangements (‘classes’, Fig. 2B). The class I channels function as an outlet for mRNAs transcribed from subviral particles (see below).

Fig. 1

Electron micrograph of RV particles in the faecal suspension of an infant with acute gastroenteritis, London, 2005. A mixture of TLPs (TLPs = virion, fully infectious particle), DLPs (DLPs containing RNA), empty TLPs (ETLPs, lacking RNA) and empty DLPs (EDLPs, lacking RNA) is seen. Calibration bar, 100 nm. (Courtesy of Dr Hazel Appleton and Brian Megson, Health Protection Agency, London).

Fig. 1

Electron micrograph of RV particles in the faecal suspension of an infant with acute gastroenteritis, London, 2005. A mixture of TLPs (TLPs = virion, fully infectious particle), DLPs (DLPs containing RNA), empty TLPs (ETLPs, lacking RNA) and empty DLPs (EDLPs, lacking RNA) is seen. Calibration bar, 100 nm. (Courtesy of Dr Hazel Appleton and Brian Megson, Health Protection Agency, London).

Fig. 2

Structural organization of RV: (A) Polyacrylamide gel showing RV RNAs 1-11 with gene–protein assignment on the right. (B) Surface representation of RV structure. Channels of classes I–III are indicated, the VP4 spikes are in red, and the VP7 capsid layer is in yellow. (C) Cut-away of the RV structure showing the intermediate layer (VP6, blue), the core (VP2, green) and the flower-shaped VP1/VP3 complexes at the inside of VP2 opposite of class I channels (red). (D) Structural organization of the VP2 layer (some of the 60 dimers are shown in red and purple). (E) Genomic RNA in the RV structure. The VP6 and VP2 layers are partially cut-away to expose the RNAs, which at the outside have dodecahedral appearance. (F) Structure of the actively transcribing DLPs with nascent mRNAs (grey) exiting through the class I channels. (G) A close-up cut-away view of the exit pathway in one of the channels. The bowling pin-shaped density of the exiting transcript (pink) is seen in actively transcribing DLPs. Panels (B)–(G) are delineated from image reconstructions of cryo-electron micrographs. (From Pesavento et al.29 with permission by Dr B.V. Venkataram Prasad and from the publisher Elsevier Science, Amsterdam.)

Fig. 2

Structural organization of RV: (A) Polyacrylamide gel showing RV RNAs 1-11 with gene–protein assignment on the right. (B) Surface representation of RV structure. Channels of classes I–III are indicated, the VP4 spikes are in red, and the VP7 capsid layer is in yellow. (C) Cut-away of the RV structure showing the intermediate layer (VP6, blue), the core (VP2, green) and the flower-shaped VP1/VP3 complexes at the inside of VP2 opposite of class I channels (red). (D) Structural organization of the VP2 layer (some of the 60 dimers are shown in red and purple). (E) Genomic RNA in the RV structure. The VP6 and VP2 layers are partially cut-away to expose the RNAs, which at the outside have dodecahedral appearance. (F) Structure of the actively transcribing DLPs with nascent mRNAs (grey) exiting through the class I channels. (G) A close-up cut-away view of the exit pathway in one of the channels. The bowling pin-shaped density of the exiting transcript (pink) is seen in actively transcribing DLPs. Panels (B)–(G) are delineated from image reconstructions of cryo-electron micrographs. (From Pesavento et al.29 with permission by Dr B.V. Venkataram Prasad and from the publisher Elsevier Science, Amsterdam.)

Complete gene–protein assignments have been established for several RV strains (Fig. 2A); the protein-function correlations are only partially known. Details can be obtained from Table 1 of Estes and Kapikian.15

Classification

A classification scheme for RVs has been derived from genome composition and immunological reactivities of three of its components:15 As RVs were found to reassort readily (see below) in doubly infected cells in vitro and in vivo and as VP4 and VP7 are encoded by different RNA segments, various combinations of VP4 and VP7 types have been observed in natural RV isolates.15 Virtually all RV genes are involved in reassortment events.19,20 The extensive genomic and antigenic diversity of RVs of both human and animal origins has led to the proposal to classify RVs according to the composition of the whole genome.20,21 Such a system will facilitate a full assessment of reassortment in nature, of zoonotic transmission (see below) and probably of other, as yet undescribed, molecular events.

