Immunogenicity and Safety of an Adjuvanted Herpes Zoster Subunit Vaccine Coadministered With Seasonal Influenza Vaccine in Adults Aged 50 Years or Older

Immunogenicity of Recombinant Zoster Vaccine: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression

BACKGROUND

The adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV), consisting of varicella-zoster virus glycoprotein E (gE) and the AS01B adjuvant system, effectively prevents herpes zoster (HZ). In the absence of a well-defined correlate of protection, it is important to monitor the RZV immune response, as a proxy of clinical effectiveness.

METHODS

This systematic review examined post-vaccination parameters: humoral and cell-mediated immunity, avidity index, geometric mean concentration of antibody (GMC), and immunity persistence. The meta-analysis used a random-effects model, and subgroup and meta-regression analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Among 37 included articles, after one month from RZV-dose 2, the pooled response rate for anti-gE humoral immunity was 95.2% (95%CI 91.9-97.2), dropping to 77.6% (95%CI 64.7-86.8) during immunosuppression. The anti-gE cell-mediated immunity-specific response reached 84.6% (95%CI 75.2-90.9). Varying factors, such as age, sex, coadministration with other vaccines, prior HZ, or live-attenuated zoster vaccine, did not significantly affect response rates. RZV induced a substantial increase in gE avidity. Immunity persistence was confirmed, with more rapid waning in the very elderly.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review indicates that RZV elicits robust immunogenicity and overcomes immunocompromising conditions. The findings underscore the need for further research, particularly on long-term immunity, and have the potential to support HZ vaccination policies and programs.

Co-administration of the adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine with other adult vaccines: An overview

BACKGROUND

The adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV; Shingrix®, GSK) is a subunit vaccine that has been approved for the prevention of herpes zoster in adults. Co-administration of two vaccines in a single visit is a strategy to improve overall vaccine coverage.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to consolidate available clinical data on RZV co-administration, providing an overview of safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity.

METHODS

RZV co-administration data were obtained from five randomised, open-label, phase III clinical trials with similar study designs. The co-administered vaccines included: quadrivalent seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV4; NCT01954251), 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23; NCT02045836), reduced-antigen-content diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap; NCT02052596), 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13; NCT03439657) and COVID-19 mRNA-1273 booster (NCT05047770). Eligible participants were healthy adults aged ≥50 years.

RESULTS

A total of 3,974 participants were vaccinated (co-administration: 1,973; sequential: 2,001) across the five trials. Vaccine response rates to RZV were similar for co-administration (range: 95.8-99.1 %) and sequential groups (range: 95.1-99.1 %). Immune responses to RZV and the other vaccines (with the exception of pertactin) were non-inferior when the vaccines were co-administered compared with sequentially administered. Overall incidences of solicited local and general adverse events (AEs), unsolicited AEs, serious AEs or potential immune-mediated diseases were similar after co-administration or sequential administration. Myalgia was the most common solicited systemic AE (co-administration: 38-64 %; sequential: 30-59 %). Shivering and fever were more common after co-administration (16 % and 21 %, respectively) than after sequential administration (both 7 %) of RZV and PPSV23.

CONCLUSIONS

Co-administration of RZV with routine vaccines does not significantly alter the reactogenicity, immunogenicity or safety of RZV or the co-administered vaccine. Healthcare practitioners should consider routine co-administration of RZV with other adult vaccines to improve vaccination coverage.

Evaluation of the efficacy, safety and influencing factors of concomitant and sequential administration of viral respiratory infectious disease vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There is no clear conclusion on the immunogenicity and adverse events of concomitant administration the viral respiratory infectious disease vaccines. We aimed to evaluate the impact of concomitant administering viral respiratory infectious disease vaccines on efficiencies, safety and influencing factors.

Methods

This meta-analysis included studies from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, Web of Science, WHO COVID-19 Research, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Randomized controlled trials of the adult participants concomitant administered with viral respiratory infectious disease vaccine and other vaccines were included. The main outcomes were the seroconversion rate and seroprotection rate of each vaccine. Used the Mantel-Haenszel fixed effects method as the main analysis to estimate the pooled RRs and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. The risk of bias for each trial was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, while evidence certainty was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.

Results

A total of 21 studies comprising 14060 participants with two types of vaccines were retained for the meta-analysis. Concomitant immunization reduced the geometric mean titer (RR: 0.858, 95% CI: (0.785 to 0.939)) and the geometric mean fold rise (0.754 (0.629 to 0.902)) in the SARS-COV-2 vaccine group but increased the seroconversion rate (1.033 (1.0002 to 1.067)) in the seasonal influenza vaccine group. Concomitant administration were influenced by the type of vaccine, adjuvant content, booster immunization, and age and gender of the recipient.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggested that the short-term protection and safety of concomitant administered were effective. Appropriate adjuvants, health promotion and counselling and booster vaccines could improve the efficiency and safety of Concomitant vaccination.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022343709.

Recombinant zoster vaccine in immunocompetent and immunocompromised adults: A review of clinical studies

Herpes zoster (HZ) is a debilitating vaccine-preventable disease. Impairment of cell-mediated immunity, as observed with aging and immunosuppressive disorders and therapies, increases risk. Recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) is efficacious against HZ in adults aged ≥50 years in different settings, and in immunocompromised adults aged ≥18 years who are at increased risk of developing HZ. RZV is the first and only HZ vaccine approved for use in immunocompromised adults globally, including in Europe and the US. RZV has a clinically acceptable safety profile and elicits robust immune responses in adults aged ≥50 years, and in immunocompromised adults aged ≥18 years who are at increased risk of HZ. Additionally, RZV is efficacious against HZ complications such as post-herpetic neuralgia and HZ-related pain. This review updates knowledge from a randomized controlled trial setting on the efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and impact on quality of life of RZV.

Effectiveness and safety of recombinant zoster vaccine: A review of real-world evidence

The recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) was licensed in the US for prevention of herpes zoster (HZ) in 2017. We conducted a literature search (January 1, 2017-August 1, 2023) using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus to consolidate the real-world evidence related to RZV. Overall, RZV effectiveness against HZ was high across the studied populations in real-world settings, including adults aged ≥ 50 years and patients aged ≥ 18 years with immunodeficiency or immunosuppression. Effectiveness was higher with two doses versus one dose, especially in elderly people and immunocompromised individuals. The safety profile of RZV was broadly consistent with that established in clinical trials. RZV does not appear to increase the risk of disease flares in patients with immune-mediated diseases. Approximately two-thirds of individuals received a second RZV dose within 2-6 months after the first dose. Collectively, RZV effectiveness against HZ was high, and these real-world studies reaffirm its favorable benefit-risk profile.

Exploring missed opportunities for influenza vaccination and influenza vaccine co-administration patterns among Italian older adults: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Missed opportunities constitute a main driver of suboptimal seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) coverage in older adults. Vaccine co-administration is a way to reduce these missed opportunities. In this study, we quantified missed opportunities for SIV, identified some of their socio-structural correlates and documented SIV co-administration patterns.

METHODS

In this registry-based retrospective cohort study, we verified the SIV status of all subjects aged ≥65 years who received at least one dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), pneumococcal or herpes zoster vaccines during the 2022/23 influenza season. The frequency of concomitant same-day administration of SIV with other target vaccines was also assessed.

