Epidemiological surveillance for poliomyelitis and acute flaccid paralysis in the Russian Federation in 2013–2024

Full Text

Introduction

The Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) of the World Health Organization (WHO) has made significant progress to date: the eradication of wild poliovirus (WPV) types 2 and 3 has been certified, and 5 of the 6 WHO regions have been declared polio-free. Despite a dramatic decline in the number of polio cases caused by WPV1, it continues to circulate in endemic countries (Afghanistan, Pakistan) [1]. The greatest challenges to the successful implementation of the GPEI are vaccine-derived polioviruses (VDPVs) and the response to polio outbreaks caused by circulating VDPVs (cVDPVs)¹ [2].

Russia is a participant in the GPEI; in 1996, a program to eliminate polio in the country was approved. Between 1996 and 1999, the program’s organizational structures and methodological framework were established, and the Poliomyelitis Eradication Coordination Center was created; a national network of WHO-accredited laboratories for diagnosing poliomyelitis was formed; and since 2006, the National Action Plan to Maintain the Russian Federation’s Polio-Free Status has been implemented [3]. The foundation for the program’s implementation was the introduction of epidemiological surveillance for polio and diseases associated with acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) syndrome, in accordance with WHO recommendations². Epidemiological surveillance involves the identification of AFP cases in accordance with established criteria, laboratory testing of clinical specimens, panel-based case diagnosis, and reporting [3]. The indicators of quality surveillance in Russia include the number of identified AFP cases among children under 15 years of age, the timeliness and quality of fecal sample collection for testing, the speed and quality of sample delivery to the laboratory, and the timeliness of epidemiological investigations³⁴. Compliance with these indicators ensures the detection of poliovirus-associated poliomyelitis cases among a large group of nonspecific diseases manifested by AFP [4–7]. The program resulted in the WHO certifying Russia as polio-free in 2002 [8]. In the years since certification, the country has maintained this status. Since poliomyelitis has not yet been eradicated globally, Russia — like other polio-free countries — continues to face risks of the importation of WPV and VDPV. There are also risks of VDPV developing if polio vaccination coverage among children decreases below the mandated level (90%); shedding of VDPV by individuals with primary immunodeficiencies; and the spread of WPV beyond facilities that handle or store WPV, in the event of a breach of containment requirements. As with other countries that continue to use the oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV), there is a risk in Russia of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP) [9].

Therefore, conducting and maintaining epidemiological surveillance of polio/AFP at a regulated level is a critical task for ensuring the country’s public health and epidemiological well-being.

The aim of this study is to analyze the indicators and results of polio/AFP surveillance in Russia over a 12-year period (2013–2024) to assess the quality of surveillance and develop measures to mitigate risks related to polio.

Materials and methods

The surveillance system for polio/AFP in Russia includes the identification and registration of cases of disease accompanied by AFP syndrome in any nosological form, with a follow-up examination of patients 60 days after the onset of paralysis, the collection of clinical specimens (fecal and blood serum samples), laboratory tests performed within a network of regional and national laboratories specializing in the diagnosis of polio/AFP, epidemiological investigations, and the final classification of each case by the National Commission for the Diagnosis of polio/AFP (Fig. 1)³⁴.

 

Fig. 1. Epidemiological Surveillance System for polio/AFP in Russia.

RC polio/AFP — Regional Center for Epidemiological Surveillance of polio/AFP; NL/RRL — National Laboratory for polio/WHO Regional Reference Laboratory for polio.

 

The analysis of quality indicators and surveillance results was conducted based on data contained in documents approved in the Russian Federation³⁴:

• standard cards of epidemiological investigation for cases of polio and AFP cases;
• monthly reports on the registration of polio and AFP cases in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;
• data on laboratory investigation obtained from the national laboratory network and the WHO Regional Reference Laboratory at the Chumakov Federal Scientific Center for Researchand Development of Immune-and-Biological Products of Russian Academy of Sciences (Institute of Poliomyelitis);
• the conclusion of the National Commission on the Diagnosis of polio and AFP;
• reports on the activities of regional centers for epidemiological surveillance of polio and poliomyelitis-like illness;
• documentation confirming the polio-free status of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;
• documentation submitted by the Russian Federation to the WHO Regional Commission for the Certification of Poliomyelitis Eradication.