  1. The inner capsid protein, VP6, can be used to differentiate at least seven entities termed ‘groups’ (A–G). Within Group A RVs, two major subgroups (I, II) exist.16

  2. Both surface proteins, VP4 and VP7, elicit neutralizing antibodies17,18 and are, therefore, considered to be involved in immune protection. Using these two proteins, a binary classification scheme has been established (similar to that developed for influenza viruses and so far only for Group A RVs) by which G types (VP7-specific, G for glycoprotein) and P types (VP4-specific, P for protease-sensitive protein) are distinguished. So far, at least 16 different G types and 27 P types have been detected, of which at least 11 G and 11 P types infect humans. G serotypes and genotypes carry identical numbers. Due to a lack of type-specific P antisera, it has been agreed to designate the P serotype and genotype individually but jointly, the latter in square brackets: for example, the human Wa strain is classified as G1P1A[8], the human DS-1 strain as G2 P1B[4], the ovine strain Lp14 as G10P[15], etc.15

Replication

Viral replication occurs in the mature epithelial cells of the small intestine. Replication in vitro has been studied in some detail.15 The viral replication cycle is diagrammatically presented in Figure 3. Triple-layered particles (TLPs, i.e. the infectious virions) attach to the host cell and enter by receptor-mediated endocytosis or direct penetration. The cellular receptors of RVs have not been fully characterized, but viral uptake is characterized by a sequence of interactions with primary and secondary receptors, the latter acting as co-receptors in a post-attachment step.22,22a Replication takes place exclusively in the cytoplasm. After removal of the outer capsid from TLPs by cellular enzymes and a low intracellular Ca++ level, double-layered particles (DLPs) emerge, which become transcriptionally active, and large numbers of positive-stranded RNA molecules (capped but not polyadenylated) are transcribed from all 11 RNA segments, exiting the DLPs via the 12 aqueous class I channels located at the edges of the 5-fold axes of symmetry (Fig. 2F). The new RNA molecules either act as mRNAs, with their translation products accumulating in the cytoplasm, or undergo replication in intracytoplasmic inclusion bodies termed ‘viroplasms’. The two non-structural RV proteins, NSP2 and NSP5, are major components of viroplasms, which are essential for RNA replication and early morphogenesis.23–25 The viroplasms also contain VP1, VP2, VP3, VP6, NSP4 and, initially, mRNAs transcribed from all genomic segments. NSP5 interacts with both VP226 and VP1.27 The exact order of events during early morphogenesis and the molecular interactions and control mechanisms by which packaging and reassortment of RNA segments into cores occur (Fig. 2C and E) are at present unknown. Cryo-EM studies have shown the arrangements of dsRNA inside the core as concentric rings.28,29 DLPs, formed in the viroplasms, consist of VP1, VP2, VP3 and VP6, and they contain one of each of the 11 RNA segments. The DLPs bud through the rough endoplasmic reticulum (RER), with NSP4 (at its C-terminal, cytoplasmic domain) acting as an intracellular receptor for VP6.30 An RER-derived envelope layer (which is lost before complete maturation) is transiently added to DLPs, and VP7 and VP4 are incorporated. VP4 may be added later in the process in ‘raft’-like structures near the plasma membrane.31 Triple-layered infectious virions are released by lysis of non-polarized cells (e.g. MA104), or by exit from polarized cells (e.g. Caco-2 cells), before a cytopathic effect becomes obvious.31 In faecal clinical specimens, TLPs and DLPs may often be seen side by side, and there may also be ‘empty particles’, which do not contain genomic RNA (Fig. 1). In immunodeficient hosts and under certain experimental conditions, RVs undergo genome rearrangements, which are intramolecular recombination events leading to partial gene duplication32.

Fig. 3

RV replication cycle. RVs attach to susceptible host cells via complex interactions of the surface proteins VP4 and VP7 with cellular receptors. This is followed by endocytosis or direct penetration and uncoating. The subviral DLPs actively transcribe mRNA from all 11 genomic segments and release them into the cytoplasm where they are translated. Intracytoplasmic inclusion bodies termed as ‘viroplasms’ are formed of which the non-structural proteins NSP2 and NSP5 are essential components. They also contain the viral proteins VP1, VP2, VP3, VP6 and NSP4, and incorporate viral mRNAs. Within the viroplasms early morphogenesis takes place during which genome equivalents of viral RNA segments are packaged under strict control and then replicated to form genomic dsRNA. The detailed steps of this process are still very poorly understood. Viral DLPs are released from viroplasms, and NSP4, incorporated into membranes of the RER, acts as an intercellular receptor for DLPs for them to be processed to form the infectious, TLPs (TLPs, = virions), which are released by cellular lysis (MA104 cells) or exited before lysis (Caco-2 cells, gut epithelial cells).