RESULTS

Among 41 112, 5482 and 3432 older adults who received ≥1 dose of COVID-19, pneumococcal and herpes zoster vaccines, missed opportunities for SIV accounted for 23.3%, 5.0% and 13.2%, respectively. Younger, male and foreign-born individuals were generally more prone to missing SIV. The co-administration of SIV with other recommended vaccines was relatively low, being 11.0%, 53.1% and 17.1% in COVID-19, pneumococcal and herpes zoster cohorts, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A sizeable proportion of older adults who received other recommended vaccines during the last influenza season did not receive SIV. This share of missed opportunities, which are subject to some social inequalities, may be addressed by increasing vaccine co-administration rates and implementing tailored health promotion interventions.

Sex differences in adverse events following seasonal influenza vaccines: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Despite being a vaccine-preventable disease, influenza remains a major public health threat with vaccine safety concerns reducing vaccine acceptability. Immune responses to vaccines and adverse events may differ between males and females, but most studies do not report results by sex. Using data from clinical trials, we explored sex differences in adverse events following seasonal influenza vaccines.

METHODS

We obtained data for phase III randomised controlled trials identified through a systematic review and clinical trials registries, and performed a two-stage meta-analysis. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) comparing solicited reactions in females versus males were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method and a random-effects model. We used the ROBINS-I tool to assess risk of bias and the I2 statistic for heterogeneity. Main analysis was stratified by age: 18-64 years and ≥65 years.

RESULTS

The dataset for this analysis included 34 343 adults from 18 studies (12 with individual-level data and 6 with aggregate data). There was a higher risk of injection site reactions in females compared with males for both younger and older participants, with RRs of 1.29 (95% CI 1.21 to 1.37) and 1.43 (95% CI 1.28 to 1.60), respectively. Higher risk in females was also observed for systemic reactions, with RRs of 1.25 (95% CI 1.20 to 1.31) and 1.27 (95% CI 1.20 to 1.34) for younger and older participants, respectively. We also observed elevated risks of severe reactions in females, with a higher RR in younger versus older participants for systemic reactions (RRs 2.12 and 1.48, p=0.03, I2=79.7%). RRs were not found to vary between quadrivalent and trivalent vaccines.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggested a higher risk of solicited reactions following influenza vaccines for females compared with males, irrespective of age and vaccine type. Transparent communication of this risk could increase the trust in vaccines and limit vaccine hesitancy. Future studies should report results stratified by sex and explore the role of gender in the occurrence of adverse events.

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

BACKGROUND

Herpes zoster, commonly known as shingles, is a neurocutaneous disease caused by the reactivation of the virus that causes varicella (chickenpox). After resolution of the varicella episode, the virus can remain latent in the sensitive dorsal ganglia of the spine. Years later, with declining immunity, the varicella zoster virus (VZV) can reactivate and cause herpes zoster, an extremely painful condition that can last many weeks or months and significantly compromise the quality of life of the affected person. The natural process of ageing is associated with a reduction in cellular immunity, and this predisposes older adults to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of the VZV activates specific T-cell production avoiding viral reactivation. Two types of herpes zoster vaccines are currently available. One of them is the single-dose live attenuated zoster vaccine (LZV), which contains the same live attenuated virus used in the chickenpox vaccine, but it has over 14-fold more plaque-forming units of the attenuated virus per dose. The other is the recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) which does not contain the live attenuated virus, but rather a small fraction of the virus that cannot replicate but can boost immunogenicity. The recommended schedule for the RZV is two doses two months apart. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2010, and updated in 2012, 2016, and 2019.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this 2022 update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2022, Issue 10), MEDLINE (1948 to October 2022), Embase (2010 to October 2022), CINAHL (1981 to October 2022), LILACS (1982 to October 2022), and three trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies involving healthy older adults (mean age 60 years or older). We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine (any dose and potency) versus any other type of intervention (e.g. varicella vaccine, antiviral medication), placebo, or no intervention (no vaccine). Outcomes were cumulative incidence of herpes zoster, adverse events (death, serious adverse events, systemic reactions, or local reaction occurring at any time after vaccination), and dropouts.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two new studies involving 1736 participants in this update. The review now includes a total of 26 studies involving 90,259 healthy older adults with a mean age of 63.7 years. Only three studies assessed the cumulative incidence of herpes zoster in groups that received vaccines versus placebo. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries in Europe and North America and included healthy Caucasians (understood to be white participants) aged 60 years or over with no immunosuppressive comorbidities. Two studies were conducted in Japan and one study was conducted in the Republic of Korea. Sixteen studies used LZV. Ten studies tested an RZV. The overall certainty of the evidence was moderate, which indicates that the intervention probably works. Most data for the primary outcome (cumulative incidence of herpes zoster) and secondary outcomes (adverse events and dropouts) came from studies that had a low risk of bias and included a large number of participants. The cumulative incidence of herpes zoster at up to three years of follow-up was lower in participants who received the LZV (one dose subcutaneously) than in those who received placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56; risk difference (RD) 2%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 50; moderate-certainty evidence) in the largest study, which included 38,546 participants. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21) or deaths (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; moderate-certainty evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher cumulative incidence of one or more adverse events (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.11; RD 23%; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.3) and injection site adverse events (RR 3.73, 95% CI 1.93 to 7.21; RD 28%; NNTH 3.6; moderate-certainty evidence) of mild to moderate intensity. These data came from four studies with 6980 participants aged 60 years or older. Two studies (29,311 participants for safety evaluation and 22,022 participants for efficacy evaluation) compared RZV (two doses intramuscularly, two months apart) versus placebo. Participants who received the new vaccine had a lower cumulative incidence of herpes zoster at 3.2 years follow-up (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.23; RD 3%; NNTB 33; moderate-certainty evidence), probably indicating a favourable profile of the intervention. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups in cumulative incidence of serious adverse events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) or deaths (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; moderate-certainty evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher cumulative incidence of adverse events, any systemic symptom (RR 2.23, 95% CI 2.12 to 2.34; RD 33%; NNTH 3.0), and any local symptom (RR 6.89, 95% CI 6.37 to 7.45; RD 67%; NNTH 1.5). Although most participants reported that their symptoms were of mild to moderate intensity, the risk of dropouts (participants not returning for the second dose, two months after the first dose) was higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39; RD 1%; NNTH 100, moderate-certainty evidence). Only one study reported funding from a non-commercial source (a university research foundation). All other included studies received funding from pharmaceutical companies. We did not conduct subgroup and sensitivity analyses AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LZV (single dose) and RZV (two doses) are probably effective in preventing shingles disease for at least three years. To date, there are no data to recommend revaccination after receiving the basic schedule for each type of vaccine. Both vaccines produce systemic and injection site adverse events of mild to moderate intensity. The conclusions did not change in relation to the previous version of the systematic review.

Early Diagnosis of Herpes Zoster Neuralgia: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Early intervention reduces the incidence of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). Typical shingles are easy to diagnose; however, there is no clear diagnostic method for neuralgia symptoms manifested before the onset of the rash, which can easily cause misdiagnosis. This not only increases the patient's pain, medical expenses, and mental burden, but more importantly, delays the valuable time for early treatment of shingles, and increases the probability of complications and PHN.

OBJECTIVE

In this paper, the diagnostic methods of preherpetic neuralgia were summarized and analyzed, and the current challenges were put forward to provide directions for the early diagnosis of herpes zoster (HZ) in the future.

METHODS

PubMed, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) libraries were searched using the terms "herpes zoster," "before the blistering," "diagnosis," and "neuralgia." Clinical trials, reviews, and case reports were collected and reviewed. The period of literature search is from 1 January 1980 to 1 October 2022.

RESULTS

The early diagnosis of herpes zoster neuralgia can reduce misdiagnosis and mistreatment, and timely and effective intervention can significantly reduce the incidence of PHN. The body may possess a mechanism that limits the local breakthrough of the virus in the skin, causing blistering later than the onset of pain. Changes in the plasma proteins of patients with varicella-zoster virus shingles neuralgia may be used as an early diagnostic indicator in patients with HZ neuralgia before eruption.

