Distribution of Rotavirus Strains before and after Introduction of the Rotarix Vaccine in the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) in Senegal
Diop Amadou1,2, Diéye Baïdy1,2, Sonko Mouhamadou Abdoulaye1, Touré Mamadou1, Thiongane Aliou3, Faye Papa Moctar3, Diallo Aliou4, Diop Boly5, Niang Aïssatou Ahmet2,6, Diallo Fatoumata2,6, Sarr Habibou7, Dia Mouhamadou Lamine2,6
1Bacteriology-Virology Laboratory of Albert Royer National Children’s Hospital Center, Dakar, Senegal.
2Bacteriology-Virology Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Pharmacy and Odonto-Stomatology, Cheikh Anta Diop University, Dakar, Senegal.
3Pediatric Service of the Albert Royer National Children’s Hospital Center, Dakar, Senegal.
4Expanded Immunization Program, World Health Organization Country Office, Dakar, Senegal.
5Direction of Prevention, Ministry of Health, Dakar, Senegal.
6Laboratory of Bacteriology-Virology, National University Hospital Center of Fann, Dakar, Senegal.
7UFR in Health Sciences, University of Ziguinchor, Ziguinchor, Senegal.
DOI: 10.4236/ojmm.2025.154019   PDF    HTML   XML   12 Downloads   74 Views  

Abstract

Senegal introduced the monovalent Rotavirus vaccine into its Expanded Program on Immunization in November 2014. The main objective of this study was to monitor the distribution of Rotavirus strains following vaccine introduction in Senegal. Materials and Methods Stool specimens were collected from children under 5 years of age who were hospitalized or under observation at the Albert Royer National Children’s Hospital in Dakar from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2020. Rotavirus antigen detection was performed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and molecular characterization of ELISA-positive samples was conducted at the West African Regional Rotavirus Reference Laboratory in Accra, Ghana. Results: A total of 313 ELISA-positive samples underwent molecular characterization: 235 samples (75.07%) were collected before vaccine introduction and 78 samples (24.93%) after. During the pre-vaccine period, VP7 genotypes G1 and G12 and VP4 genotypes P[6] and P[8] accounted for more than 90% of circulating G and P genotypes. In the post-vaccine period, VP7 genotypes G3 and G1 represented over 47% of strains, while VP4 genotypes P[6] and P[8] comprised nearly 90%. The predominant strain combinations were G12P[8] and G1P[6] before vaccine introduction, shifting to G3P[8] and G1P[8] afterward. Conclusion G12P[8] and G1P[6] genotypes predominated in the pre-vaccine era, whereas G3P[8] and G1P[8] were the most frequent after vaccine introduction. Continuous surveillance in the post-vaccine period is essential to monitor circulating Rotavirus strains and detect unusual or emerging genotypes.

Share and Cite:

Amadou, D. , Baïdy, D. , Abdoulaye, S. , Mamadou, T. , Aliou, T. , Moctar, F. , Aliou, D. , Boly, D. , Ahmet, N. , Fatoumata, D. , Habibou, S. and Lamine, D. (2025) Distribution of Rotavirus Strains before and after Introduction of the Rotarix Vaccine in the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) in Senegal. Open Journal of Medical Microbiology, 15, 233-241. doi: 10.4236/ojmm.2025.154019.