Fig. 3

RV replication cycle. RVs attach to susceptible host cells via complex interactions of the surface proteins VP4 and VP7 with cellular receptors. This is followed by endocytosis or direct penetration and uncoating. The subviral DLPs actively transcribe mRNA from all 11 genomic segments and release them into the cytoplasm where they are translated. Intracytoplasmic inclusion bodies termed as ‘viroplasms’ are formed of which the non-structural proteins NSP2 and NSP5 are essential components. They also contain the viral proteins VP1, VP2, VP3, VP6 and NSP4, and incorporate viral mRNAs. Within the viroplasms early morphogenesis takes place during which genome equivalents of viral RNA segments are packaged under strict control and then replicated to form genomic dsRNA. The detailed steps of this process are still very poorly understood. Viral DLPs are released from viroplasms, and NSP4, incorporated into membranes of the RER, acts as an intercellular receptor for DLPs for them to be processed to form the infectious, TLPs (TLPs, = virions), which are released by cellular lysis (MA104 cells) or exited before lysis (Caco-2 cells, gut epithelial cells).

Reverse genetics

For RVs, a reverse genetics system has been recently developed,33,34 which permits the rescue of a viral RNA segment produced from cDNA in vitro into replication-competent progeny virus. However, the system requires helper virus, and despite intensive research a helper virus-free system is still proving elusive.

Pathogenesis

Upon infection with RV, extensive cellular necrosis of the epithelium of the small intestine develops, leading to villous atrophy, loss of digestive enzymes, reduction in absorption and increased osmotic pressure in the gut lumen and the onset of diarrhoea. This is followed by a reactive crypt cell hyperplasia accompanied by increased fluid secretion, which also contributes to the severity of diarrhoea.15

Viral factors determining the pathogenicity of RVs have been investigated in several animal models (piglets, mice, rabbits35). The protein product of RNA segment 4, VP4, has been found to be a major determinant of pathogenicity in several systems, but products of other structural (VP3, VP7) and non-structural genes (NSP1, NSP2, NSP4) have also been implicated.

The discovery of NSP4 acting as a viral enterotoxin (the first of its kind36) has explained the well-known observation that RV-infected animals exhibit profuse diarrhoea prior to detection of histologic damage. NSP4 or a peptide thereof (aa 114-135) induces dose- and age-dependent diarrhoea in laboratory animals (mice, rats) in the absence of histological changes.36 NSP4 produces an increase in intracellular Ca2+ concentration37 and perturbs cellular electrolyte homeostasis. A peptide of NSP4, an active enterotoxin, is secreted from infected cells.38 The secreted protein binds to recently discovered cellular receptors39 and initiates signalling cascades in uninfected cells.38,40 Silencing of NSP4 expression in RV-infected cells by specific siRNA affects mRNA production and the formation of viroplasms, suggesting a significant involvement of NSP4 in RV replication and morphogenesis as well.41,42 Immunization of mice with an NSP4-based vaccine, followed by specific antibody production, attenuates the symptoms of RV-induced diarrhoea.43 Whether NSP4 antibodies exert a protective function in humans remains to be explored. The enteric nervous system may be involved in RV diarrhoea (and diarrhoea of other causes) as drugs blocking this system were shown to alleviate the diarrhoea.44–46 RV RNA and antigen have been detected in the sera of children with acute RV gastroenteritis.47,48 While viremia in RV infection appears to be relatively frequent, systemic disease is rare (see below), suggesting that spread of RV may be coincidental with systemic disease caused by a different microorganism.15,49,50

Immune responses and correlates of protection

Neonatal or primary RV infection elicits a mainly serotype-specific humoral immune response providing homotypic immunity. Partial protection against subsequent RV infections by other serotypes also develops and increases with the number of re-infections.51 The exact correlates of protective immunity remain to be determined, but levels of RV-specific copro-antibodies of the IgA class seem to correlate best.52–55 Humoral antibodies directed towards the inner capsid proteins VP2 and particularly VP6 develop to high titers.56–58 These antibodies do not neutralize in vitro but protect in vivo, possibly by interacting with DLPs intracellularly and preventing transcription or maturation (‘intracellular neutralization’57,59). There is a RV-specific cytotoxic T cell response, but its exact role in overcoming a primary infection or in protection against subsequent infections is not known.55,60 Natural infection or appropriate vaccination (see below) seem to protect from severe disease in subsequent infections,51,52 even if the serotype of the challenging virus differs from that of the previous infections or those in a prior vaccine.

