Skip directly to site content Skip directly to search


Español  Other Languages


Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC twenty four seven. Saving Lives, Protecting People
 Search
		×
			Vaccines site
			Vaccines site
				All CDC
				Submit
			For a full list of topics:A-Z Index
			Advanced Search
		Advanced Search


Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)








ACIP Evidence to Recommendations for Use of JYNNEOS (orthopoxvirus) Vaccine Primary Series for Research, Clinical Laboratory, and Response Team Personnel (Policy Question 1)										Related Pages
										**Question****:** Should JYNNEOS® be recommended for research and clinical laboratory personnel performing diagnostic testing for orthopoxviruses* and for designated response teams# at risk for occupational exposure to orthopoxviruses?
**Population:** Clinical laboratory personnel performing diagnostic testing for orthopoxviruses and designated response teams
**Intervention:** Vaccination with JYNNEOS®
**Comparison(s):** Vaccination with ACAM2000
**Outcome:** 1) Prevention of disease 2) Severity of disease 3) Serious adverse events 4) Myo-/peri-carditis
*Clinical laboratory personnel who perform routine chemistry, hematology, and urinalysis testing, including for suspect patients with orthopoxvirus infections, are not included in this recommendation as their risk for exposure is very low
#Public health authorities, at their own discretion, may approve a cohort of healthcare and/or public health personnel to receive primary vaccination against orthopoxviruses for preparedness purposes (i.e., in the event of a smallpox or monkeypox outbreak)
[Note:  Clinical laboratory personnel who perform routine chemistry, hematology, and urinalysis procedures are not recommended to be vaccinated with ACAM2000 or JYNNEOS because their risk of occupational exposure to orthopoxviruses is very low]**Background:**
In September 2019, FDA approved JYNNEOS®, a live replication-deficient modified vaccinia Ankara, for the prevention of smallpox and monkeypox disease in adults 18 years of age and older determined to be at high risk for smallpox or monkeypox infection.  With the licensure of this vaccine, there are now 2 vaccines available in the United States for the prevention of orthopoxviruses; the other vaccine is ACAM2000, a live replicating vaccinia virus vaccine that is derived from a clonal isolate of Dryvax, the New York City Board of Health strain widely used during the smallpox eradication campaign.  JYNNEOS® differs from ACAM2000 in several ways:  JYNNEOS® is administered subcutaneously in 2 doses that are given 28 days apart, does not produce a cutaneous reaction or “take”, and does not carry risks for inadvertent inoculation or autoinoculation.  Serious adverse events like progressive vaccinia and eczema vaccinatum are not expected to occur with JYNNEOS®; this is because the uncontrolled viral replication that occurred with previous orthopoxvirus vaccines (i.e., live, replicating vaccines) does not happen with JYNNEOS® (live, non-replicating vaccine). Cardiac adverse events like myopericarditis are believed to be fewer with JYNNEOS®. FDA assessed effectiveness by comparing its immunologic response to that of ACAM2000 and deemed it non-inferior.
CDC has received multiple inquiries from federal agencies, occupational health clinics, and vaccinees inquiring about when JYNNEOS will be available.  Because of the favorable profile outlined above, there is specific interest in receiving doses of JYNNEOS® (instead of ACAM2000) as the recommended boosters even though ACAM2000 was the vaccination administered for the primary series for a vaccinee.Problem
Problem
Criteria
Work Group Judgements
Evidence
Additional Information**Is the problem of public health importance?**
Yes
It is important to have more than one vaccine available for prevention of orthopoxviruses and this would be a second that is currently available
Public health authorities are being asked when JYNNEOS will be available because there is interest in receiving it.
There is unpublished data from DRC that JYNNEOS is preferred to ACAM2000; we anticipate there will be many requests in the U.S. for JYNNEOS as well.Benefits and Harms
Benefits and Harms
Criteria
Work Group Judgements
Evidence
Additional Information**How substantial are the desirable anticipated effects?**
Small
Evidence table for outcome A, prevention of disease, suggests that there is a small benefit of JYNNEOS compared to ACAM2000 for prevention of infection
Found to be non-inferior to ACAM2000 for immunogenicity by FDA resulting in licensure
JYNNEOS is not a replicating virus so there is no potential for spread to others**How substantial are the undesirable anticipated effects?**
Minimal
No known harms; however, the Evidence table could not adequately assess adverse events given the low number of subjects and other study limitations
There are few contraindications and believed to be fewer serious adverse events**Do the desirable effects outweigh the undesirable effects?**
Favors interventional
Benefits listed above are large and the harms are minimal**What is the overall certainty of this evidence for the critical outcomes?**
Effectiveness of the intervention:
Moderate
The Evidence table shows moderate certainty for prevention of disease and either low (for serious adverse events and myopericarditis) or very low (severity of disease) outcomesValues
Values
Criteria
Work Group Judgements
Evidence
Additional Information**Does the target population feel that the desirable effects are large relative to undesirable effects?**
Yes
There is no research data to evaluate this but the target population has been making multiple requests for this vaccine**Is there important uncertainty about or variability in how much people value the main outcomes?**
Probably not important uncertainty or variability
Although there is no research identified, stakeholders are expected to value immunity and the 2-dose JYNNEOS was found to be non-inferior to ACAM2000 by FDA for immunogenicity
There are 2-doses over 28 days needed for JYNNEOS but only one vaccination visit for ACAM2000 and an individual will not be considered fully vaccinated until later for JYNNEOS than ACAM2000Acceptability
Acceptability
Criteria
Work Group Judgements
Evidence
Additional Information**Is the intervention acceptable to key stakeholders?**
Yes
Ease of finding provider
No risk of transmission to others
No absences from work to travel to a provider who can give the vaccine; any provider can administer a subcutaneous injection
Less pain and no concerns for auto-inoculation or infection transmission to others, particularly to immunocompromised persons and those with eczema
Although there is no research evidence available, orthopoxvirus recipients have repeatedly reached out to CDC and the product sponsor to ask about the availability of the vaccine suggesting that the convenience associated with the vaccine makes the booster dose acceptable.Resource Use
Resource Use
Criteria
Work Group Judgements
Evidence
Additional Information**Is the intervention a reasonable and efficient allocation of resources?**
Yes
JYNNEOS, like ACAM2000, would be provided from HHS’ Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) free-of-cost to the patient
The cost of the clinic appointments could potentially be more for JYNNEOS because two in-person clinic visits are needed.  In the case of ACAM2000, only one clinic visit is needed for vaccination but a second ~7 days later is recommended to confirm the cutaneous reaction, i.e., “take”, confirming vaccination; this, however, can potentially occur through telemedicine and does not require an in-person visit
Some clinics have patients return for in-person clnic appointments on days 3, 7 etc.  So there may be multiple clinical appointments for ACAM2000 even though only one appointment for the vaccine.Equity
Equity
Criteria
Work Group Judgements
Evidence
Additional Information**What would be the impact on health equity?**
Increased
For some vaccine recipients, the cost of the clinic appointment is absorbed by the employer; for others, it is not. There would be no change in those costs. However, there would be decreased costs and challenges for those who have to travel to identify a provider to provide the vaccine.Feasibility
Feasibility
Criteria
Work Group Judgements
Evidence
Additional Information**Is the intervention feasible to implement?**
Yes
No research identified
Potentially more in-person clinic visits with JYNNEOS compared to ACAM2000 but less difficulty getting on a vaccination schedule because more providers willing to administer a subcutaneous injectionBalance of consequences
Desirable consequences *probably outweigh*undesirable consequences in most settings
Is there sufficient information to move forward with a recommendation? Yes.
Policy options for ACIP consideration
ACIP recommends the intervention
Final deliberation and decision by the ACIP
Final ACIP recommendation
Additional ACIP considerationsTop of Page
							
