Banner

News

Article

ACIP votes on change to MMRV vaccine recommendation for children younger than 4

Fact checked by:

Key Takeaways

  • ACIP recommended separate MMR and varicella vaccines for children under four, rejecting the combined MMRV vaccine.
  • The proposal to update the VFC program to reflect the new recommendation was denied, maintaining current vaccine coverage.
SHOW MORE

Vaccines for Children program coverage will remain unchanged, according to vote.

mmr vaccine vial: © Leigh Prather - stock.adobe.com 283415438.jpeg

© Leigh Prather - stock.adobe.com 283415438.jpeg

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices voted to recommend a policy change to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Measles, Mumps, Rubella, and Varicella (MMRV) Vaccines

VOTE: The pediatric vaccine schedule should be updated to reflect the following change:

  • For measles, mumps, rubella and varicella vaccines given before age 4 years, the combined MMRV vaccine is not recommended.
  • Children in this age group should receive separate measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and varicella vaccine (MMR+V).

Passed 8-3, with one abstention.

Ayes: James V. Pagano, MD; Kirk Milhoan, MD, PhD; Catherine Stein, PhD; Evelyn Griffin, MD; Raymond Pollack, MD, FACS, FRCS; Vicky Pebsworth, OP, PhD, RN; Retsef Levi, PhD; Chair Martin Kulldorff, PhD

Nays: Hillary Blackburn, PharmD, MBA; Joseph Hibbeln, MD, ABNP, CAPT USPHS (Ret.); Cody H. Meissner, MD

Abstaining: Robert Malone, MD, MS, due to preexisting legal agreements

That vote took place on Sept. 18, as did a vote on the MMR+V shot in the Vaccines for Children program. On Sept. 19, ACIP voted to reconsider that earlier vote.

In the second vote, ACIP voted 9-0, with three abstentions, to approve: Regarding the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program, the voting language said: “Approve the updated Vaccines for Children resolution for prevention of measles, mumps, rubella and varicella.”

Ayes: Levi, Pebsworth, Hibbeln, Pollak, Griffin, Stein, Blackburn, Milhoan, Pagano

Abstaining: Malone, Meissner, Kulldorff

Kulldorff blamed the error on the ACIP members being new to the meeting procedures. Typically the votes on the recommendation and the VFC program are the same, he said. Hibbeln agreed the wording of the VFC program was confusing.

Newsletter

Stay informed and empowered with Medical Economics enewsletter, delivering expert insights, financial strategies, practice management tips and technology trends — tailored for today’s physicians.

Related Videos
A new chapter in student loans: Video explainer © Nadzeya - stock.adobe.com
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.