Illness, diagnosis and treatment

After a short incubation period of 1–2 days, the onset of the illness is sudden. Symptoms include watery diarrhoea lasting 4–7 days, as well as vomiting, fever and rapid dehydration. The degree of severity of disease varies widely from inapparent infections by so-called ‘nursery strains’ (frequent61) to central nervous system infections (rare62) and chronic infections and hepatitis in children with immunodeficiencies (rare63). In SCID mice, rhesus rotavirus (RRV) causes hepatitis.64 Respiratory symptoms are not infrequently seen during RV disease; however, there is no direct evidence for RVs actively replicating in lung tissue.50

Diagnosis of an RV infection is relatively easy as large numbers of virus particles (up to 1011 particles/ml of faeces) are shed at the acute stage of the disease (Fig. 1). The main techniques are enzyme-linked immunoassays (ELISAs), passive particle agglutination tests and, when searching comprehensively for diarrhoeagenic viruses, EM (at present not widely used). G and P types of RV isolates can be determined serologically, but molecular techniques are increasingly being applied for both detection and genotyping. RV-specific oligonucleotide primers complementary to common and type-specific regions of the VP6, VP7 and VP4 genes allow sensitive detection, subgroup determination and typing for both G and P types, respectively, by RT-PCR.16,19–21,65–67

Treatment of RV disease is by oral, subcutaneous or intravenous rehydration and pain relief as indicated. The formulae of oral rehydration treatment (ORT) and reduced osmolarity ‘light ORT’, recommended by WHO, are widely used.68,69 Oral immunoglobulins seem to have an effect on the duration of diarrhoea and virus shedding but are not routinely used.68,69 Encephalinase inhibitors have been used to dampen the symptoms of severe diarrhoea caused by RVs and other microorganisms.45 For immunocompromised children, passive immunization with RV antibodies obtained from eggs or milk has been found to be beneficial,70 but their wider use is not practicable.

Epidemiology

RVs spread mainly via the faeco-oral route. Water, fomites and occasionally food may act as vehicles. RV particles are very resistant to environmental conditions. The high particle number in the faeces of children with acute RV disease and the very small 50% diarrhoea-causing dose [1 DD50 = 10 plaque forming units (pfu)71] lead to wide and efficient spread to any susceptible host. While there are marked seasonal peaks (winter/spring) in countries with temperate climates, in tropical regions RV infections and disease occur throughout the year.

The epidemiology of Group A RV infections is complex, since RVs of different G and P types co-circulate within a geographical region at any one time.72–76 The relative incidence of different G types also changes over time in the same location. Approximately 95% of co-circulating strains are types G1–G4 in most regions of temperate climate, typically G1P1A[8], G2P1B[4], G3P1A[8] and G4P1A[8], but other G types may be represented at high frequencies, particularly in tropical areas.72,74,75 Recently, G9 RVs have been isolated as the predominant outbreak strains in several locations in the USA73 and in Europe.77–85 Besides being acquired in the community,86 RV infections are increasingly recognized as the cause of a significant proportion of nosocomial infections and diarrhoeal disease.87 Group B RVs have caused outbreaks of diarrhoea in children and adults in China88 and have been isolated from sporadic cases of gastroenteritis in Calcutta, India,89,90 and Bangladesh.91–93 Group C RVs are associated with small outbreaks in humans.94,95 Apart from the accumulation of point mutations (genomic drift96), gene reassortment (genomic shift19,20,97–99) plays a major role in generating the high diversity of RVs. Animals of different mammalian species are increasingly recognized as significant reservoirs for human RV infections as animal RVs have been found to infect humans directly and to form reassortants with human RVs.20,98–103

Vaccine development

The burden of RV disease is high worldwide. According to the estimates based on studies carried out worldwide during 1986–2000, RVs cause 100 million episodes of acute gastroenteritis, 25 million clinic visits, 2 million hospitalizations and approximately 600 000 deaths per annum.1,2 While the incidence of RV disease is similar for developed and developing countries, death from RV disease is most frequent in developing countries of sub-Saharan Africa and Asia.1 Thus, the development of vaccines is urgent and started in the early 1980s.104 The early efficacy results were variable, owing to the enormous genomic and antigenic diversity of RVs105–110. Animal RVs (of simian or bovine origin) were used as live attenuated vaccines for humans. In many cases, protection from infection and/or mild disease was only modest (40–50%), but 80–90% protection from severe disease including dehydration was achieved when a cocktail of different viruses was applied.111–113 A tetravalent vaccine contained a rhesus rotavirus (RRV) of G3 type and three mono-reassortants, which individually carry the VP7 gene of human serotypes G1, G2 and G4 in the RRV genetic background (Rotashield®, developed by Wyeth) and received Food and Drug Administration approval as a universal vaccine in the USA in August 1998.114 More than 1.5 million doses were administered in the following 10 months. During that time, several cases of intussusception (IS) were observed in vaccinees, particularly within 3–7 days after the first dose (odds ratio of 27.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.8 to 72.1) in a case–control analysis of IS.115 These observations led the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics116,117 to withdraw the recommendation of Rotashield for use in infants, and vaccine production ceased. Since IS also occurs spontaneously, there has been considerable controversy about the vaccine-attributable risk of the occurrence of IS, which has been estimated to be approximately 1:10 000.118 IS was not found to be epidemiologically linked with natural RV infection,119,120 although abnormal gut anatomy has been observed in children with acute RV disease.121 A recent re-analysis of the data indicated that the age of vaccinees is a critical factor for IS, as a disproportionately high number (>80%) of children who developed IS after the first dose of RV vaccine were older than 90 days.122 On the basis on these observations, ‘catch-up vaccinations’ of children older than 3 months are considered as contraindicated, and the same arguments apply when using the most recently developed vaccines (see below).