1. Introduction

Acute gastroenteritis (AGE) remains a major public health concern and is one of the leading causes of pediatric hospitalization. In low- and middle-income countries, morbidity and mortality rates remain high [1] [2]. Rotaviruses are the principal etiological agents of infantile gastroenteritis. Antigenic diversity within the viral outer capsid proteins VP7 and VP4, as well as genetic variability of their encoding genes, has led to a classification into G and P genotypes [3]. At least 32 G genotypes and 47 P genotypes have been described, producing numerous G/P combinations [3]. Molecular epidemiology studies have significantly advanced Rotavirus vaccine development. In November 2014, the Senegalese Ministry of Health and Social Action, with Gavi support, introduced the two-dose monovalent live-attenuated human Rotavirus vaccine RV1 (RIX4414 strain, G1P[8] specificity; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals) into the national Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI). RV1 is administered at 6 and 10 weeks of age. Although genotypes G1 to G4 are globally prevalent, emergent genotypes such as G9 and G12 currently not included in vaccines are being increasingly reported worldwide [4] [5]. The emergence of novel genotypes highlights the need for ongoing Rotavirus surveillance both before and after vaccine introduction. The primary objective of this study was to monitor the molecular evolution of circulating rotavirus strains in children under 5 years of age in Senegal, comparing the periods before and after implementation of the national Rotavirus vaccination program.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Population

It was a prospective study covering the period from January 1st, 2011 to December 31, 2020, conducted at the Rotavirus sentinel surveillance site at the Albert Royer National Children’s Hospital in Dakar. This surveillance has been established since 2005 by the World Health Organization (WHO), under the authority of the Ministry of Health and Social Action, therefore with the agreement of the national epidemiological surveillance officials and the hospital. Surveillance years were defined as March of one year through February of the following year. Given that vaccine introduction occurred in November 2014, March 2014-February 2015 was considered a transitional period.

Fecal samples were collected from children less than 5 years of age admitted with a primary diagnosis of AGE within 48 h of hospitalization. AGE is defined as three or more watery stools per 24-hour period, lasting for a period of 7 days or less. Upon enrolment, informed consent was obtained from the child’s parent or guardian, a questionnaire was administered to obtain demographic and clinical information, and 10 grams of stool was collected and transported to the CHNEAR laboratory for analysis. Detection of group A Rotavirus antigen was performed by using enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (ProSpecTTM, Oxoid Cambridge, United Kingdom).

Rotavirus-positive stools were subsequently stored at −80˚C before their molecular characterization at the West African Regional Rotavirus Reference Laboratory (RRL) located at the Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research, University of Ghana.

2.2. Polyacrylamide gel Electrophoresis (PAGE)

All RV EIA-positive stool specimens were subjected to Polyacrylamide Gel Electrophoresis (PAGE) to ascertain the integrity of the RNA genome. Simarly, all EIA-negative samples were also subjected to PAGE to screen for any non-group A Rotavirus. Briefly, viral RNA was extracted from 10% faecal suspensions by the Bender method [6] with slight modification for PAGE analysis [7]. The extracted double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) was electrophoresed on a 10% polyacrylamide slab gel for 18 - 20 h at 100 V using the discontinuous buffer system as described by Laemmli [8]. A 3% stacking gel was employed to enhance the resolution of the segmented genes. Bands were visualized by silver-staining technique [9].

2.3. Molecular Characterization by RT-PCR

RVA dsRNA was extracted from 10% fecal suspensions of EIA-positive and EIA negative PAGE-positive samples by the phenol/chloroform method as described by Steele and Alexander and purified with an RNaid Kit (Bio 101, Carlsbad, USA) [9]. RT-PCR was carried out using consensus primers Beg9/End9 and Con2/Con3 to amplify the VP7 and VP4 genes respectively [10] [11]. Semi-nested multiplex PCR was done for G- and P-typing by using genotype-specific primers as described previously [12] [13]. The amplified product was electrophoresed on a 2% agarose gel, and the genotypes determined by the sizes of the amplicons. All demographic, clinical and laboratory data were entered into a database and analyzed using Stata version 14. We used the chi-square test to calculate the value of probability p to determine. P-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Data were entered and analyzed using Epi Info 3.5 and Microsoft Excel.

3. Results

During the pre-vaccine period (2010-2014), a total of 683 stool specimens were collected, of which 333 tested positive for Rotavirus, corresponding to a positivity rate of 48.76%. This rate declined to 15.29% in the post-vaccine period (2015-2020), when 89 of 582 samples were positive. The p value indicates a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) (Table 1).

