Safe vaccination of patients with egg allergy by using live attenuated influenza vaccine

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices — United States, 2023–24 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2022–23 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) concerning the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (

MMWR Recomm Rep 2022;71[No. RR-1]:1–28). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. All seasonal influenza vaccines expected to be available in the United States for the 2023–24 season are quadrivalent, containing hemagglutinin (HA) derived from one influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, one influenza A(H3N2) virus, one influenza B/Victoria lineage virus, and one influenza B/Yamagata lineage virus. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) are expected to be available.

For most persons who need only 1 dose of influenza vaccine for the season, vaccination should ideally be offered during September or October. However, vaccination should continue after October and throughout the season as long as influenza viruses are circulating and unexpired vaccine is available. Influenza vaccines might be available as early as July or August, but for most adults (particularly adults aged ≥65 years) and for pregnant persons in the first or second trimester, vaccination during July and August should be avoided unless there is concern that vaccination later in the season might not be possible. Certain children aged 6 months through 8 years need 2 doses; these children should receive the first dose as soon as possible after vaccine is available, including during July and August. Vaccination during July and August can be considered for children of any age who need only 1 dose for the season and for pregnant persons who are in the third trimester during these months if vaccine is available

ACIP recommends that all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications receive a licensed and age-appropriate seasonal influenza vaccine. With the exception of vaccination for adults aged ≥65 years, ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. ACIP recommends that adults aged ≥65 years preferentially receive any one of the following higher dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccines: quadrivalent high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV4), quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), or quadrivalent adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV4). If none of these three vaccines is available at an opportunity for vaccine administration, then any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine should be used

Primary updates to this report include the following two topics: 1) the composition of 2023–24 U.S. seasonal influenza vaccines and 2) updated recommendations regarding influenza vaccination of persons with egg allergy. First, the composition of 2023–24 U.S. influenza vaccines includes an update to the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 component. U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines will contain HA derived from 1) an influenza A/Victoria/4897/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/67/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); 2) an influenza A/Darwin/9/2021 (H3N2)-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Darwin/6/2021 (H3N2)-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); 3) an influenza B/Austria/1359417/2021 (Victoria lineage)-like virus; and 4) an influenza B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage)-like virus. Second, ACIP recommends that all persons aged ≥6 months with egg allergy should receive influenza vaccine. Any influenza vaccine (egg based or nonegg based) that is otherwise appropriate for the recipient’s age and health status can be used. It is no longer recommended that persons who have had an allergic reaction to egg involving symptoms other than urticaria should be vaccinated in an inpatient or outpatient medical setting supervised by a health care provider who is able to recognize and manage severe allergic reactions if an egg-based vaccine is used. Egg allergy alone necessitates no additional safety measures for influenza vaccination beyond those recommended for any recipient of any vaccine, regardless of severity of previous reaction to egg. All vaccines should be administered in settings in which personnel and equipment needed for rapid recognition and treatment of acute hypersensitivity reactions are available

This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2023–24 influenza season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html . These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used according to Food and Drug Administration–licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC’s influenza website ( https://www.cdc.gov/flu ). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

A practical guide to address reactions to vaccines in children

Currently available vaccines are safe, but, potentially, any vaccine can cause an allergic reaction and, albeit very rare, anaphylaxis can occur. Although its rarity, the precise diagnostic management of a suspected anaphylaxis postvaccination is of paramount importance due to the risk of a potentially serious reaction after re-exposure, while a misdiagnosis might lead to an increase in the number of children that interrupt vaccinations resulting in an unjustifiably individual and collective risk of loss of protection against immune preventable diseases. In the light that most cases of suspected allergy to a vaccine are not effectively confirmed in up to 85% of the cases referred for an allergy evaluation, patients can continue the vaccination schedule with the same formulation and tolerance of the booster doses. The patient assessment has to be done by an expert in the vaccine field, usually an allergist or an immunologist depending on the country, to select subjects at risk of allergic reactions and to perform the correct procedures for vaccine hypersensitivity diagnosis and management, in order to guarantee safe immunization practices. The aim of this review is to provide a practical guidance for the safe management of allergic children undergoing immunization procedures. The guide is referred both to the evaluation of children who have previously experienced a suspected allergic reaction to a specific vaccine and their management in case of further booster doses, and to children allergic to a component of the vaccine to be administered.