Despite this major setback, work on alternative live attenuated RV vaccines has continued.106–109 In particular, two new vaccines have recently emerged. A pentavalent RV vaccine (RotaTeq® developed by Merck) is based on the attenuated bovine RV WC3 strain (G6P7[5]).123 It consists of a mixture of five mono-reassortants, in which the VP7 gene of the WC3 strain is individually replaced by the VP7 genes of human G1, G2, G3 and G4 strains, and the VP4 gene by that of a human P[8] strain, the other 10 genomic RNA segments in all mono-reassortants being provided by the WC3 strain. This vaccine was found to be highly efficacious in preventing severe RV gastroenteritis (98%) caused by G1, G2, G3, G4 and G9 strains. No link with IS was found in >32 000 vaccinees when compared with the same number of matched, double-blinded placebo controls.124 The vaccine was licensed for use in the USA, has been recommended for universal use by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices125 and has now been licensed by the European Medicines Agency and in various other countries worldwide.

A monovalent vaccine (Rotarix® developed by GlaxoSmithKline) is derived from an attenuated human RV isolate, 89-12, and is of the G1P1A[8] type. It was found to be highly effective (85%) in preventing severe RV gastroenteritis and hospitalization126 and did not present a risk of IS above background in over 30 000 vaccinees when compared with the same number of matched, double-blinded placebo controls.127 The monovalent vaccine provided good heterologous protection against the G3P[8], G4P[8] and G9P[8] strains and also against disease after infection with the G2P[4] strains.128 The vaccine has now been licensed in Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela and numerous European countries, and has been incorporated into EPI schemes for universal mass vaccination of birth cohorts in Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, Belgium, Luxembourg and Austria. European Guidelines for usage of both vaccines have been published recently.129

In Europe, each year, more than 90 000 infants and young children are admitted to the hospital with severe, RV-associated gastroenteritis,130 which represents 28–52% of all hospitalizations for acute gastroenteritis in children under 5 years of age.131,132 The medical (direct) and societal (indirect) costs of RV disease have been estimated for several European countries.133–135 The benefits of the RV vaccination outweigh the costs in all countries with high mortality from RV disease.136,137 In developed countries, RV vaccination is at present considered to be less cost-effective, even when the societal costs are taken into account.138–144 Acceptance of RV vaccination is highly sensitive to diarrhoea incidence rate, proportion of severe cases, mortality rate and vaccine price. Lack of awareness of RV disease among parents and health care professionals is considered to be a major barrier in Europe.145 The WHO strongly recommends inclusion of RV vaccination into national immunization programmes, where vaccine efficacy has been proven, the vaccination programme can be sustained and adequate sentinel surveillance is in place.146

The impact of the new RV vaccines, particularly in countries where it has been decided to administer them universally to the annual birth cohorts, remains to be seen.147 Although one of the vaccines has been tested in some developing countries, the real test of vaccinating populations of infants in the poorest parts of the world is still lacking.107 The risk of undesirable effects of live attenuated vaccines [clinical complications, reversion to virulence, genetic interaction (reassortment) with co-circulating wildtype RV strains, etc.] is considered to be low but not zero and may only become apparent, or be excluded, once millions of children have been vaccinated. Cases of IS may occur in temporal association with vaccination, although the overall background level of IS may not be increased.109 Thus far, post-marketing investigations have not detected a gross increase of IS with either of the two vaccines.148,149 However, intensive post-marketing surveillance is required during the introduction of the new vaccines in many countries, and is in fact in place. There is a good case for including surveillance of animal RVs in these exercises as well. With regard to the efficacy of a schedule of universal mass vaccination against RV disease, there are first encouraging initial data from the USA showing a delayed onset and diminished magnitude of RV disease during the 2007/08 winter season.150 Clinical trials with the new RV vaccines in developing countries, where they are most needed, are ongoing.

A lamb RV strain LLR (G10P[12]) has been licensed as a live attenuated vaccine for human use in China, but no clinical trial data have become available so far.106,107 A tetravalent vaccine, based on mono-reassortants of human VP7 genes with the genes of the attenuated bovine UK Compton RV strain, has proven to be effective and safe151 and has been expanded into a hexavalent vaccine candidate.152 Asymptomatic neonatal human RV strains have also been developed as live attenuated candidate vaccines.153 RV vaccine candidates other than live attenuated virus are being explored in animal models: virus-like particles originating from baculovirus recombinants expressing structural proteins (VP2, VP6, VP4 and VP7),154–156 preparations enhancing RV immunogenicity by microencapsidation157 and DNA-based vaccines.158–160 None of the non-replicating RV vaccine candidates has reached the stage of extensive clinical trials.