Table 1. Distribution of rotavirus cases according to vaccination periods.

Number of stools collected

Number of positive stools

Percentage of Rotavirus positives

p-value

Pre-vaccine period

683

333

48.76%

p < 0.01

Post-vaccine period

582

89

15.29%

A total of 313 Rotavirus-positive stools underwent genotyping: 235 from the pre-vaccine period and 78 from the post-vaccine period.

Pre-vaccine genotypes

VP7 genotypes

Among the 235 strains, 177 (75.31%) were successfully typed for VP7. The VP7 genotyping revealed five different G genotypes: G1, G2, G8, G9, and G12, with G1 and G12 predominating (Table 2).

Table 2. Distribution of rotavirus genotypes during the pre-vaccine period (2011-2014).

VP4

Total

P[6]

P[8]

P[Mix]

VP7

G1

38

26

4

68

G2

8

2

1

11

G8

7

1

0

8

G9

1

28

0

29

G12

9

51

1

61

GNT

29

28

1

58

Total

92

136

7

235

VP4 genotypes

Two P genotypes were identified P[6] and P[8] with P[8] predominating at approximately 57.87% (Table 2).

VP7/VP4 combinations

Simultaneous typing of VP7 and VP4 was achieved for 170 samples (72.34%), revealing distinct G/P associations (Table 2). The most frequent combination was G12P[8] (28.81%), followed by G1P[6] (21.46%), G9P[8] (15.81%), and G1P[8] (14.68%).

Post-vaccine genotypes

VP7 genotypes

Four VP7 genotypes were detected: G1, G2, G3, G9, and G12 with G3 being the most common, followed by G1 (Table 3).

Table 3. Distribution of Rotavirus genotypes during the post-vaccine period (2015-2020).

VP4

Total

P[4]

P[6]

P[8]

P[Mix]

VP7

G1

1

6

8

0

15

G2

1

4

1

1

7

G3

2

6

12

2

22

G9

0

1

4

0

5

G12

0

4

1

1

7

G mix

0

5

4

1

8

Total

4

22

48

4

78

VP4 genotypes

VP4 genotyping identified three primary genotypes: P[4], P[6], and P[8], along with mixed types P[8] P[6] and P[4] P[6]. P[8] remained the dominant VP4 genotype (Table 3).

VP7/VP4 combinations

Concurrent VP7/VP4 genotyping was achieved for 66 strains (84.61%). The most frequent G/P association was G3P[8] (18.18%), followed by G1P[8] (12.12%) (Table 3).

4. Discussion

Acute gastroenteritis remains one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality among children under five years of age in developing countries, with Rotavirus as the most common infectious etiology. Laboratory-diagnosed Rotavirus AGE, particularly among younger children, substantially declined following Rotavirus vaccine introduction in Senegal. Rotavirus vaccine was introduced in November 2014, and rapidly reached 89% two-dose coverage by the end of 2015, and 96% by 2020 [14]. Infants were the first to benefit from vaccine. Our findings reveal a substantial decline in the number of circulating Rotavirus strains in the country after vaccine introduction. Genotyping at the Rotavirus Reference Laboratory (collaborating laboratory of the World Health Organization) was carried out according to the available budget. That’s why all positive Rotavirus were not genotyped.

Among the G genotypes identified, G1 was most frequent during the pre-vaccine period of our study, followed by G12 and G9, whereas after vaccination G3 became predominant, followed by G12, G1, and untyped genotypes. The genotyping protocol used makes it possible to detect more than 95% of the main genotypes responsible for human Rotavirus infections. So the untyped strains will not have an impact on the distribution of genotypes, especially during the pre-vaccination period. These results confirm that the globally common strains (G1, G2, G3, G4, and G9) are not detected in the same proportions in Senegal compared with developed countries [15]-[17] and even some other African nations. For example, in Zimbabwe the predominant strains were G9 (34%), G2 (26%), G1 (13%), G8 (5%), and G12 (4%) [4]; similarly, in Thailand G1 accounted for 50%, G2 for 26.9%, G3 for 10.1%, and G9 for 4.3% [18].