Virological studies were conducted in laboratories of the national network of polio laboratories (the National Laboratory of the Сhumakov Federal Scientific Center for Research and Development of Immune-and-Biological Products of Russian Academy of Sciences on Poliomyelitis of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Institute of Poliomyelitis); and laboratories of the regional centers of the Federal Budgetary Institution of Public Health “Center for Hygiene and Epidemiology” of Rospotrebnadzor in the city of Moscow, the Sverdlovsk and Omsk Regions, and the Stavropol and Khabarovsk Krai, the St. Petersburg Pasteur Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology) in accordance with the methodological documents of the Russian Federation⁵ and WHO recommendations⁶.

Statistical analysis of the data was performed using Microsoft Excel 2013. The results are presented as mean values and standard deviations. Differences were considered statistically significant at a p ≤ 0.05.

Results

Epidemiological Surveillance Indicators for polio/AFP

Between 2013 and 2024, 5,016 cases of AFP were reported in Russia based on initial diagnoses (Fig. 2). Throughout this period, the incidence rates of AFP not associated with poliovirus (non-poliomyelitis AFP) exceeded the WHO recommendation of 1 case per 100,000 children under 15 years of age (the average annual rate was 1.32 ± 0.23). A rate below the recommended level (0.91) was observed in 2020, which coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic and reflected a general trend observed in many countries, including the WHO European Region⁷. Since 2021, the rate has reached the recommended level.

 

Fig. 2. Trends in the incidence rate of AFP (per 100,000 children under 15) and the number of reported cases of AFP among children under 15 in Russia, 2013–2024.

 

The indicators of the quality of surveillance for polio/AFP (Table) generally met—and, for the most part, exceeded—the standards set by national regulations and recommended by the WHO. The decline in the indicator of the timeliness of AFP case detection since 2022 is due to the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

 

Quality Indicators for Epidemiological Surveillance of polio/AFP in Russia, 2013–2024

Indicator	Timeliness of detection, % (within 7 days of the onset of paralysis)	Timeliness of sample collection, % (collection of 2 stool samples 24–48 hours apart within 14 days of the onset of paralysis)	Timeliness of epidemiological investigations, % (within 24 hours of case registration)
As required by health regulations/ recommended by WHO*	80/80	80/80	90/80
2013	88.7	95.6	95.9
2014	88.6	95.9	96.4
2015	88.8	95.8	93.0
2016	89.0	95.0	96.8
2017	83.7	93.3	97.1
2018	85.3	93.0	97.6
2019	88.2	94.8	97.4
2020	82.5	91.9	95.1
2021	81.8	94.2	96.3
2022	79.3	91.7	97.3
2023	76.5	89.2	97.6
2024	78.1	91.8	99.0
Annual average, 2013–2024	84.2 ± 4.6	93.5 ± 2.1	96.6 ± 1.5

Note. *the Russian Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing (Rospotrebnadzor). SanPiN 3.3686-21 “Sanitary and epidemiological requirements for the prevention of infectious diseases”; World Health Organization. Guidance on management of wild poliovirus incidents in the European Region. Copenhagen; 2007. URL: https://fcgie.ru/download/koord_tsentr/Poilio_OB_IX_EURO_RUS.pdf

 

There was significant variability in the sensitivity of AFP surveillance across the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (Fig. 3). Most regions met and exceeded the regulated AFP incidence rate annually; however, a number of territories almost consistently failed to meet it or did not report a single case (silent territories). The number of such territories increased in 2020 (coinciding with the COVID-19 pandemic) and remained significant in subsequent years.

 

Fig. 3. Trends in the Number of Russian Federation Regions that did not meet the standardized Incidence Rate for AFP, 2013–2024.

 

Epidemiological Characteristics of AFP Cases

AFP cases were reported primarily among children under 5 years of age (50.54%; 2,535 cases), of which 625 (24.6% of all cases in this age group) and 573 cases (22.6%) were among children aged 1 and 2 years, respectively. Older children (ages 6–14) accounted for 49.14% (2,465 cases), adolescents aged 15–17 accounted for 0.3% (15 cases), and 1 case (0.02%) was reported in a 28-year-old adult.

By gender, boys predominated (2,944 cases; 58.8%).

The vaccination status of children with AFP varied. The majority of patients (4,136; 82.46%) were vaccinated, i.e., had received three or more doses of the polio vaccine; unvaccinated children accounted for 11.7% (Fig. 4). The proportion of vaccinated children gradually decreased from 86.46% in 2013 to 79.28% in 2024, and, accordingly, the number of unvaccinated children doubled — from 7.21% in 2013 to 14.7% in 2024. The highest percentage of unvaccinated individuals was recorded in 2022 — 17.04%.