Supplementary material

Supplementary material is available at BRIMED online.

Funding

Work in authors' laboratories is being funded by The Wellcome Trust, the Health Protection Agency, the Food Standards Agency and the Department of Health.

References
(The complete list of references is available online)

1
Parashar
UD
Hummelman
EG
Bresee
JS
Miller
MA
Glass
RI
Global illness and deaths caused by rotavirus disease in children
Emerg Infect Dis
 , 
2003
, vol. 
9
 (pg. 
565
-
72
)
2
Parashar
UD
Gibson
CJ
Bresee
JS
Glass
RI
Rotavirus and severe childhood diarrhea
Emerg Infect Dis
 , 
2006
, vol. 
12
 (pg. 
304
-
6
)
15
Estes
MK
Kapikian
AZ
Knipe
DM
Howley
PM
, et al.  . 
Rotaviruses
Fields Virology
 , 
2007
5th ed.
Philadelphia
Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
(pg. 
1917
-
74
)
19
Maunula
L
von Bonsdorff
CH
Frequent reassortments may explain the genetic heterogeneity of rotaviruses: analysis of Finnish rotavirus strains
J Virol
 , 
2002
, vol. 
76
 (pg. 
11793
-
800
)
20
Matthijnssens
J
Ciarlet
M
Heiman
E
, et al.  . 
Full genome-based classification of rotaviruses reveals a common origin between human Wa-Like and porcine rotavirus strains and human DS-1-like and bovine rotavirus strains
J Virol
 , 
2008
, vol. 
82
 (pg. 
3204
-
19
)
22
López
S
Arias
CF
Multistep entry of rotavirus into cells: a Versaillesque dance
Trends Microbiol
 , 
2004
, vol. 
12
 (pg. 
271
-
8
Review
32
Desselberger
U
Genome rearrangements of rotaviruses
Adv Virus Res
 , 
1996
, vol. 
46
 (pg. 
69
-
95
Review
33
Komoto
S
Sasaki
J
Taniguchi
K
Reverse genetics system for introduction of site-specific mutations into the double-stranded RNA genome of infectious rotavirus
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
 , 
2006
, vol. 
103
 (pg. 
4646
-
51
)
34
Komoto
S
Kugita
M
Sasaki
J
Taniguchi
K
Generation of recombinant rotavirus with an antigenic mosaic of cross-reactive neutralization epitopes on VP4
J Virol
 , 
2008
, vol. 
82
 (pg. 
6753
-
7
)
35
Burke
B
Desselberger
U
Rotavirus pathogenicity
Virology
 , 
1996
, vol. 
218
 (pg. 
299
-
305
Review
36
Ball
JM
Tian
P
Zeng
CQY
, et al.  . 
Age dependent diarrhea induced by a rotaviral nonstructural glycoprotein
Science
 , 
1996
, vol. 
272
 (pg. 
101
-
4
)
39
Seo
NS
Zeng
CQ
Hyser
JM
, et al.  . 
Inaugural article: integrins alpha1beta1 and alpha2beta1 are receptors for the rotavirus enterotoxin
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
 , 
2008
, vol. 
105
 (pg. 
8811
-
8
)
44
Lundgren
O
Peregrin
AT
Persson
K
Kordasti
S
Uhnoo
I
Svensson
L
Role of the enteric nervous system in the fluid and electrolyte secretion of rotavirus diarrhea
Science
 , 
2000
, vol. 
287
 (pg. 
409
-
11
)
48
Blutt
SE
Matson
DO
Crawford
SE
, et al.  . 
Rotavirus antigenemia in children is associated with viremia
PLoS Med
 , 
2007
, vol. 
4
 pg. 
e121
 