Addressing Common Misconceptions in Food Allergy: A Review

Background: Food allergies are common, affecting 1 in 13 school children in the United States and their prevalence is increasing. Many misconceptions exist with regards to food allergy prevention, diagnosis and management. Objective: The main objective of this review is to address misconceptions with regards to food allergies and discuss the optimal, evidence-based approach for patients who carry this diagnosis. Observations: Common misconceptions in terms of food allergy prevention include beliefs that breastfeeding and delayed introduction of allergenic foods prevent the development of food allergies. In terms of diagnosis, statements such as ‘larger skin prick tests or/and higher levels of food-specific IgE can predict the severity of food-induced allergic reactions’, or ‘Tryptase is always elevated in food-induced anaphylaxis’ are inaccurate. Additionally, egg allergy is not a contraindication for receiving the influenza vaccine, food-allergy related fatalities are rare and peanut oral immunotherapy, despite reported benefits, is not a cure for food allergies. Finally, not all infants with eczema will develop food allergies and epinephrine auto-injectors may unfortunately be both unavailable and underused in food-triggered anaphylaxis. Conclusions and relevance: Healthcare professionals must be familiar with recent evidence in the food allergy field and avoid common misunderstandings that may negatively affect prevention, diagnosis and management of this chronic disease.

Diagnosis and management of hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines

INTRODUCTION

Many countries in Europe now recommend and enforce mandatory vaccinations to improve vaccination coverage. Thus, the number of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) may show an increase. Among these events, severe hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines are rare. However, it is important that they be identified and recognized so that they may be adequately managed.

AREAS COVERED

The literature search was undertaken through PubMed and Embase to identify English-language papers focusing on hypersensitivity to vaccines.

EXPERT OPINION

Hypersensitivity reactions following vaccinations are rare and are classified according to their chronology and extension: immediate when they occur within the first 4 hours following administration and non-immediate when they occur later. Local reactions are the most common adverse event following injection of vaccines and generally do not require any allergy workup. Immediate reactions, however, are potentially IgE-mediated and require an allergy workup. In general, a previously known food allergy (i.e., egg or milk) is not a contraindication to immunizations. Patients with a known allergy to gelatin, yeast, latex, antibiotics, or other specific components of vaccines require an allergy workup before administration of the vaccine.

Food Allergy: A Review

Food allergy is an important public health problem that affects children and adults, and it has been increasing in prevalence in the last 2 to 3 decades. The symptoms can vary from mild to severe, and in extreme cases food allergy can lead to anaphylaxis, which is a life-threatening allergic reaction. Currently, there is no cure for food allergy. Management of food allergy includes allergen avoidance or emergency treatment. The eight most common food allergens are eggs, milk, peanuts, tree nuts, soy, wheat, crustacean shellfish, and fish, all of which are frequently consumed in the US. Thus, patients and their families must remain constantly vigilant, which can often be stressful. Moreover, nonallergic food reactions, such as food intolerance, are commonly mistaken as food allergies. This article highlights risk factors, natural history, diagnosis, and management of food allergy. [Pediatr Ann. 2020;49(1):e50-e58.].

Proteomics as a tool for live attenuated influenza vaccine characterisation

Many viral vaccines, including the majority of influenza vaccines, are grown in embryonated chicken eggs and purified by sucrose gradient ultracentrifugation. For influenza vaccines this process is well established, but the viral strains recommended for use in vaccines are updated frequently. As viral strains can have different growth properties and responses to purification, these updates risk changes in the composition of the vaccine product. Changes of this sort are hard to assess, as influenza virions are complex structures containing variable ratios of both viral and host proteins. To address this, we used liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), a flexible and sensitive method ideally suited to identifying and quantifying the proteins present in complex mixtures. By applying LC-MS/MS to the pilot scale manufacturing process of the live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) FluMist® Quadrivalent vaccine (AstraZeneca), we were able to obtain a detailed description of how viral and host proteins are removed or retained at each stage of LAIV purification. LC-MS/MS allowed us to quantify the removal of individual host proteins at each stage of the purification process, confirming that LAIV purification efficiently depletes the majority of host proteins and identifying the small subset of host proteins which are associated with intact virions. LC-MS/MS also identified substantial differences in the retention of the immunosuppressive viral protein NS1 in purified virions. Finally, LC-MS/MS allowed us to detect subtle variations in the LAIV production process, both upstream of purification and during downstream purification stages. This demonstrates the potential utility of LC-MS/MS for optimising the purification of complex biological mixtures and shows that it is a promising approach for process optimisation in a wide variety of vaccine manufacturing platforms.