					
							Last Reviewed:  May 25, 2022						Source: 	National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
					Facebook
        Twitter
        LinkedIn
        Syndicate homeACIP Home
Meeting Information
Committee Informationplus icon
Role of the ACIP in CDC’s Vaccine Recommendations
Charter
Economics Studies
Committee Membersplus icon
ACIP Membership Roster
Apply for ACIP Membership
Work Groupsplus icon
VaST Reportsplus icon
June 28, 2021
May 24, 2021
May 17, 2021
March 29, 2021
Recommendationsplus icon
Shared Clinical Decision-Making Recommendations
Evidence Based Recommendationsplus icon
About GRADE
Grade Evidence Tables
Evidence to Recommendations Frameworks Vaccines & ImmunizationsImmunization SchedulesVFC ResolutionsVaccine Information Statements (VISs)
  1600 Clifton Road, N.E., Mailstop A27
Atlanta, GA 30329-4027acip@cdc.gov


About CDC
					Contact Us
					800-232-4636
 Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn Youtube Pinterest Snapchat
 CONTACT CDC
				Contact Us
							Call 800-232-4636
							Email Us
			ABOUT CDC
				About CDC
							Jobs
							Funding
			POLICIES
				Accessibility
							External Links
							Privacy
							Policies
							No Fear Act
							FOIA
							OIG
							Nondiscrimination
							Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
			CONNECT WITH US
				Facebook
								Twitter
								Instagram
								LinkedIn
							Youtube
								Pinterest
								Snapchat
								Email
			LANGUAGES
				Español
							繁體中文
							Tiếng Việt
							한국어
							Tagalog
							Русский
							العربية
							Kreyòl Ayisyen
							Français
							Polski
							Português
							Italiano
							Deutsch
							日本語
							فارسی
							English


U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
			Accessibility
			External Links
			Privacy
			Policies
			No Fear Act
			FOIA
			Nondiscrimination
			OIG
			Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
			USA.gov


Exit Notification / Disclaimer Policy Close
 Links with this icon  indicate that you are leaving the CDC website. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.
				Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.
				You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.
				CDC is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on other federal or private website. Website Disclaimers
 Cancel Continue