49
Dormitzer
PR
Mandell
GL
Bennett
JE
Dolin
R
Rotaviruses
Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases
 , 
2005
6th ed.
Philadelphia
Elsevier
(pg. 
1902
-
13
)
50
Ramig
RF
Systemic rotavirus infection
Exp Rev Anti-Infect Ther
 , 
2007
, vol. 
5
 (pg. 
591
-
612
)
51
Velazquez
FR
Matson
DO
Calva
JJ
, et al.  . 
Rotavirus infection in infants as protection against subsequent infection
N Engl J Med
 , 
1996
, vol. 
355
 (pg. 
1022
-
8
)
55
Franco
MA
Angel
J
Greenberg
HB
Immunity and correlates of protection for rotavirus vaccines
Vaccine
 , 
2006
, vol. 
24
 (pg. 
2718
-
31
Review
57
Burns
JW
Siadat-Pajouh
M
Krishnaney
AA
, et al.  . 
Protective effect of rotavirus VP6-specific IgA monoclonal antibodies that lack neutralizing activity
Science
 , 
1996
, vol. 
272
 (pg. 
104
-
7
)
60
Franco
MA
Greenberg
HB
Role of B cells and cytotoxic T lymphocytes in clearance and immunity to rotavirus infection in mice
J Virol
 , 
1995
, vol. 
69
 (pg. 
7800
-
6
)
65
Gouvea
V
Glass
RI
Woods
P
, et al.  . 
Polymerase chain reaction amplification and typing of rotavirus nucleic acid from stool specimens
J Clin Microbiol
 , 
1990
, vol. 
28
 (pg. 
276
-
82
)
66
Gentsch
JR
Glass
RI
Woods
P
, et al.  . 
Identification of group A rotavirus gene 4 types by polymerase chain reaction
J Clin Microbiol
 , 
1992
, vol. 
30
 (pg. 
1365
-
73
)
67
Simpson
R
Aliyu
S
Iturriza-Gomara
M
Desselberger
U
Gray
J
Infantile viral gastroenteritis: on the way to closing the diagnostic gap
J Med Virol
 , 
2003
, vol. 
70
 (pg. 
258
-
62
)
68
Desselberger
U
Rotavirus infections: guidelines for treatment and prevention
Drugs
 , 
1999
, vol. 
58
 (pg. 
447
-
52
Review
69
Bass
D
Desselberger
U
Gray
J
Treatment of viral gastroenteritis
Viral Gastroenteritis
 , 
2003
Amsterdam
Elsevier Science
(pg. 
93
-
104
)
72
Gentsch
JR
Woods
PA
Ramachandran
M
, et al.  . 
Review of G and P typing results from a global collection of rotavirus strains: implications for vaccine development
J Infect Dis
 , 
1996
, vol. 
174
 (pg. 
S30
-
6
)
75
Desselberger
U
Iturriza-Gómara
M
Gray
J
Rotavirus epidemiology and surveillance
Novartis Found Symp
 , 
2001
, vol. 
238
 (pg. 
125
-
47
Review
76
Santos
N
Hoshino
Y
Global distribution of rotavirus serotypes/genotypes and its implication for the development and implementation of an effective rotavirus vaccine
Rev Med Virol
 , 
2005
, vol. 
15
 (pg. 
29
-
56
Review
85
Van Damme
P
Giaquinto
C
Maxwell
M
Todd
P
van der Wielen
M
REVEAL Study Group
Distribution of rotavirus genotypes in Europe 2004–2005: the REVEAL study
J Infect Dis
 , 
2007
, vol. 
195
 (pg. 
S17
-
35
)
87
Gleizes
O
Desselberger
U
Tatochenko
V
, et al.  . 
Nosocomial rotavirus infection in European countries: a review of the epidemiology, severity and economic burden of hospital-acquired rotavirus infections
Pediatr Infect Dis J
 , 
2006
, vol. 
25
 (pg. 
S12
-
21
Review
88
Hung
T
Rotavirus and adult diarrhoea
Adv Virus Res
 , 
1988
, vol. 
35
 (pg. 
193
-
218
Review
96
Iturriza-Gómara
M
Desselberger
U
Gray
J
Desselberger
U
Gray
J
Molecular epidemiology of rotaviruses: Genetic mechanisms associated with diversity
Viral Gastroenteritis.
 , 
2003
Amsterdam
Elsevier Science
(pg. 
317
-
44
Review
97
Iturriza-Gómara
M
Isherwood
B
Desselberger
U
Gray
J
Reassortment in vivo: driving force for diversity of human rotavirus strains isolated in the United Kingdom between 1995 and 1999
J Virol
 , 
2001
, vol. 
75
 (pg. 
3696
-
705
)
103
Steyer
A
Poljsak-Prijatelj
M
Barlic-Maganja
D
Marin
J
Human, porcine and bovine rotaviruses in Slovenia: evidence of interspecies transmission and genome reassortment
J Gen Virol
 , 
2008
, vol. 
89
 (pg. 
1690
-
8
)
107
Glass
RI
Parashar
UD
Bresee
JS
, et al.  . 
Rotavirus vaccines: current prospects and future challenges
Lancet
 , 
2006
, vol. 
368
 (pg. 
323
-
32
)
108
Glass
RI
Parashar
UD
The promise of new rotavirus vaccines
N Engl J Med
 , 
2006
, vol. 
354
 (pg. 
75
-
7
)
109