 

Fig. 4. Vaccination Status of Patients with AFP Syndrome in Russia, 2013–2024

 

Results of virological investigation of specimens from AFP cases

Over the entire observation period, the rate of poliovirus isolation was 1.85% (Fig. 5), and that of non-poliomyelitis enteroviruses (NPEVs) was 1.46% (93 and 73 cases out of 5,016, respectively). The lowest rate of poliovirus isolation (0.97%) was observed in 2020, while the lowest rate for NPEVs was observed between 2020 (0.32%) and 2022 (no enteroviruses detected), which is most likely due to reduced circulation during the COVID-19 pandemic. The proportion of cases with poliovirus isolation gradually decreased over the observation period — from 3.93% in 2013 to 0.53–0.72% in 2023 and 2024, respectively. This trend reflects a decrease in the use of OPV and an increase in the number of doses of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) in the National Immunization Schedule to 4 in 2022.

 

Fig. 5. Rates of poliovirus and NPEV isolation from AFP Cases in Russia, 2013–2024.

 

Throughout the entire observation period, PV3 was the most frequently isolated from AFP cases (48.4%; n = 45 cases), followed by PV1 in 18.3% (n = 17) and PV2 in 11.8% (n = 11) of cases. PV mixtures were detected in 20 (21.5%) cases. PV2, including in mixtures with other types, was detected prior to the global transition from trivalent OPV to bivalent OPV in 2016 (Fig. 6).

 

Fig. 6. Distribution of AFP cases from which polioviruses (PVs) were isolated in Russia, 2013–2024.

 

Poliovirus isolates from AFP cases were characterized as vaccine-like, with the exception of PV isolates from 7 cases, which were classified as VDPV type 1 (1 in 2019, 3 in 2022) and VDPV type 3 (1 each in 2014, 2018, and 2024). Differences in nucleotide sequences in the genome region encoding the VP1 protein between the isolated strains and the prototypical homotypic Sabin strains ranged from 1.30% to 2.21%, which corresponds to a virus age of 1–2 years. The viruses showed no genetic evidence of human-to-human transmission and were classified as VDPV of unknown origin (see footnote 1).

Among AFP cases with isolation of NPEVs (viruses identified from 63 cases), those from which viruses of the Enterovirus betacoxsakie species were isolated predominated (71.4%; 45 cases) (Fig. 7). AFP cases associated with the isolation of viruses from the E. alphacoxsakie and E. coxsackiepol species accounted for 27.0% (17 cases) and 1.6% (1 case), respectively. The viral composition was diverse, but viruses from the CVB 1–6 group (22 cases; 34.9%) and EV-A71 (11 cases; 17.5%) were most frequently isolated from AFP cases. Among the identified CVB 1–6 viruses (9 cases), CVB4 and CVB5 predominated (44.4% each).

 

Fig. 7. AFP cases reported in Russia in 2013-2024, from which NPEVs were isolated.

Viruses of the E. alphacoxsakie species are marked in orange, those of the E. betacoxsakie species in blue,, and those of the E. coxsackiepol species in green.

 

Clinical Profile of AFP Cases

The breakdown of final diagnoses included conditions of various etiologies: polio, poly(radicul)neuropathies (including Guillain–Barré syndrome), mononeuropathies of the extremities (including post-traumatic ones), myelitis, paresis/paralysis due to a spinal cord tumor or nerve compression by a neoplasm, peripheral neuropathies due to infection or intoxication, other nonspecific neurological diseases, systemic diseases, or metabolic disorders, and paresis of unknown etiology (Fig. 8).

 

Fig. 8. Clinical Distribution of AFP Cases Reported in the Russian Federation, 2013–2024, %.

 

Between 2013 and 2024, of all cases registered based on preliminary diagnoses, 1,082 (21.57%) patients showed no clinical manifestations of AFP syndrome; such cases were classified by the National Commission as “non-AFP.” The structure of clinical diagnoses was dominated by poly(radicul)neuropathies (30.78%; n = 1,544), mononeuropathies of the extremities (25.57%; n = 1,283), myelitis accounted for 9.31% (n = 467), paralysis of unknown etiology — 9.17% (n = 460), and other forms (in total) — 2.91% (n = 146). Cases of polio accounted for 0.68% (n = 34).