CONCLUSION

Early diagnosis of HZ neuralgia before eruption can facilitate timely targeted treatment, thereby reducing the incidence of PHN. Proteomic quantitative analysis and validation results can serve as a simple, micro, rapid, and accurate diagnostic method.

Insights into the Novel Therapeutics and Vaccines against Herpes Simplex Virus

Herpes simplex virus (HSV) is a great concern of the global health community due to its linked infection of inconspicuous nature and resultant serious medical consequences. Seropositive patients may develop ocular disease or genital herpes as characteristic infectious outcomes. Moreover, the infectious nature of HSV is so complex that the available therapeutic options have been modified in certain ways to cure it. However, no permanent and highly effective cure has been discovered. This review generates insights into the available prophylactic and therapeutic interventions against HSV. A methodological research approach is used for study design and data complication. Only the latest data from publications are acquired to shed light on updated therapeutic approaches. These studies indicate that the current antiviral therapeutics can suppress the symptoms and control viral transmission up to a certain level, but cannot eradicate the natural HSV infection and latency outcomes. Most trials that have entered the clinical phase are made part of this review to understand what is new within the field. Some vaccination approaches are also discussed. Moreover, some novel therapeutic options that are currently in research annals are given due consideration for future development. The data can enable the scientific community to direct their efforts to fill the gaps that remain unfilled in terms of therapies for HSV. The need is to integrate scientific efforts to produce a proper cure against HSV to control the virus spread, resistance, and mutation in future disease management.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2022-23 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2021–22 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) concerning the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States

(MMWR Recomm Rep 2021;70[No. RR-5]:1–24). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used.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. All seasonal influenza vaccines expected to be available in the United States for the 2022–23 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. Trivalent influenza vaccines are no longer available, but data that involve these vaccines are included for reference.

Influenza vaccines might be available as early as July or August, but 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. 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 if vaccine is available during those months

Updates described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP that were held on October 20, 2021; January 12, 2022; February 23, 2022; and June 22, 2022. Primary updates to this report include the following three topics: 1) the composition of 2022–23 U.S. seasonal influenza vaccines; 2) updates to the description of influenza vaccines expected to be available for the 2022–23 season, including one influenza vaccine labeling change that occurred after the publication of the 2021–22 ACIP influenza recommendations; and 3) updates to the recommendations concerning vaccination of adults aged ≥65 years. First, the composition of 2022–23 U.S. influenza vaccines includes updates to the influenza A(H3N2) and influenza B/Victoria lineage components. U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines will contain HA derived from an influenza A/Victoria/2570/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/588/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture–based or recombinant vaccines); 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 or recombinant vaccines); an influenza B/Austria/1359417/2021 (Victoria lineage)-like virus; and an influenza B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage)-like virus. Second, the approved age indication for the cell culture–based inactivated influenza vaccine, Flucelvax Quadrivalent (ccIIV4), was changed in October 2021 from ≥2 years to ≥6 months. Third, recommendations for vaccination of adults aged ≥65 years have been modified. 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

This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2022–23 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.

Vaccination for herpes zoster in patients with solid tumors: a position paper on the behalf of the Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica (AIOM)

Herpes zoster (HZ) is the infectious reactivation of the varicella-zoster virus. HZ is more frequent in immunocompromised subjects, including patients with cancer. HZ complications can even last for years with a consequent delay in treatment of the underlying malignancy and with an unfavorable impact on quality of life. Nowadays, HZ is a vaccine-preventable disease: the recent approval of adjuvanted glycoprotein E-based recombinant zoster vaccine has changed preventive perspectives in immunocompromised subjects. Recombinant zoster vaccine induced both strong humoral and cellular immune responses also in immunocompromised patients. The question is, therefore, to which categories of cancer patients we should recommend HZ vaccination. Based on a careful review of the available data present in the literature, including recommendations and expert opinions, we report the position of the Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica on HZ vaccination in adult patients with solid tumors, thus providing clinical practice advice in a field where clear-cut information is missing.

•

Herpes zoster (HZ) is a vaccine-preventable disease.

•

The vaccination may prevent severe HZ complications and bacterial superinfections.

•

The recombinant vaccine (RZV) is safe and efficacious in frail subjects.

•

RZV can be co-administered, at different anatomic sites, with other vaccines.

Reactogenicity of Simultaneous COVID-19 mRNA Booster and Influenza Vaccination in the US

Importance

COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines are essential in preventing respiratory infections and their potentially severe complications. Simultaneous administration of vaccines is efficient and may improve coverage with each vaccine. However, the safety of simultaneous administration of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines has not been well described.

Objective

To evaluate adverse events and health impacts associated with simultaneously administered COVID-19 mRNA booster and seasonal influenza vaccines in the US population.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this retrospective cohort study, self-reported vaccine data were collected on days 0 to 7 after vaccination from September 22, 2021, through May 1, 2022, through v-safe, a voluntary smartphone-based monitoring system established by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Participants were persons who voluntarily registered in v-safe following COVID-19 vaccination.

Exposure

Receipt of simultaneously administered COVID-19 mRNA booster and seasonal influenza vaccines or COVID-19 mRNA booster alone.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Local injection site and systemic reactions (eg, fatigue, headache, and myalgia) and health impacts reported by v-safe respondents in the week following COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccination. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were estimated for simultaneous administration compared with booster dose alone, controlling for sex, age, and week of vaccination.

Results

Of a total of 981 099 persons aged 12 years or older registered with v-safe, simultaneous administration of COVID-19 mRNA booster and seasonal influenza vaccines was reported by 92 023 (9.4%) v-safe respondents; of these respondents, 54 926 (59.7%) were female, 36 234 (39.4%) were male, and sex was unknown for 863 (0.9%). In the week following vaccination, any systemic reactions were reported by 36 144 (58.9%) of 61 390 respondents who simultaneously received Pfizer-BioNTech booster and influenza vaccines and 21 027 (68.6%) of 30633 respondents who simultaneously received Moderna booster and influenza vaccines. Respondents who simultaneously received influenza and Pfizer-BioNTech booster vaccines (aOR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.06-1.10) or influenza and Moderna booster vaccines (aOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.08-1.14) were slightly more likely to report any systemic reaction in the week following simultaneous vaccination than respondents who received only a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine booster.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, compared with administration of COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccines alone, simultaneous administration of COVID-19 mRNA booster and seasonal influenza vaccines was associated with significant increases in reports of systemic reactions during days 0 to 7 following vaccination. These results may help better characterize the outcomes associated with simultaneously administered COVID-19 booster and influenza vaccines in the US population.

The safety of co-administration of Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) and influenza vaccines

Background

With the emergence of novel vaccines and new applications for older vaccines, co-administration is increasingly likely. The immunomodulatory effects of BCG could theoretically alter the reactogenicity of co-administered vaccines. Using active surveillance in a randomised controlled trial, we aimed to determine whether co-administration of BCG vaccination changes the safety profile of influenza vaccination.

Methods

Participants who received influenza vaccine alone (Influenza group) were compared with those who also received BCG-Denmark vaccine in the contralateral arm (Influenza+BCG group). Data on the influenza vaccination site were collected using serial questionnaires and active follow-up for 3 months post vaccination.