Angel
J
Franco
MA
Greenberg
HB
Rotavirus vaccines: recent developments and future considerations
Nature Rev
 , 
2007
, vol. 
5
 (pg. 
529
-
39
Review
110
Dennehy
PH
Rotavirus vaccines: an overview
Clin Microbiol Rev
 , 
2008
, vol. 
21
 (pg. 
198
-
208
Review
114
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
Rotavirus vaccine for the prevention of rotavirus gastroenteritis among children
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
 , 
1999
, vol. 
48
 (pg. 
1
-
22
)
115
Murphy
TV
Garguillo
PM
Massoudi
MS
, et al.  . 
Intussusception among infants given an oral rotavirus vaccine
N Engl J Med
 , 
2001
, vol. 
344
 (pg. 
564
-
72
)
119
Chang
EJ
Zangwill
KM
Lee
H
Ward
JI
Lack of association between rotavirus infection and intussusception: implications for use of attenuated rotavirus vaccines
Pediatr Infect Dis J
 , 
2002
, vol. 
21
 (pg. 
97
-
102
)
120
Velazquez
FR
Luna
G
Cedillo
R
Torres
J
Munoz
O
Natural rotavirus infection is not associated with intussusception in Mexican children
Pediatr Infect Dis J
 , 
2004
, vol. 
23
 (pg. 
S173
-
8
)
124
Vesikari
T
Matson
DO
Dennehy
P
, et al.  . 
Rotavirus Efficacy and Safety Trial (REST) Study Team
Safety and efficacy of a pentavalent human-bovine (WC3) reassortant rotavirus vaccine
N Engl J Med
 , 
2006
, vol. 
354
 (pg. 
23
-
33
)
125
Parashar
UD
Alexander
JP
Glass
RI
Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Prevention of rotavirus gastroenteritis among infants and children. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
MMWR Recommend Rep
 , 
2006
, vol. 
55
 (pg. 
1
-
13
)
127
Ruiz-Palacios
GM
Perez-Schael
I
Velazquez
FR
, et al.  . 
Human Rotavirus Vaccine Study Group
Safety and efficacy of an attenuated vaccine against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis
N Engl J Med
 , 
2006
, vol. 
354
 (pg. 
11
-
22
)
128
Vesikari
T
Karvonen
A
Prymula
R
, et al.  . 
Efficacy of human rotavirus vaccine against rotavirus gastroenteritis during the first 2 years of life in European infants: randomised, double-blind controlled study
Lancet
 , 
2007
, vol. 
370
 (pg. 
1757
-
63
)
129
Vesikari
T
Van Damme
P
Giaquinto
C
, et al.  . 
European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases/European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition evidence-based recommendations for rotavirus vaccination in Europe: executive summary
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr
 , 
2008
, vol. 
46
 (pg. 
615
-
8
)
131
Van Damme
P
Giaquinto
C
Huet
F
Gothefors
L
Maxwell
M
Van der Wielen
M
REVEAL Study Group
Multicenter prospective study of the burden of rotavirus acute gastroenteritis in Europe, 2004–2005: the REVEAL study
J Infect Dis
 , 
2007
, vol. 
195
 (pg. 
S4
-
S16
)
135
Standaert
B
Harlin
O
Desselberger
U
The financial burden of rotavirus disease in four countries of the European Union
Pediatr Infect Dis J
 , 
2008
, vol. 
27
 (pg. 
S20
-
S27
)
137
Valencia-Mendoza
A
Bertozzi
SM
Gutierrez
JP
Itzler
R
Cost-effectiveness of introducing a rotavirus vaccine in developing countries: the case of Mexico
BMC Infect Dis
 , 
2008
, vol. 
8
 pg. 
103
 
138
Widdowson
MA
Meltzer
MI
Zhang
X
Bresee
JS
Parashar
UD
Glass
RI
Cost-effectiveness and potential impact of rotavirus vaccination in the United States
Pediatrics
 , 
2007
, vol. 
119
 (pg. 
684
-
97
)
146
World Health Organization
Rotavirus vaccines. WHO position paper
Wkly Epidemiol Rec
 , 
2007
, vol. 
82
 (pg. 
285
-
95
)
147
Desselberger
U
Wolleswinkel-van den Bosch
J
Mrukowicz
J
Rodrigo
C
Giaquinto
C
Vesikari
T
Rotavirus types in Europe and their significance for vaccination
Pediatr Infect Dis J
 , 
2006
, vol. 
25
 (pg. 
S30
-
41
)
150
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Delayed onset and diminished magnitude of rotavirus activity – United States November 2007—May 2008
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
 , 
2008
, vol. 
57
 (pg. 
699
-
700
)

Supplementary data