Immunogenicity and safety of a quadrivalent plant-derived virus like particle influenza vaccine candidate-Two randomized Phase II clinical trials in 18 to 49 and ≥50 years old adults

Background

New influenza vaccines eliciting more effective protection are needed, particularly for the elderly who paid a large and disproportional toll of hospitalization and dead during seasonal influenza epidemics. Low (≤15 μg/strain) doses of a new plant-derived virus-like-particle (VLP) vaccine candidate have been shown to induce humoral and cellular responses against both homologous and heterologous strains in healthy adults 18–64 years of age. The two clinical trials reported here addressed the safety and immunogenicity of higher doses (≥15 μg/strain) of quadrivalent VLP candidate vaccine on 18–49 years old and ≥50 years old subjects. We also investigated the impact of alum on the immunogenicity induced by lower doses of the vaccine candidate.

Method

In the first Phase II trial reported here (NCT02233816), 18–49 year old subjects received 15, 30 or 60 μg/strain of a hemagglutinin-bearing quadrivalent virus-like particle (QVLP) vaccine or placebo. In the second trial (NCT02236052), ≥50 years old subjects received QVLP as above or placebo with additional groups receiving 7.5 or 15 μg/strain with alum. Along with safety recording, the humoral and cell-mediated immune responses were analyzed.

Results

Local and systemic side-effects were similar to those reported previously. The QVLP vaccine induced significant homologous and heterologous antibody responses at the two higher doses, the addition of alum having little-to-no effect. Serologic outcomes tended to be lower in ≥50 years old subjects previously vaccinated. The candidate vaccine also consistently elicited both homologous and heterologous antigen-specific CD4⁺ T cells characterized by their production of interferon-gamma (IFN-γ), interleukine-2 (IL-2) and/or tumor-necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) upon ex vivo antigenic restimulation.

Conclusion

Overall, the 30 μg dose produced the most consistent humoral and cellular responses in both 18–49 and ≥50 years old subjects, strongly supporting the clinical development of this candidate vaccine. That particular dose was chosen to test in the ongoing Phase III clinical trial.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices-United States, 2018-19 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2017-18 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2017;66[No. RR-2]). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. A licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine should be used. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIVs), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) are expected to be available for the 2018-19 season. Standard-dose, unadjuvanted, inactivated influenza vaccines will be available in quadrivalent (IIV4) and trivalent (IIV3) formulations. Recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4) and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) will be available in quadrivalent formulations. High-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3) and adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3) will be available in trivalent formulations.Updates to the recommendations described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP held on October 25, 2017; February 21, 2018; and June 20, 2018. New and updated information in this report includes the following four items. First, vaccine viruses included in the 2018-19 U.S. trivalent influenza vaccines will be an A/Michigan/45/2015 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus, an A/Singapore/INFIMH-16-0019/2016 (H3N2)-like virus, and a B/Colorado/06/2017-like virus (Victoria lineage). Quadrivalent influenza vaccines will contain these three viruses and an additional influenza B vaccine virus, a B/Phuket/3073/2013-like virus (Yamagata lineage). Second, recommendations for the use of LAIV4 (FluMist Quadrivalent) have been updated. Following two seasons (2016-17 and 2017-18) during which ACIP recommended that LAIV4 not be used, for the 2018-19 season, vaccination providers may choose to administer any licensed, age-appropriate influenza vaccine (IIV, RIV4, or LAIV4). LAIV4 is an option for those for whom it is appropriate. Third, persons with a history of egg allergy of any severity may receive any licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate influenza vaccine (IIV, RIV4, or LAIV4). Additional recommendations concerning vaccination of egg-allergic persons are discussed. Finally, information on recent licensures and labeling changes is discussed, including expansion of the age indication for Afluria Quadrivalent (IIV4) from ≥18 years to ≥5 years and expansion of the age indication for Fluarix Quadrivalent (IIV4), previously licensed for ≥3 years, to ≥6 months.This report focuses on the recommendations for use of vaccines for the prevention and control of influenza during the 2018-19 season in the United States. A Background Document containing further information and a brief summary of these recommendations are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html.These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used within Food and Drug Administration-licensed indications. Updates and other information are available at CDC's influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check CDC's influenza website periodically for additional information.