Results

Of 1351 participants in the Influenza+BCG group and 1418 participants in the Influenza group, 2615 (94%) provided influenza vaccine safety data. There was no significant difference in the proportion of participants with any local adverse reaction between the Influenza+BCG group and the Influenza group (918/1293 [71.0%] versus (906/1322 [68.5%], p = 0.17). The proportion of participants reporting any pain, erythema and tenderness at the influenza vaccination site were similar in both groups. Swelling was less frequent (81/1293 [6.3%] versus 119/1322 (9.0%), p = 0.01) and the maximal diameter of erythema was smaller (mean 1.8 cm [SD 2.0] versus 3.0 cm [SD 2.5], p<0.001) in the Influenza+BCG group. Sixteen participants reported serious adverse events: 9 participants in the Influenza+BCG group and 7 in the Influenza group.

Conclusions

Adverse events following influenza vaccination are not increased when BCG is co-administered.

Herpes Zoster and Vaccination Strategies in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Practical Guide

Herpes zoster is a painful dermatomal cutaneous eruption resulting from reactivation of the latent varicella-zoster virus. Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases have an increased risk of shingles compared with the general population and this risk can be increased with the use of immunosuppressive therapy. Live zoster vaccine and recombinant zoster vaccine have shown efficacy for the prevention of herpes zoster. The recombinant zoster vaccine seems to offer greater efficacy and long-term protection profile compared with the life zoster vaccine. However, their use in clinical practice still is unclear and updated vaccination recommendations are lacking. This review discusses the risk for shingles in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases, available vaccines, and their efficacy and safety profiles. We also provide guidance on who, when, and how to vaccinate for herpes zoster in routine clinical practice among patients with inflammatory bowel diseases.

Herpes Zoster Following Recombinant Zoster Vaccine With or Without Concomitant Vaccination

Background

The 2-dose recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) series is recommended for prevention of herpes zoster (HZ) in adults aged ≥50 years, but data are limited on the impact of concomitant administration with other vaccines on subsequent HZ risk.

Methods

This cohort study included Kaiser Permanente Southern California members aged ≥50 years who received 2 doses of RZV 4 weeks to ≤6 months apart during 1 April 2018–30 September 2019. RZV recipients with and without same-day concomitant vaccination for either RZV dose were followed up for incident HZ beginning 31 days after the second RZV dose until 30 September 2020. The hazard ratio (HR) for HZ comparing RZV recipients with and without concomitant vaccination was estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusting for confounders.

Results

RZV with and without concomitant vaccination was received by 12 898 and 28 353 individuals, respectively. HZ occurred among 41 individuals with concomitant vaccination (incidence rate, 2.2 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.6–3.0] per 1000 person-years) and 136 without concomitant vaccination (3.4 [95% CI, 2.9–4.0] per 1000 person-years). The adjusted HR for HZ comparing RZV recipients with and without concomitant vaccination was 0.75 (95% CI, .53–1.08).

Conclusions

HZ risk was not significantly different between RZV recipients with and without concomitant vaccination, supporting recommendations allowing for concomitant administration of RZV with other vaccines.

Safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of a COVID-19 vaccine (NVX-CoV2373) co-administered with seasonal influenza vaccines: an exploratory substudy of a randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The safety and immunogenicity profile of COVID-19 vaccines when administered concomitantly with seasonal influenza vaccines have not yet been reported. We therefore aimed to report the results of a substudy within a phase 3 UK trial, by evaluating the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of NVX-CoV2373 when co-administered with licensed seasonal influenza vaccines.

METHODS

We did a planned exploratory substudy as part of the randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine (NVX-CoV2373) by co-administrating the influenza vaccine at four study hospitals in the UK. Approximately, the first 400 participants meeting the main study entry criteria-with no contraindications to influenza vaccination-were invited to join the substudy. Participants of the main study were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive two intramuscular injections of either NVX-CoV2373 (5 μg) or placebo (normal saline) 21 days apart; participants enrolled into the substudy were co-vaccinated with a single (0·5 mL) intramuscular, age-appropriate (quadrivalent influenza cell-based vaccine [Flucelvax Quadrivalent; Seqirus UK, Maidenhead] for those aged 18-64 years and adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine [Fluad; Seqirus UK, Maidenhead] for those ≥65 years), licensed, influenza vaccine on the opposite deltoid to that of the first study vaccine dose or placebo. The influenza vaccine was administered in an open-label manner and at the same time as the first study injection. Reactogenicity was evaluated via an electronic diary for 7 days after vaccination in addition to monitoring for unsolicited adverse events, medically attended adverse events, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was assessed with influenza haemagglutination inhibition and SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike protein IgG assays. Vaccine efficacy against PCR-confirmed, symptomatic COVID-19 was assessed in participants who were seronegative at baseline, received both doses of study vaccine or placebo, had no major protocol deviations affecting the primary endpoint, and had no confirmed cases of symptomatic COVID-19 from the first dose until 6 days after the second dose (per-protocol efficacy population). Immunogenicity was assessed in participants who received scheduled two doses of study vaccine, had a baseline sample and at least one post-vaccination sample, and had no major protocol violations before unmasking (per-protocol immunogenicity population). Reactogenicity was analysed in all participants who received at least one dose of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo and had data collected for reactogenicity events. Safety was analysed in all participants who received at least one dose of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo. Comparisons were made between participants of the substudy and the main study (who were not co-vaccinated for influenza). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04583995.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 28, 2020, and Nov 28, 2020, a total of 15 187 participants were randomised into the main phase 3 trial, of whom 15 139 received treatment (7569 received dose one of NVX-CoV2373 and 7570 received dose one of placebo). 431 participants were co-vaccinated with a seasonal influenza vaccine in the substudy (217 received NVX-CoV2373 plus the influenza vaccine and 214 received placebo plus the influenza vaccine). In general, the substudy participants were younger, more racially diverse, and had fewer comorbid conditions than those in the main study. Reactogenicity events were more common in the co-administration group than in the NVX-CoV2373 alone group: tenderness (113 [64·9%] of 174 vs 592 [53·3%] of 1111) or pain (69 [39·7%] vs 325 [29·3%]) at injection site, fatigue (48 [27·7%] vs 215 [19·4%]), and muscle pain (49 [28·3%] vs 237 [21·4%]). Incidences of unsolicited adverse events, treatment-related medically attended adverse events, and serious adverse events were low and balanced between the co-administration group and the NVX-CoV2373 alone group. No episodes of anaphylaxis or deaths were reported within the substudy. Co-administration resulted in no change to influenza vaccine immune response although a reduction in antibody responses to the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine was noted. NVX-CoV2373 vaccine efficacy in the substudy (ie, participants aged 18 to <65 years) was 87·5% (95% CI -0·2 to 98·4) and in the main study was 89·8% (95% CI 79·7-95·5).

INTERPRETATION

To our knowledge, this substudy is the first to show the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy profile of a COVID-19 vaccine when co-administered with seasonal influenza vaccines. Our results suggest concomitant vaccination might be a viable immunisation strategy.

FUNDING

Novavax.

The Adjuvanted Recombinant Zoster Vaccine Co-Administered with the 13-valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Adults Aged ≥50 Years: a Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Herpes zoster (HZ) results from reactivation of latent varicella-zoster virus. Adults at increased risk of HZ (due to immunocompromising conditions or older age) are also at risk of pneumococcal disease, both of which are preventable by vaccination. We evaluated simultaneous versus sequential administration of the adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) and the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) in adults aged ≥50 years.

METHODS

In this phase IIIB multinational trial (NCT03439657), participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either the first RZV dose and PCV13 simultaneously followed by the second RZV dose two months later (Co-Ad, N=449), or at two-month intervals, PCV13, the first RZV dose, and the second RZV dose sequentially (Control, N=463). Objectives were to demonstrate that immune responses to both vaccines are non-inferior when co-administered compared to sequential administration and to evaluate the safety of their co-administration.