Since vaccine introduction, genotype G3 has dominated in Senegal, similar to findings in Malaysia [19], whereas G12 predominates in Ivory Coast [20]. Although G3 was never a predominant genotype in Senegal studies. The dominant genotypes in Zimbabwe (G9, G2) differ from those in Senegal [4]. Our results show that P[8] and P[6] genotypes were the most common both before and after vaccination, mirroring the relatively stable P-type distribution observed in Zimbabwe, despite a marked quantitative decline [4].

Before vaccination, the predominant strains in our study were G12P[8] (28.81%), G1P[6] (21.46%), G9P[8] (15.81%), and G1P[8] (14.68%). Globally, prior to vaccine introduction, five G/P genotype combinations were most often associated with rotavirus diarrhea: G1P[8], G2P[4], G3P[8], G4P[8], and G9P[8] [17] [21] [22]. Other studies have shown that globally rare strains were more frequently detected in Africa (27%), Asia (14%), and South America (11%) compared with North America (5%) and Europe (4%) [23] [24]. Among these African strains, some (G12P[8], G3P[6], G1P[6], and G9P[6]) were present and predominant in Senegal before vaccination [24].

However, after introduction of the G1P[8] Rotarix vaccine, G12P[8] was replaced by G3P[8] (18.18%), followed by G1P[8] (12.12%), G3P[6] (9.09%), and G1P[6] (9.09%) in our study. This aligns with the work of Bilbera and al., who reported that the most important circulating genotypes during the post-vaccination period included G2P[4] and five other G/P combinations (G1P[8], G3P[8], G9P[8], G4P[8], G12P[8]) [25]. These findings highlight the strong effectiveness of the vaccine against genotypes such as G12P[8] and G1P[6].

Although G3P[8] has been detected in several countries, the detection rate varies. Few G3P[8] strains have been detected in Germany, Hungary, Japan and the USA. In Australia and Spain, the detection rate was moderate, between 14.4 and 37.4%. G3P[8] was predominant in Brazil, Indonesia and Thailand during the 2016-2017 seasons [19]. This emergence of G3P[8] could be due to a high coverage rate of the Rotarix vaccine. In Australia, the dominance G3P[8] is attributed to high Rotarix vaccine coverage-related vaccine-induced selective pressure. The dominance of G3P[8] in Thailand and Hungary is also attributed to vaccine-induced selective pressure, although Rotarix is only available on the private market and has lower national coverage in these two countries. Furthermore, the G3P[8] dominance in Spain is also attributed to vaccine-induced selective pressure, although RotaTeq has been primarily used there [19].

Notably, 90% of circulating strains worldwide share epitopes on VP4 and 30% on VP7, which enables cross-recognition by neutralizing antibodies [26]. The Rotarix® vaccine (GSK) contains an attenuated strain belonging to the same G1P[8] group as the Wa strain, conferring protection against both homotypic and heterotypic strains [22]. Regardless of the changes in genotype distributions, the overall prevalence of rotavirus has decreased substantially in all countries following rotavirus vaccine introduction [27].

Because of its segmented genome, the virus can undergo point mutations, gene rearrangements, or gene reassortment, generating extensive genetic diversity. Mixed-genotype infections may also allow reassortment of RNA segments. Numerous reports have described natural reassortment events between animal and human rotavirus strains [28].

5. Conclusions

Unusual genotype combinations were observed during the study period. From 2010 to 2014, the dominant G and P genotypes were G1, G12, P[8] and P[6], whereas between 2015 and 2020 the predominant types shifted to G3, G12, P[8] and P[6].

Before vaccine introduction, the leading genotype associations were G12P[8], G1P[6], G9P[8], and G1P[8]. After vaccine rollout, G3P[8] became the most prevalent combination, followed by G1P[8], G1P[6], and G3P[6].