Postmarketing safety surveillance of trivalent recombinant influenza vaccine: Reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System

On January 16, 2013, the Food and Drug Administration approved recombinant hemagglutinin influenza vaccine (RIV3) (Spodoptera frugiperda cell line; Flublok), which is the first completely egg-free flu vaccine licensed in the United States. To improve our understanding of the safety profile of this vaccine, we reviewed and summarized reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following RIV3. Through June 30, 2016, VAERS received 88 reports. Allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, were the most common type of adverse event. Based on medical review, 10 cases met the Brighton Collaboration case definition of anaphylaxis, 21 reports described allergic reactions other than anaphylaxis, and 11 reports described signs and symptoms that suggested hypersensitivity. Other adverse events included injection site reactions, fatigue, myalgia, headache, and fever. The occurrence of anaphylaxis and other allergic reactions in some individuals may reflect an underlying predisposition to atopy that may manifest itself after an exposure to any drug or vaccine, and it does not necessarily suggest a causal relationship with the unique constituents that are specific to the vaccine product administered. Further research may elucidate the mechanism of allergic reactions following influenza vaccination: it is possible that egg proteins and influenza hemagglutinin play little or no role. Vaccination remains the single best defense against influenza and its complications. The information summarized here may enable policy makers, health officials, clinicians, and patients to make a more informed decision regarding vaccination strategies.

Summary of the NACI Statement on Seasonal Influenza Vaccine for 2017-2018

Background

Influenza is a respiratory infection caused primarily by influenza A and B viruses. Vaccination is the most effective way to prevent influenza and its complications. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) provides recommendations regarding seasonal influenza vaccines annually to the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC).

Objective

To summarize the NACI recommendations regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines for the 2017-2018 influenza season.

Methods

Annual influenza vaccine recommendations are developed by NACI's Influenza Working Group for consideration and approval by NACI, based on NACI's evidence-based process for developing recommendations. The recommendations include a consideration of the burden of influenza illness and the target populations for vaccination; efficacy and effectiveness, immunogenicity and safety of influenza vaccines; vaccine schedules; and other aspects of influenza immunization. These recommendations are published annually on the Agency's website in the NACI Advisory Committee Statement: Canadian Immunization Guide Chapter on Influenza and Statement on Seasonal Influenza Vaccine (the Statement).

Results

The annual statement has been updated for the 2017-2018 influenza season to incorporate recommendations for the use of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) that were contained in two addenda published after the 2016-2017 statement. These recommendations were 1) that egg-allergic individuals may be vaccinated against influenza using the low ovalbumin-containing LAIV licensed for use in Canada and 2) to continue to recommend the use of LAIV in children and adolescents 2-17 years of age, but to remove the preferential recommendation for its use.

Conclusion

NACI continues to recommend annual influenza vaccination for all individuals aged six months and older, with particular focus on people at high risk of influenza-related complications or hospitalization, people capable of transmitting influenza to those at high risk, and others as indicated.

International Consensus (ICON): allergic reactions to vaccines

BACKGROUND

Routine immunization, one of the most effective public health interventions, has effectively reduced death and morbidity due to a variety of infectious diseases. However, allergic reactions to vaccines occur very rarely and can be life threatening. Given the large numbers of vaccines administered worldwide, there is a need for an international consensus regarding the evaluation and management of allergic reactions to vaccines.

METHODS

Following a review of the literature, and with the active participation of representatives from the World Allergy Organization (WAO), the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (AAAAI), and the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (ACAAI), the final committee was formed with the purpose of having members who represented a wide-range of countries, had previously worked on vaccine safety, and included both allergist/immunologists as well as vaccinologists.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on a variety of topics, including: definition of immediate allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, approaches to distinguish association from causality, approaches to patients with a history of an allergic reaction to a previous vaccine, and approaches to patients with a history of an allergic reaction to components of vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

This document provides comprehensive and internationally accepted guidelines and access to on-line documents to help practitioners around the world identify allergic reactions following immunization. It also provides a framework for the evaluation and further management of patients who present either following an allergic reaction to a vaccine or with a history of allergy to a component of vaccines.