RESULTS

The RZV vaccine response rate (VRR) in the Co-Ad group was 99.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 97.6-99.7), meeting the VRR success criterion. Non-inferiority criteria for the Co-Ad versus Control group were also met for anti-glycoprotein E antibodies (adjusted geometric mean concentration Control/Co-Ad ratio 1.07 [95%CI: 0.99-1.16]) and all PCV13 serotypes (adjusted antibody geometric mean titer Control/Co-Ad ratios 1.02 [95%CI: 0.86-1.22] to 1.36 [95%CI: 1.07-1.73]). Upon co-administration, the frequency of solicited local adverse events was consistent with the known safety profile of each individual vaccine, whereas solicited general adverse events were within the same range as for RZV alone.

CONCLUSIONS

RZV co-administered with PCV13 had an acceptable safety profile. Humoral immune responses to both vaccines were non-inferior when co-administered compared to sequential administration. These results suggest that adults may benefit from receiving RZV and a PCV at the same healthcare visit.

Influenza Vaccine Uptake in the Year After Concurrent vs Separate Influenza and Zoster Immunization

IMPORTANCE

Fewer than half of US adults receive the influenza vaccine each year; many cite concerns about side effects, which occur infrequently. By contrast, the recombinant zoster vaccine causes systemic side effects in a large proportion of patients.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether concurrent administration of the influenza and zoster vaccines was associated with a reduced likelihood of influenza vaccination in the subsequent year.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study included patients aged 50 years or older who received the influenza vaccine between August 1, 2018, and March 31, 2019, and received the zoster vaccine on the same day or separately (within the prior 180 days). Data were gathered from a national claims database of patients with commercial insurance and Medicare Advantage plans. Logistic regression analysis was used to adjust for baseline demographic characteristics, comorbidities, influenza vaccine month and location (pharmacy vs medical office), and health care use (including influenza vaccination in the prior year).

EXPOSURES

Concurrent vs separate influenza and zoster vaccine administration.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Receipt of the influenza vaccine in the subsequent year (August 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020).

RESULTS

Among 89 237 individuals included in this study, the median age was 72 years (IQR, 67-77 years), 58.3% were women, 70.1% were White, and 85.7% had at least 1 comorbidity. Influenza vaccine uptake in 2019-2020 was lower among 27 161 individuals who received concurrent influenza and zoster vaccines compared with the 62 076 individuals who received the vaccines on separate days (87.3% vs 91.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.78; P < .001). Results were similar across subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this cohort study suggest that concurrent administration of influenza and zoster vaccines was associated with a reduction in receipt of the influenza vaccine the following year. One possible explanation is that some patients could have misattributed systemic side effects caused by the zoster vaccine to the influenza vaccine. It may be preferable to administer these 2 vaccines separately or enhance patient counseling about expected vaccine side effects.

A practitioner's guide to the recombinant zoster vaccine: review of national vaccination recommendations

Introduction: The adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) is currently licensed in over 30 countries for the prevention of herpes zoster (HZ) in adults aged ≥50 years. We conducted a review of available national guidelines or recommendations on RZV use to identify the similarities and differences and highlight any potential gaps.Areas covered: National recommendations from ten countries (Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK and the USA) are summarized under the following seven topics: HZ vaccine preference, age group recommendations, considerations prior to vaccination, dose schedule, co-administration with other vaccines, vaccination of special populations, and vaccine safety profile. In seven of these countries, RZV is the preferred or the only recommended HZ vaccine. There were some differences in age group recommendations, reflecting evaluations dependent on public funding. There were also differences with respect to use in immunocompromised and other special populations.Expert opinion: The high efficacy and anticipated public health impact of RZV led to expanded national recommendations for RZV vaccination compared to previous HZ recommendation in many countries. Possible areas that could be considered in future revisions of national recommendations, including use in immunocompromised adults ≥18 years, are also highlighted.PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY:The varicella-zoster virus causes chickenpox, usually in childhood. After the chickenpox episode, the virus remains in the body in a latent state and can reactivate later in life, causing herpes zoster, or shingles. Adults over 50 years of age or those who have a weakened immune system are more vulnerable to developing herpes zoster. Herpes zoster appears as a painful localized skin rash. While live attenuated vaccines against herpes zoster have existed for many years, a recombinant vaccine against herpes zoster (RZV) has recently become available in several countries. Guidelines issued by national health authorities or vaccination committees provide healthcare professionals with information on practical aspects of vaccination. However, given the novelty of the RZV vaccine, we identified such guidelines in only ten countries (Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America). We summarized these national RZV recommendations, focusing on herpes zoster vaccine preference, the age at which RZV is recommended, considerations before vaccination, vaccination schedule, the possibility of administering RZV together with other vaccines, vaccinating vulnerable populations and the safety of RZV. While national recommendations varied, most guidelines indicate that RZV is the preferred herpes zoster vaccine due to its high and persistent efficacy and as it can be administered to vulnerable populations who are at increased risk of herpes zoster and its complications. Recommendations have noted that side effects are common with RZV, however, most are of mild-moderate intensity and temporary (see also Figure 1).

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2021-22 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2020–21 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2020;69[No. RR-8]). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used. ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. During the 2021–22 influenza season, the following types of vaccines are expected to be available: inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4).

The 2021–22 influenza season is expected to coincide with continued circulation of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Influenza vaccination of persons aged ≥6 months to reduce prevalence of illness caused by influenza will reduce symptoms that might be confused with those of COVID-19. Prevention of and reduction in the severity of influenza illness and reduction of outpatient visits, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit admissions through influenza vaccination also could alleviate stress on the U.S. health care system. Guidance for vaccine planning during the pandemic is available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pandemic-guidance/index.html. Recommendations for the use of COVID-19 vaccines are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/covid-19.html, and additional clinical guidance is available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/clinical-considerations/covid-19-vaccines-us.html.

Updates described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP that were held on October 28, 2020; February 25, 2021; and June 24, 2021. Primary updates to this report include the following six items. First, all seasonal influenza vaccines available in the United States for the 2021–22 season are expected to be quadrivalent. Second, the composition of 2021–22 U.S. influenza vaccines includes updates to the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and influenza A(H3N2) components. U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines will contain hemagglutinin derived from an influenza A/Victoria/2570/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/588/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture–based and recombinant vaccines), an influenza A/Cambodia/e0826360/2020 (H3N2)-like virus, an influenza B/Washington/02/2019 (Victoria lineage)-like virus, and an influenza B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage)-like virus. Third, the approved age indication for the cell culture–based inactivated influenza vaccine, Flucelvax Quadrivalent (ccIIV4), has been expanded from ages ≥4 years to ages ≥2 years. Fourth, discussion of administration of influenza vaccines with other vaccines includes considerations for coadministration of influenza vaccines and COVID-19 vaccines. Providers should also consult current ACIP COVID-19 vaccine recommendations and CDC guidance concerning coadministration of these vaccines with influenza vaccines. Vaccines that are given at the same time should be administered in separate anatomic sites. Fifth, guidance concerning timing of influenza vaccination now states that vaccination soon after vaccine becomes available can be considered for pregnant women in the third trimester. As previously recommended, children who need 2 doses (children aged 6 months through 8 years who have never received influenza vaccine or who have not previously received a lifetime total of ≥2 doses) should receive their first dose as soon as possible after vaccine becomes available to allow the second dose (which must be administered ≥4 weeks later) to be received by the end of October. For nonpregnant adults, vaccination in July and August should be avoided unless there is concern that later vaccination might not be possible. Sixth, contraindications and precautions to the use of ccIIV4 and RIV4 have been modified, specifically with regard to persons with a history of severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to an influenza vaccine. A history of a severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of any egg-based IIV, LAIV, or RIV of any valency is a precaution to use of ccIIV4. A history of a severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of any egg-based IIV, ccIIV, or LAIV of any valency is a precaution to use of RIV4. Use of ccIIV4 and RIV4 in such instances should occur in an inpatient or outpatient medical setting under supervision of a provider who can recognize and manage a severe allergic reaction; providers can also consider consulting with an allergist to help identify the vaccine component responsible for the reaction. For ccIIV4, history of a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to any ccIIV of any valency or any component of ccIIV4 is a contraindication to future use of ccIIV4. For RIV4, history of a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to any RIV of any valency or any component of RIV4 is a contraindication to future use of RIV4.