The emergence of the G3 genotype could pose a challenge to vaccine effectiveness. Enhanced surveillance of these newly circulating genotypes is therefore essential to ensure early detection and to guide vaccine policy and effectiveness assessments.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

[1] Tate, J.E., Burton, A.H., Boschi-Pinto, C. and Parashar, U.D. (2016) Global, Regional, and National Estimates of Rotavirus Mortality in Children < 5 Years of Age, 2000-2013. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 62, S96-S105.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[2] Digwo, D., Chidebelu, P., Ugwu, K., Adediji, A., Farkas, K. and Chigor, V. (2022) Prevalence and Relative Risk of Rotavirus Gastroenteritis in Children under Five Years in Nigeria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Pathogens and Global Health, 117, 24-35.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[3] Mourez, T., Sonia, B., Boutolleau, D. and Pillet, S. (2020) Traité de virologie médicale 2ème édition; Virus des gastro-entérites: Rotavirus et Norovirus. Société Française de Virologie, 502.
[4] Mukaratirwa, A., Berejena, C., Nziramasanga, P., Ticklay, I., Gonah, A., Nathoo, K., et al. (2018) Distribution of Rotavirus Genotypes Associated with Acute Diarrhoea in Zimbabwean Children Less than Five Years Old before and after Rotavirus Vaccine Introduction. Vaccine, 36, 7248-7255.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Mwenda, J.M., Abebe, A., Adegbola, R.A., et al. (2019) Rotavirus Strain Diversity and Impact of Vaccination in Africa. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 19, e34-e41.
[6] Flook, P.K., Wilson, M.D. and Post, R.J. (1992) The Repetitive Use of DNA Probes in the Analysis of Natural Populations of Insects and Parasites. In: Berry, R.J., Crawford, T.J. and Hewitt, G.M., Eds., Genes in Ecology, British Ecological Society/Blackwell Scientific Publication, 484-486.
[7] Asmah, R.H., Green, J., Armah, G.E., Gallimore, C.I., Gray, J.J., Iturriza-Gómara, M., et al. (2001) Rotavirus G and P Genotypes in Rural Ghana. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 39, 1981-1984.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[8] Laemmli, U.K. (1970) Cleavage of Structural Proteins during the Assembly of the Head of Bacteriophage T4. Nature, 227, 680-685.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[9] Herring, A.J., Inglis, N.F., Ojeh, C.K., Snodgrass, D.R. and Menzies, J.D. (1982) Rapid Diagnosis of Rotavirus Infection by Direct Detection of Viral Nucleic Acid in Silver-Stained Polyacrylamide Gels. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 16, 473-477.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Steele, A.D., Alexander, J.J. and Hay, I.T. (1986) Rotavirus-Associated Gastroenteritis in Black Infants in South Africa. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 23, 992-994.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] Iturriza-Gómara, M., Kang, G. and Gray, J. (2004) Rotavirus Genotyping: Keeping up with an Evolving Population of Human Rotaviruses. Journal of Clinical Virology, 31, 259-265.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[12] Gentsch, J.R., Glass, R.I., Woods, P., Gouvea, V., Gorziglia, M., Flores, J., et al. (1992) Identification of Group a Rotavirus Gene 4 Types by Polymerase Chain Reaction. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 30, 1365-1373.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Gouvea, V., Glass, R.I., Woods, P., Taniguchi, K., Clark, H.F., Forrester, B., et al. (1990) Polymerase Chain Reaction Amplification and Typing of Rotavirus Nucleic Acid from Stool Specimens. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 28, 276-282.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] Ministry of Health and Social Action of Senegal (2020) Annual Report on Vaccination Coverage, 2019.