Poliomyelitis cases

Between 2013 and 2024, 34 polio cases were identified: 30 cases were associated with OPV and classified as VAPP (10 in vaccine recipients, 20 in contacts with vaccine recipients); 2 were caused by VDPV; 2 were classified as “polio compatible” (according to ICD-10 A80.3 “Acute paralytic poliomyelitis, unspecified”). All cases were reported in children aged 5 years or younger, predominantly boys (85.3%; n = 29).

 

Fig. 9. Number of polio cases reported in Russia from 2013 to 2024.

Cases considered polio-compatible are those with a clinical presentation consistent with polio and a corresponding epidemiological history, from which the polio virus has not been isolated due to inadequate sample collection³ .

 

Eight VAPP cases occurred in recipients after the first dose of OPV, which the children received instead of IPV, constituting a violation of the polio immunization schedule and the sanitary and epidemiological requirements for VAPP prevention. In 2 VAPP cases of, the cases occurred in children with primary immunodeficiencies following OPV re-vaccination. In both cases, the children had received 3–4 doses of IPV prior to OPV administration.

All contact cases of VAPP occurred in children unprotected against polio (unvaccinated or vaccinated only once) as a result of contact with a vaccine virus shedder due to a violation of sanitary and epidemiological requirements for the isolation of children unvaccinated against polio from those recently vaccinated with OPV.

Two VAPP cases (in 2014 and 2019) were associated with VDPV3 and VDPV1 (1.3% and 1.2% nucleotide substitutions in the region of the genome encoding the VP1 protein, respectively). The case caused by VDPV3 occurred in a child who had not been vaccinated against polio and was residing in a facility for orphans and children without parental care, where a significant number of residents had not been vaccinated against polio due to unfounded medical exemptions from vaccination [10].

Of the two polio cases (in 2022 and 2024), one was associated with VDPV1 (2.1% of substitutions), and the other with VDPV3 (1.67% of substitutions). Both children had not been vaccinated against polio due to their parents’ refusal of immunization.

Discussion

Epidemiological surveillance of diseases associated with the AFP syndrome is one of the components of the GPEI and is carried out in most countries⁸, including 44 of the 53 countries in the European Region [11], for which the interruption of indigenous WPV circulation was certified as early as 2002. In the decades following certification, the risk of imported WPV or VDPV persisted and materialized on multiple occasions in countries of the European Region [12, 13], while in countries that continue to use OPV, the risk of VAPP cases persists [9]. Therefore, Russia considers epidemiological surveillance of polio/AFP to be the crucial element in maintaining the country’s epidemiological security⁹.

The high quality of polio/AFP surveillance in Russia from 2013 to 2024 ensured its effectiveness and guaranteed the timely detection of epidemiologically significant PVs. However, an analysis of the indicators revealed several alarming trends: a decline in the incidence rate (from 1.67 in 2013 to 1.25 in 2024); an increase in the number of “silent” territories (to 10 in 2023 and 9 in 2024); a significant increase in the number of cases for which the AFP diagnosis was revoked (21.6% over the entire observation period); this trend has persisted since 2020 (Figs. 2, 3). The decline in the quality of surveillance was largely due to the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic, which had a negative impact on surveillance in many countries [14]. At the same time, these indicators reflect the work of the clinical component of the polio/AFP surveillance system. The decline in indicators may be associated not only with a lack of or insufficient knowledge among physicians, but also with a lack of understanding of the purpose of registering somatic diseases with AFP syndrome within the polio surveillance program, as well as with turnover among pediatric neurologists and infectious disease specialists that has occurred over the more than 30 years the program has been in operation.

The main clinical and epidemiological characteristics of AFP cases in Russia were consistent with the surveillance system organized on a syndrome-based approach — cases predominantly occurred in children under 5 years of age, primarily boys, and the most common diagnosis was Guillain–Barré syndrome. Such characteristics of AFP cases have been observed in many countries [15–26]. Most children (82.46%) with AFP had been vaccinated, i.e., had received 3 doses of the poliovirus vaccine; however, starting in 2017, there was a trend toward an increase in the number of children who were unvaccinated or had received fewer than 3 doses: in 2013–2016, unvaccinated children accounted for 8.29%, and in 2017–2024, 13.5% (p ≥ 0.5), which is most likely associated with a rise in vaccine hesistancy among parents, which intensified particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic [27].