This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2021–22 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.

Safety of vaccines used for routine immunization in the United States: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Understanding the safety of vaccines is critical to inform decisions about vaccination. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of the safety of vaccines recommended for children, adults, and pregnant women in the United States.

METHODS

We searched the literature in November 2020 to update a 2014 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality review by integrating newly available data. Studies of vaccines that used a comparator and reported the presence or absence of key adverse events were eligible. Adhering to Evidence-based Practice Center methodology, we assessed the strength of evidence (SoE) for all evidence statements. The systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020180089).

RESULTS

Of 56,603 reviewed citations, 338 studies reported in 518 publications met inclusion criteria. For children, SoE was high for no increased risk of autism following measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. SoE was high for increased risk of febrile seizures with MMR. There was no evidence of increased risk of  intussusception with rotavirus vaccine at the latest follow-up (moderate SoE), nor of diabetes (high SoE). There was no evidence of increased risk or insufficient evidence for key adverse events for newer vaccines such as 9-valent human papillomavirus and meningococcal B vaccines. For adults, there was no evidence of increased risk (varied SoE) or insufficient evidence for key adverse events for the new adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine and recombinant adjuvanted zoster vaccine. We found no evidence of increased risk (varied SoE) for key adverse events among pregnant women following tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccine, including stillbirth (moderate SoE).

CONCLUSIONS

Across a large body of research we found few associations of vaccines and serious key adverse events; however, rare events are challenging to study. Any adverse events should be weighed against the protective benefits that vaccines provide.

Vaccination for quality of life: herpes-zoster vaccines

Current vaccination policy in most high-income countries aims to counteract the decline in cell-mediated immunity to varicella zoster virus that occurs with advancing age or immunosuppression. The aim of this review was to describe the burden of illness associated with herpes zoster (HZ) and post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN) risks and their impact on the social and common life in infected people. The effectiveness/efficacy and cost effectiveness of the immunization strategy will be presented through the review of the literature relevant to the live attenuated HZ vaccine (ZLV) licensed in 2006 and the recombinant HZ vaccine (RZV). The latter has very recently been approved to protect aged people aged ≥ 50 years against HZ morbidity including its complications, and associated health-care costs. Finally, this review also provides data with respect of precautions of using and safety of ZVL and RVZ.

Vaccines for older adults

The proportion of the global population aged 65 and older is rapidly increasing. Infections in this age group, most recently with SARS-CoV-2, cause substantial morbidity and mortality. Major improvements have been made in vaccines for older people, either through the addition of novel adjuvants-as in the new recombinant zoster vaccine and an adjuvanted influenza vaccine-or by increasing antigen concentration, as in influenza vaccines. In this article we review improvements in immunization for the three most important vaccine preventable diseases of aging. The recombinant zoster vaccine has an efficacy of 90% that is minimally affected by the age of the person being vaccinated and persists for more than four years. Increasing antigen dose or inclusion of adjuvant has improved the immunogenicity of influenza vaccines in older adults, although the relative effectiveness of the enhanced influenza vaccines and the durability of the immune response are the focus of ongoing clinical trials. Conjugate and polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccines have similar efficacy against invasive pneumococcal disease and pneumococcal pneumonia caused by vaccine serotypes in older adults. Their relative value varies by setting, depending on the prevalence of vaccine serotypes, largely related to conjugate vaccine coverage in children. Improved efficacy will increase public confidence and uptake of these vaccines. Co-administration of these vaccines is feasible and important for maximal uptake in older people. Development of new vaccine platforms has accelerated following the arrival of SARS-CoV-2, and will likely result in new vaccines against other pathogens in the future.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2020-21 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2019–20 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2019;68[No. RR-3]). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIVs), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) are expected to be available. Most influenza vaccines available for the 2020–21 season will be quadrivalent, with the exception of MF59-adjuvanted IIV, which is expected to be available in both quadrivalent and trivalent formulations.

Updates to the recommendations described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP held on October 23, 2019; February 26, 2020; and June 24, 2020. Primary updates to this report include the following two items. First, the composition of 2020–21 U.S. influenza vaccines includes updates to the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, influenza A(H3N2), and influenza B/Victoria lineage components. Second, recent licensures of two new influenza vaccines, Fluzone High-Dose Quadrivalent and Fluad Quadrivalent, are discussed. Both new vaccines are licensed for persons aged ≥65 years. Additional changes include updated discussion of contraindications and precautions to influenza vaccination and the accompanying Table, updated discussion concerning use of LAIV4 in the setting of influenza antiviral medication use, and updated recommendations concerning vaccination of persons with egg allergy who receive either cell culture–based IIV4 (ccIIV4) or RIV4.

The 2020–21 influenza season will coincide with the continued or recurrent circulation of SARS-CoV-2 (the novel coronavirus associated with coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]). Influenza vaccination of persons aged ≥6 months to reduce prevalence of illness caused by influenza will reduce symptoms that might be confused with those of COVID-19. Prevention of and reduction in the severity of influenza illness and reduction of outpatient illnesses, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit admissions through influenza vaccination also could alleviate stress on the U.S. health care system. Guidance for vaccine planning during the pandemic is available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pandemic-guidance/index.html.

This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2020–21 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 within Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–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.

Which patients should receive the herpes zoster vaccine?

The recombinant adjuvanted zoster vaccine (RZV, trade name Shingrix) is preferentially recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to prevent herpes zoster and related complications in immunocompetent adults age 50 years and older. This article reviews efficacy and safety of the vaccine, its use in special populations, and how to prevent administration errors to answer the question "Which patients should receive the herpes zoster vaccine?"