Summary of the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) Statement on Seasonal Influenza Vaccine for 2016-2017

Background

Influenza is a respiratory infection caused primarily by influenza A and B viruses. Vaccination is the most effective way to prevent influenza and its complications. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) provides recommendations regarding seasonal influenza vaccines annually to the Public Health Agency of Canada (the Agency).

Objective

To summarize the NACI recommendations regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines for the 2016-2017 influenza season.

Methods

Annual influenza vaccine recommendations are developed by NACI's Influenza Working Group for consideration and approval by NACI, based on NACI's evidence-based process for developing recommendations, and include a consideration of the burden of influenza illness and the target populations for vaccination; efficacy and effectiveness, immunogenicity and safety of influenza vaccines; vaccine schedules; and other aspects of influenza immunization. These recommendations are published annually on the Agency's website in the NACI Advisory Committee Statement: Canadian Immunization Guide Chapter on Influenza and Statement on Seasonal Influenza Vaccine (the Statement).

Results

The annual NACI seasonal influenza vaccine recommendations have been updated for the 2016-2017 influenza season to include adults with neurologic or neurodevelopment conditions among the groups for whom influenza vaccination is particularly recommended; to include the new high-dose, trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine for use in adults 65 years of age and over; to recommend that egg-allergic individuals may also be vaccinated against influenza using the low ovalbumin-containing live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) licensed for use in Canada (NACI has previously recommended that egg-allergic individuals may be vaccinated using inactivated influenza vaccines); and to remove the preferential recommendation for the use of LAIV in children 2-17 years of age. Two addenda to the 2016-2017 Statement address these new LAIV recommendations.

Conclusion

NACI continues to recommend annual influenza vaccination for all individuals aged six months and older, with particular focus on people at high risk of influenza-related complications or hospitalization, people capable of transmitting influenza to those at high risk and others as indicated.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines

This report updates the 2015-16 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines (Grohskopf LA, Sokolow LZ, Olsen SJ, Bresee JS, Broder KR, Karron RA. Prevention and control of influenza with vaccines: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2015-16 influenza season. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2015;64:818-25). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For the 2016-17 influenza season, inactivated influenza vaccines (IIVs) will be available in both trivalent (IIV3) and quadrivalent (IIV4) formulations. Recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV) will be available in a trivalent formulation (RIV3). In light of concerns regarding low effectiveness against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 in the United States during the 2013-14 and 2015-16 seasons, for the 2016-17 season, ACIP makes the interim recommendation that live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) should not be used. Vaccine virus strains included in the 2016-17 U.S. trivalent influenza vaccines will be an A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)-like virus, an A/Hong Kong/4801/2014 (H3N2)-like virus, and a B/Brisbane/60/2008-like virus (Victoria lineage). Quadrivalent vaccines will include an additional influenza B virus strain, a B/Phuket/3073/2013-like virus (Yamagata lineage).Recommendations for use of different vaccine types and specific populations are discussed. A licensed, age-appropriate vaccine should be used. No preferential recommendation is made for one influenza vaccine product over another for persons for whom more than one licensed, recommended product is otherwise appropriate. This information is intended for vaccination providers, immunization program personnel, and public health personnel. Information in this report reflects discussions during public meetings of ACIP held on October 21, 2015; February 24, 2016; and June 22, 2016. These recommendations apply to all licensed influenza vaccines used within Food and Drug Administration-licensed indications, including those licensed after the publication date of this report. Updates and other information are available at CDC's influenza website (http://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check CDC's influenza website periodically for additional information.

Safety of live attenuated influenza vaccine in young people with egg allergy: multicentre prospective cohort study

STUDY QUESTION

How safe is live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV), which contains egg protein, in young people with egg allergy?

METHODS

In this open label, phase IV intervention study, 779 young people (2-18 years) with egg allergy were recruited from 30 UK allergy centres and immunised with LAIV. The cohort included 270 (34.7%) young people with previous anaphylaxis to egg, of whom 157 (20.1%) had experienced respiratory and/or cardiovascular symptoms. 445 (57.1%) had doctor diagnosed asthma or recurrent wheeze. Participants were observed for at least 30 minutes after vaccination and followed-up by telephone 72 hours later. Participants with a history of recurrent wheeze or asthma underwent further follow-up four weeks later. The main outcome measure was incidence of an adverse event within two hours of vaccination in young people with egg allergy.