We believe that the gradual decline in the number of AFP cases with poliovirus isolation (from 3.93% in 2013 to 0.72% in 2024) is due to a reduction in OPV use, as well as a decline in the country’s child population. The isolated peaks observed in 2017, 2019, and 2021 are associated with additional immunization campaigns using OPV [28], including one in 2016 prior to the transition to bivalent OPV. The ratio of one type of poliovirus to another varied from year to year, which is difficult to explain in the absence of outbreaks and anti-epidemic measures involving the use of a specific type of OPV. Overall, we observed a predominance of cases with PV3 isolation. It is known that the proportion of children isolating PV3 after receiving OPV increases with each subsequent dose of the vaccine [29]. PV2 was not isolated from OPV cases after the “switch” from trivalent OPV to bOPV in April 2016.

Our study identified several important issues related to the continued use of OPV. We confirmed that since 2010, when WPV1 was imported from Tajikistan [12], WPV has not been isolated in Russia. Between 2013 and 2024, OPV-derived viruses became epidemiologically significant. Among 34 cases of poliomyelitis, VAPP was identified in 30. At the same time, there were fewer post-vaccination complications (VAPP in vaccine recipients) than cases of VAPP in unvaccinated contact children (33.3% and 66.7%, respectively). The occurrence of VAPP in recipients (with the exception of cases in children with immune deficiencies, which are difficult to prevent [30]) was associated with violations of sanitary and epidemiological requirements for polio prevention. The prevalence of contact cases of VAPP over recipient cases (20 and 10, respectively) indicates the effectiveness of the polio vaccination schedule adopted as part of the National Immunization Schedule for its prevention. Prior to the introduction of IPV into the schedule, VAPP cases occurred predominantly among OPV recipients [9]. However, with the continued use of OPV, unvaccinated children remain a vulnerable group for the development of VAPP. The problem of VAPP, to one degree or another, faces all countries using OPV [9]. The introduction of IPV into national immunization schedules as the first dose helps prevent this complication but does not guarantee the complete absence of VAPP—for example, contact cases among unvaccinated children, including those with primary immunodeficiency, and imported cases. The routine immunization schedule against polio in Russia prevents the development of VAPP in OPV recipients, and to prevent contact cases among unvaccinated children, in accordance with sanitary and epidemiological requirements, these children are separated from those recently vaccinated with OPV. Thanks to these measures, VAPP is currently an extremely rare occurrence in Russia.

Cases of poliomyelitis in unvaccinated children caused by various types of VDPV, with no established epidemiological or genetic links, confirm the possibility of the formation of VDPV under high vaccination coverage [31], even as the use of OPV in the National Polio Immunization Program declines. Facilities for orphans and children without parental care remain “high-risk facilities” where VDPV can emerge (or be introduced) and circulate [10, 32]. The occurrence of polio cases among unvaccinated individuals—the vast majority of which are due to vaccine refusal—indicates the existence of serious problems with vaccine-preventable infectious diseases in general. The existence of cases associated with the use of OPV confirms the validity of the transition to IPV, as planned by the WHO (see footnote 7), provided that high vaccination coverage levels are maintained.

Surveillance for AFP is primarily aimed at detecting poliovirus, but its algorithm also allows for the identification of cases caused by other, non-polioviruses. This aspect of surveillance is becoming increasingly relevant in light of the well-known neurotropic properties of EV-A71 [33] and the outbreaks of myelitis reported in North America and European countries in recent decades and caused by EV-D68 [34]. Our study confirmed the role of EV-A71 in the onset of polio-like diseases with residual paralysis (among 11 cases of poliomyelitis-like disease, residual paralysis persisted in 6 patients). Furthermore, data on NPEVs obtained through AFP surveillance provide additional information on the circulation of NPEVs among population groups not covered by enterovirus infection surveillance. Thus, the picture of NPEV circulation in Russia is expanding. In our study, the proportion of AFP cases from which NPEV was isolated ranged from 2.40% to 2.11%, which is slightly lower than the rate reported in a longer-term 24-year study [35] and is most likely due to changes in laboratory methodology. The lowest value (0.32%) in 2020 and the absence of cases with NPEV isolation in 2021 and 2022 are evidently linked to quarantine measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, although the nature of these measures was consistent with an infection transmitted via airborne droplets. The resumption of NPEV circulation among the clinically healthy population occurred within 2–3 years [36]. Periodic peaks and troughs in the number of cases with NPEV isolation reflect the cyclical nature of NPEV circulation among the population.

Conclusion

An analysis of the quality indicators for epidemiological surveillance of polio/AFP in Russia from 2013 to 2024 confirmed their compliance with the standards set forth in national regulations and recommended by the WHO. The high level of surveillance quality ensures its effectiveness in maintaining the Russian Federation’s status as a polio-free country.