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

BACKGROUND

Herpes zoster, commonly known as shingles, is a neurocutaneous disease caused by the reactivation of the virus that causes varicella (chickenpox). After resolution of the varicella episode, the virus can remain latent in the sensitive dorsal ganglia of the spine. Years later, with declining immunity, the varicella zoster virus (VZV) can reactivate and cause herpes zoster, an extremely painful condition that can last many weeks or months and significantly compromise the quality of life of the affected person. The natural process of aging is associated with a reduction in cellular immunity, and this predisposes older people to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of the VZV activates specific T-cell production avoiding viral reactivation. The USA Food and Drug Administration has approved a herpes zoster vaccine with an attenuated active virus, live zoster vaccine (LZV), for clinical use amongst older adults, which has been tested in large populations. A new adjuvanted recombinant VZV subunit zoster vaccine, recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV), has also been approved. It consists of recombinant VZV glycoprotein E and a liposome-based AS01B adjuvant system. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last updated in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this 2019 update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 1, January 2019), MEDLINE (1948 to January 2019), Embase (2010 to January 2019), CINAHL (1981 to January 2019), LILACS (1982 to January 2019), WHO ICTRP (on 31 January 2019) and ClinicalTrials.gov (on 31 January 2019).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine (any dose and potency) versus any other type of intervention (e.g. varicella vaccine, antiviral medication), placebo, or no intervention (no vaccine). Outcomes were incidence of herpes zoster, adverse events (death, serious adverse events, systemic reactions, or local reaction occurring at any time after vaccination), and dropouts.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 new studies involving 18,615 participants in this update. The review now includes a total of 24 studies involving 88,531 participants. Only three studies assessed the incidence of herpes zoster in groups that received vaccines versus placebo. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries in Europe and North America and included healthy Caucasians (understood to be white participants) aged 60 years or over with no immunosuppressive comorbidities. Two studies were conducted in Japan. Fifteen studies used LZV. Nine studies tested an RZV. The overall quality of the evidence was moderate. Most data for the primary outcome (incidence of herpes zoster) and secondary outcomes (adverse events and dropouts) came from studies that had a low risk of bias and included a large number of participants. The incidence of herpes zoster at up to three years follow-up was lower in participants who received the LZV (one dose subcutaneously) than in those who received placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56; risk difference (RD) 2%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 50; moderate-quality evidence) in the largest study, which included 38,546 participants. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21) or deaths (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; moderate-quality evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher incidence of one or more adverse events (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.11; RD 23%; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.3) and injection site adverse events (RR 3.73, 95% CI 1.93 to 7.21; RD 28%; NNTH 3.6) of mild to moderate intensity (moderate-quality evidence). These data came from four studies with 6980 participants aged 60 years or over. Two studies (29,311 participants for safety evaluation and 22,022 participants for efficacy evaluation) compared RZV (two doses intramuscularly, two months apart) versus placebo. Participants who received the new vaccine had a lower incidence of herpes zoster at 3.2 years follow-up (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.23; RD 3%; NNTB 33; moderate-quality evidence). There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups in incidence of serious adverse events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) or deaths (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; moderate-quality evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher incidence of adverse events, any systemic symptom (RR 2.23, 95% CI 2.12 to 2.34; RD 33%; NNTH 3.0), and any local symptom (RR 6.89, 95% CI 6.37 to 7.45; RD 67%; NNTH 1.5). Although most participants reported that there symptoms were of mild to moderate intensity, the risk of dropouts (participants not returning for the second dose, two months after the first dose) was higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39; RD 1%; NNTH 100, moderate-quality evidence). Only one study reported funding from a non-commercial source (a university research foundation). All of the other included studies received funding from pharmaceutical companies. We did not conduct subgroup and sensitivity analyses AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LZV and RZV are effective in preventing herpes zoster disease for up to three years (the main studies did not follow participants for more than three years). To date, there are no data to recommend revaccination after receiving the basic schedule for each type of vaccine. Both vaccines produce systemic and injection site adverse events of mild to moderate intensity.

Adjuvanted Recombinant Glycoprotein E Herpes Zoster Vaccine

The adjuvanted recombinant glycoprotein E herpes zoster (HZ) vaccine is superior to the live attenuated HZ vaccine, with an efficacy >90% against HZ in healthy immunocompetent adults aged ≥50 years after vaccination. In pivotal studies, the efficacy of the new vaccine varied very little with the age of the vaccinee and decreased only by 5-10% in the 3.5 years after immunization. This nonlive vaccine was successfully administered to small cohorts of immunocompromised individuals; initial trials showed efficacy of >60-80% in several such settings. Potential drawbacks include the requirement for 2 vaccine doses separated by 2-6 months, local and systemic reactogenicity that is significantly greater than observed with commonly used vaccines, and the inclusion of a strong adjuvant that has been minimally studied in clinical settings where it might be problematic, such as in people with autoimmune diseases. Postmarketing studies are underway to address some of the drawbacks.

Herpes Zoster Vaccines

Background

Immunization for herpes zoster (HZ) aims to reverse the decline in cell-mediated immunity to varicella zoster virus that occurs with advancing age or immunocompromise. There are 2 vaccines available, one live attenuated (Zoster vaccine, live attenuated [ZVL]) and, recently, a recombinant subunit vaccine (HZ/su).

Methods

The literature relevant to the two HZ vaccines was reviewed.

Results

ZVL has overall efficacies of 51% and 65% against HZ and postherpetic neuralgia, respectively, with a prominent decline in efficacy with advancing age of the vaccinee. This compares to approximately 90% efficacy against HZ for HZ/su that is minimally affected with advancing age. The efficacy of ZVL against HZ declines over 4 and 8 years, compared with minimal decline so far over 4 years with HZ/su, and immunogenicity that is maintained for 9 years. Local and systemic reactogenicity to HZ/su is much greater than to ZVL.

Conclusions

HZ/su establishes an important principle-that a single recombinant viral protein with an effective adjuvant combination can stimulate immunogenicity superior to that of a live attenuated vaccine, and that this can diminish immunosenescence. This provides hope for improvement of other vaccines for aging patients. However, key questions remain unanswered, including the durability of the efficacy of HZ/su, its efficacy as a booster for previous recipients of ZVL, and its efficacy in immunocompromised patients.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2019-20 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2018–19 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2018;67[No. RR-3]). 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 2019–20 season. Standard-dose, unadjuvanted, inactivated influenza vaccines will be available in quadrivalent formulations (IIV4s). High-dose (HD-IIV3) and adjuvanted (aIIV3) inactivated influenza vaccines will be available in trivalent formulations. Recombinant (RIV4) and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) will be available in quadrivalent formulations.

Updates to the recommendations described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP held on October 25, 2018; February 27, 2019; and June 27, 2019. Primary updates in this report include the following two items. First, 2019–20 U.S. trivalent influenza vaccines will contain hemagglutinin (HA) derived from an A/Brisbane/02/2018 (H1N1)pdm09–like virus, an A/Kansas/14/2017 (H3N2)–like virus, and a B/Colorado/06/2017–like virus (Victoria lineage). Quadrivalent influenza vaccines will contain HA derived from these three viruses, and a B/Phuket/3073/2013–like virus (Yamagata lineage). Second, recent labeling changes for two IIV4s, Afluria Quadrivalent and Fluzone Quadrivalent, are discussed. The age indication for Afluria Quadrivalent has been expanded from ≥5 years to ≥6 months. The dose volume for Afluria Quadrivalent is 0.25 mL for children aged 6 through 35 months and 0.5 mL for all persons aged ≥36 months (≥3 years). The dose volume for Fluzone Quadrivalent for children aged 6 through 35 months, which was previously 0.25 mL, is now either 0.25 mL or 0.5 mL. The dose volume for Fluzone Quadrivalent is 0.5 mL for all persons aged ≥36 months (≥3 years).

This report focuses on the recommendations for use of vaccines for the prevention and control of influenza during the 2019–20 season in the United States. A brief summary of these recommendations and a 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 within 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.

Varicella zoster virus vaccines: an update

Varicella zoster virus (VZV) is the etiological agent of varicella, a highly infectious, self-limiting disease with serious complications. The decline in cell-mediated immunity (CMI) that occurs with aging or immunodepression causes a reactivation of the latent VZV as herpes zoster (HZ). Prevention of VZV through varicella vaccination strategies allows to avoid the primary infection in newborns and susceptible subjects. Available monovalent and combined VZV vaccines are effective, safe and generally well tolerated. Universal varicella vaccination has significantly impacted on incidence, complications and deaths related to this disease. Prevention of HZ through vaccination is a priority to avoid the significant burden of its incidence and complications. Currently two HZ vaccines are available. The recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV), approved by the FDA in 2017 and Zoster Vaccine Live (ZVL) licensed in the United States by the FDA in 2006. The advisory committee on immunization practices (ACIP) preferentially recommends RZV. ZVL remains an option for prevention of HZ in immunocompetent adults aged ≥60 years, although the CMI tends to wane a few years after vaccination.