[15] Leshem, E., Lopman, B., Glass, R., Gentsch, J., Bányai, K., Parashar, U., et al. (2014) Distribution of Rotavirus Strains and Strain-Specific Effectiveness of the Rotavirus Vaccine after Its Introduction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 14, 847-856.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Patel, M., Shane, A.L., Parashar, U.D., Jiang, B., Gentsch, J.R. and Glass, R.I. (2009) Oral Rotavirus Vaccines: How Well Will They Work Where They Are Needed Most? The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 200, S39-S48.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] Armah, G.E., Pager, C.T., Asmah, R.H., Anto, F.R., Oduro, A.R., Binka, F., et al. (2001) Prevalence of Unusual Human Rotavirus Strains in Ghanaian Children. Journal of Medical Virology, 63, 67-71.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Chieochansin, T., Vutithanachot, V., Phumpholsup, T., Posuwan, N., Theamboonlers, A. and Poovorawan, Y. (2016) The Prevalence and Genotype Diversity of Human Rotavirus a Circulating in Thailand, 2011-2014. Infection, Genetics and Evolution, 37, 129-136.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Amit, L.N., Mori, D., John, J.L., Chin, A.Z., Mosiun, A.K., Jeffree, M.S., et al. (2021) Emergence of Equine-Like G3 Strains as the Dominant Rotavirus among Children under Five with Diarrhea in Sabah, Malaysia during 2018-2019. PLOS ONE, 16, e0254784.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[20] Boni-Cisse, C., Meite, S., Mlan, A.B., Zaba, F., N’Guessan, R., Lepri, N.A., et al. (2018) Genotypic Characterization of Rotavirus in Children under 5 Years Circulating in Côte d’Ivoire from 2010 to 2013. Virology Journal, 15, Article No. 78.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[21] Bar-Zeev, N., Kapanda, L., Tate, J.E., Jere, K.C., Iturriza-Gomara, M., Nakagomi, O., et al. (2015) Effectiveness of a Monovalent Rotavirus Vaccine in Infants in Malawi after Programmatic Roll-Out: An Observational and Case-Control Study. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 15, 422-428.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[22] Correia, J.B., Patel, M.M., Nakagomi, O., Montenegro, F.M.U., Germano, E.M., Correia, N.B., et al. (2010) Effectiveness of Monovalent Rotavirus Vaccine (Rotarix) against Severe Diarrhea Caused by Serotypically Unrelated G2PStrains in Brazil. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 201, 363-369.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[23] Santos, N. and Hoshino, Y. (2004) Global Distribution of Rotavirus Serotypes/Genotypes and Its Implication for the Development and Implementation of an Effective Rotavirus Vaccine. Reviews in Medical Virology, 15, 29-56.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[24] Seheri, L.M., Magagula, N.B., Peenze, I., Rakau, K., Ndadza, A., Mwenda, J.M., et al. (2018) Rotavirus Strain Diversity in Eastern and Southern African Countries before and after Vaccine Introduction. Vaccine, 36, 7222-7230.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[25] Bibera, G.L., Chen, J., Pereira, P. and Benninghoff, B. (2020) Dynamics of G2P[4] Strain Evolution and Rotavirus Vaccination: A Review of Evidence for Rotarix. Vaccine, 38, 5591-5600.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] Franco, M.A., Angel, J. and Greenberg, H.B. (2006) Immunity and Correlates of Protection for Rotavirus Vaccines. Vaccine, 24, 2718-2731.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[27] Mhango, C., Mandolo, J.J., Chinyama, E., Wachepa, R., Kanjerwa, O., Malamba-Banda, C., et al. (2020) Rotavirus Genotypes in Hospitalized Children with Acute Gastroenteritis before and after Rotavirus Vaccine Introduction in Blantyre, Malawi, 1997-2019. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 225, 2127-2136.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[28] Mpabalwani, E.M., Simwaka, J.C., Mwenda, J.M., Matapo, B., Parashar, U.D. and Tate, J.E. (2018) Sustained Impact of Rotavirus Vaccine on Rotavirus Hospitalisations in Lusaka, Zambia, 2009-2016. Vaccine, 36, 7165-7169.[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Copyright © 2025 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.