STUDY ANSWER AND LIMITATIONS

No systemic allergic reactions occurred (upper 95% confidence interval for population 0.47% and in participants with anaphylaxis to egg 1.36%). Nine participants (1.2%, 95% CI 0.5% to 2.2%) experienced mild symptoms, potentially consistent with a local, IgE mediated allergic reaction. Delayed events potentially related to the vaccine were reported in 221 participants. 62 participants (8.1%, 95% CI for population 6.3% to 10.3%) experienced lower respiratory tract symptoms within 72 hours, including 29 with parent reported wheeze. No participants were admitted to hospital. No increase in lower respiratory tract symptoms occurred in the four weeks after vaccination (assessed with asthma control test). The study cohort may represent young people with more severe allergy requiring specialist input, since they were recruited from secondary and tertiary allergy centres.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

LAIV is associated with a low risk of systemic allergic reactions in young people with egg allergy. The vaccine seems to be well tolerated in those with well controlled asthma or recurrent wheeze.

FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING

This report is independent research commissioned and funded by a Department of Health policy research programme grant to the National Vaccine Evaluation Consortium. Additional funding was provided by the NIHR Clinical Research Networks, Health Protection Scotland (Edinburgh site), and Health & Social Care Services in Northern Ireland (Belfast site). PJT and MEL had support from the Department of Health for the submitted work; PJT has received research grants from the Medical Research Council and NIHR. No additional data available.Study registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02111512) and the EU Clinical Trials Register EudraCT (2014-001537-92).

Safety of influenza vaccination in children with allergic diseases

Global guidelines strongly recommend annual influenza vaccination in people age 6 months and older, particularly in asthmatic children. There is no doubt about the benefit of influenza vaccination in asthmatic children. However, some of the vaccine's components may elicit an IgE mediated hypersensitivity or disease exacerbation, including life-threatening events, in children with allergic diseases. As a result, concerns regarding the safety of the vaccine still continue today. The influenza vaccine is grown on hens' eggs and contains a trace of egg protein. Consequently, it can provoke an allergic reaction or anaphylaxis in children with an egg allergy or exacerbation in those with asthma. Therefore, we need to know the risks and benefits of the influenza vaccine and the best strategy for safe vaccination. Although most guidelines have consistently reported the safety of influenza vaccination in children with allergic disease, and have recommended annual administration, safety concerns impede guideline-based performance in practice. The safety and efficacy of influenza vaccination for allergic children are summarized in the present review.

Safety of live attenuated influenza vaccine in atopic children with egg allergy

Background

Live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) is an intranasal vaccine recently incorporated into the United Kingdom immunization schedule. However, it contains egg protein and, in the absence of safety data, is contraindicated in patients with egg allergy. Furthermore, North American guidelines recommend against its use in asthmatic children.

Objective

We sought to assess the safety of LAIV in children with egg allergy.

Methods

We performed a prospective, multicenter, open-label, phase IV intervention study involving 11 secondary/tertiary centers in the United Kingdom. Children with egg allergy (defined as a convincing clinical reaction to egg within the past 12 months and/or >95% likelihood of clinical egg allergy as per published criteria) were recruited. LAIV was administered under medical supervision, with observation for 1 hour and telephone follow-up 72 hours later.

Results

Four hundred thirty-three doses were administered to 282 children with egg allergy (median, 4.9 years; range, 2-17 years); 115 (41%) had experienced prior anaphylaxis to egg. A physician's diagnosis of asthma/recurrent wheezing was noted in 67%, and 51% were receiving regular preventer therapy. There were no systemic allergic reactions (upper 95% CI for population, 1.3%). Eight children experienced mild self-limiting symptoms, which might have been due an IgE-mediated allergic reaction. Twenty-six (9.4%; 95% CI for population, 6.2% to 13.4%) children experienced lower respiratory tract symptoms within 72 hours, including 13 with parent-reported wheeze. None of these episodes required medical intervention beyond routine treatment.

Conclusions

In contrast to current recommendations, LAIV appears to be safe for use in children with egg allergy. Furthermore, the vaccine appears to be well tolerated in children with a diagnosis of asthma or recurrent wheeze.