Surveillance has made possible to identify epidemiologically significant polioviruses and, consequently, to implement targeted antiepidemic measures in a timely manner. The existing threat of international spread of poliovirus serves as a basis for further surveillance improvement.

The surveillance algorithm has great potential for gathering information on other (non-polio) pathogens capable of causing diseases with AFP syndrome..

 

¹ World Health Organization. Classification and Reporting of Vaccine-Derived Polioviruses (VDPV). Geneva; 2016. URL: https://polioeradication.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Reporting-and-Classification-of-VDPVs_Aug2016_EN.pdf (дата обращения: 13.06.2026).

² Order of the Ministry of Health of Russia and the State Committee for Sanitary and Epidemiological Surveillance of the Russian Federation No. 336/142 dated September 10, 1996, "On Approval of the ‘Program for the Eradication of Poliomyelitis in the Russian Federation by the Year 2000’."

³ Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing. SanPiN 3.3686-21 "Sanitary and Epidemiological Requirements for the Prevention of Infectious Diseases." Approved by Resolution No. 4 of the Chief State Sanitary Doctor of the Russian Federation dated January 28, 2021, as amended.

⁴ Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing. Methodological Guidelines MU 3.1.1.4016-24 "Epidemiological Surveillance of Poliomyelitis and Acute Flaccid Paralysis." Moscow; 2024. URL: https://www.rospotrebnadzor.ru/documents/details.php?ELEMENT_ID=29257

⁵ Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing. Methodological Guidelines MUK 4.2.4064-24 "Organization and Conduct of Testing Clinical Materials for Polioviruses." Moscow; 2024. URL: https://www.rospotrebnadzor.ru/documents/details.php?ELEMENT_ID=29259

⁶ World Health Organization. Poliovirus laboratory manual. Geneva; 2004. URL: http://iris.who.int/handle/10665/43127

⁷ World Health Organization. Polio Eradication Strategy 2022–2026: delivering on a promise, extension to 2029. Geneva; 2025. URL: https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/49602e7f-8824-4450-bb10-a1636d14c800/content

⁸ World Health Organization. Best Practices in Active Surveillance for Polio Eradication. Geneva; 2018. URL: https://polioeradication.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Best-practices-in-active-surveillance-for-polio-eradication.pdf

⁹ Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing. Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. National Action Plan for Maintaining the Polio-Free Status of the Russian Federation for 2022–2024. Moscow; 2022.

About the authors

Yulia М. Mikhailova

Federal Center of Hygiene and Epidemiology

Email: mikhailovaym@fcgie.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0002-4895-8712

epidemiologist, Department of epidemiological surveillance

 

Russian Federation, Moscow

Alina V. Chirova

Federal Center of Hygiene and Epidemiology

Email: chirovaav@fcgie.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0001-7092-0836

epidemiologist, Department of epidemiological surveillance

 

Russian Federation, Moscow

Evgeniya А. Cherepanova

Federal Center of Hygiene and Epidemiology

Email: cherepanovaea@fcgie.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0046-5612

Deputy head, Department of epidemiological surveillance

 

Russian Federation, Moscow

Nadezhda S. Morozova

Federal Center of Hygiene and Epidemiology

Email: morozova.n.s@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0000-2935-0520

Head, Department of epidemiological surveillance

 

Russian Federation, Moscow

Armen К. Shakaryan

Chumakov Federal Scientific Centre for Research and Development of Immune-and-Biological Products of Russian Academy of Sciences (Institute of poliomyelitis); Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Email: armen2@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3417-3631

researcher, Clinical department; Assistant, Department of infectious diseases in children

 

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

Liubov I. Kozlovskaya

Chumakov Federal Scientific Centre for Research and Development of Immune-and-Biological Products of Russian Academy of Sciences (Institute of poliomyelitis)

Email: kozlovskaya_li@chumakovs.su
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3029-1035

Dr. Sci. (Biol.), Head, Laboratory poliomyelitis and other enterovirus infections with the WHO Reference center for the surveillance for poliomyelitis

Russian Federation, Moscow

Olga E. Ivanova

Chumakov Federal Scientific Centre for Research and Development of Immune-and-Biological Products of Russian Academy of Sciences (Institute of poliomyelitis)

Author for correspondence.
Email: ivanova_oe@chumakovs.su
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1784-4827

Dr. Sci. (Biol.), Head, Laboratory poliomyelitis and other enterovirus infections with the WHO Reference center for the surveillance for poliomyelitis

Russian Federation, Moscow

References

Supplementary files