Shingrix: A New Herpes Zoster Vaccine

Shingrix, a new vaccine for herpes zoster.

A Novel Vaccine Strategy Employing Serologically Different Chimpanzee Adenoviral Vectors for the Prevention of HIV-1 and HCV Coinfection

Background: Nearly 3 million people worldwide are coinfected with HIV and HCV. Affordable strategies for prevention are needed. We developed a novel vaccination regimen involving replication-defective and serologically distinct chimpanzee adenovirus (ChAd3, ChAd63) vector priming followed by modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA) boosts, for simultaneous delivery of HCV non-structural (NSmut) and HIV-1 conserved (HIVconsv) region immunogens.

Methods: We conducted a phase I trial in which 33 healthy volunteers were sequentially enrolled and vaccinated via the intramuscular route as follows: 9 received ChAd3-NSmut [2.5 × 10¹⁰ vp] and MVA-NSmut [2 × 10⁸ pfu] at weeks 0 and 8, respectively; 8 received ChAdV63.HIVconsv [5 × 10¹⁰ vp] and MVA.HIVconsv [2 × 10⁸ pfu] at the same interval; 16 were co-primed with ChAd3-NSmut [2.5 × 10¹⁰ vp] and ChAdV63.HIVconsv [5 × 10¹⁰ vp] followed at week 8 by MVA-NSmut and MVA.HIVconsv [both 1 × 10⁸ pfu]. Immunogenicity was assessed using peptide pools in ex vivo ELISpot and intracellular cytokine assays. Vaccine-induced whole blood transcriptome changes were assessed by microarray analysis.

Results: All vaccines were well tolerated and no vaccine-related serious adverse events occurred. Co-administration of the prime-boost vaccine regimens induced high magnitude and broad T cell responses that were similar to those observed following immunization with either regimen alone. Median (interquartile range, IQR) peak responses to NSmut were 3,480 (2,728–4,464) and 3,405 (2,307–7,804) spot-forming cells (SFC)/10⁶ PBMC for single and combined HCV vaccinations, respectively (p = 0.8). Median (IQR) peak responses to HIVconsv were 1,305 (1,095–4,967) and 1,005 (169–2,482) SFC/10⁶ PBMC for single and combined HIV-1 vaccinations, respectively (p = 0.5). Responses were maintained above baseline to 34 weeks post-vaccination. Intracellular cytokine analysis indicated that the responding populations comprised polyfunctional CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells. Canonical pathway analysis showed that in the single and combined vaccination groups, pathways associated with antiviral and innate immune responses were enriched for upregulated interferon-stimulated genes 24 h after priming and boosting vaccinations.

Conclusions: Serologically distinct adenoviral vectors encoding HCV and HIV-1 immunogens can be safely co-administered without reducing the immunogenicity of either vaccine. This provides a novel strategy for targeting these viruses simultaneously and for other pathogens that affect the same populations.

Clinical trial registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT02362217

Cost-effectiveness of vaccination of immunocompetent older adults against herpes zoster in the Netherlands: a comparison between the adjuvanted subunit and live-attenuated vaccines

BACKGROUND

The newly registered adjuvanted herpes zoster subunit vaccine (HZ/su) has a higher efficacy than the available live-attenuated vaccine (ZVL). National decision-makers soon need to decide whether to introduce HZ/su or to prefer HZ/su above ZVL.

METHODS

Using a Markov model with a decision tree, we conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccination with HZ/su (two doses within 2 months) or zoster vaccine live (ZVL) (single dose, or single dose with a booster after 10 years) for cohorts of 50-, 60-, 70- or 80-year-olds in the Netherlands. The model was parameterized using vaccine efficacy data from randomized clinical trials and up-to-date incidence, costs and health-related quality of life data from national datasets. We used a time horizon of 15 years, and the analysis was conducted from the societal perspective.

RESULTS

At a coverage of 50%, vaccination with two doses of HZ/su was estimated to prevent 4335 to 10,896 HZ cases, depending on the cohort age. In comparison, this reduction was estimated at 400-4877 for ZVL and 427-6466 for ZVL with a booster. The maximum vaccine cost per series of HZ/su to remain cost-effective to a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained ranged from €109.09 for 70-year-olds to €63.68 for 50-year-olds. The cost-effectiveness of ZVL changed considerably by age, with corresponding maximum vaccine cost per dose ranging from €51.37 for 60-year-olds to €0.73 for 80-year-olds. Adding a ZVL booster after 10 years would require a substantial reduction of the maximum cost per dose to remain cost-effective as compared to ZVL single dose. Sensitivity analyses on the vaccine cost demonstrated that there were scenarios in which vaccination with either HZ/su (two doses), ZVL single dose or ZVL + booster could be the most cost-effective strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

A strategy with two doses of HZ/su was superior in reducing the burden of HZ as compared to a single dose or single dose + booster of ZVL. Both vaccines could potentially be cost-effective to a conventional Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold for preventive interventions. However, whether HZ/su or ZVL would be the most cost-effective alternative depends largely on the vaccine cost.

Tetanus-diphtheria vaccination in adults: the long-term persistence of antibodies is not dependent on polyclonal B-cell activation and the defective response to diphtheria toxoid re-vaccination is associated to HLADRB1∗01

Cellular and humoral immune responses to tetanus-diphtheria vaccine (Td) were assessed in human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-typed Italian military personnel who received multiple concomitant vaccines. Td-specific antibodies and T-lymphocytes were measured in individuals with one (group-1) and more than one (group-2) Td boosters. A third group (group-3), who received several vaccines, but not Td, was studied to verify the hypothesis of the polyclonal B-cell activation as mechanism for antibody persistence. The antibody response to Td toxoids was higher in group-1, who showed lower baseline antibody levels, than in group-2 subjects. The antibody response to tetanus was higher than to diphtheria toxoid in both groups. No correlation between antibody and cellular response, and no interference in the response to Td by co-administration of different vaccines were observed. HLA-DRB1∗01 allele was detected at significant higher frequency in subjects unable to double the baseline anti-diphtheria antibody levels after the vaccination. Anti-tetanus and diphtheria antibodies half-lives were assessed and the long-lasting persistence above the threshold for protection (0.1 IU/ml) was estimated in over 65 and 20 years, respectively. No significant increase of anti-diphtheria antibodies was observed in consequence of polyclonal B-cell activation. This study emphasizes the duration of Td vaccination-induced seroprotection, suggesting that re-vaccination should probably be performed at intervals longer than 10 years. No reciprocal interference by concomitantly administered vaccines has been observed. HLA-DRB1∗01 allele was significantly associated with anti-diphtheria defective response. Finally, this study does not confirm that anti-diphtheria antibody levels are maintained by polyclonal B-cell activation. Clinical trial registry: The study was registered with NCT01807780.

A novel nonlive, adjuvanted herpes zoster subunit vaccine: a report on the emerging clinical data and safety profile

Herpes zoster (HZ) is an acute vesicular dermatitis with a typical dermatomal distribution, caused by the varicella zoster virus (VZV), often preceded and accompanied by prodromal pain or pruritus. HZ may be related to several complications such as postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). The incidence and severity of the disease increase with aging, due to immunosenescence and in particular to the decline of the specific cell-mediated immunity (CMI). The impact of HZ in terms of morbidity and short- and long-term complications, the availability of suboptimal treatment options to date, and the high costs for the diagnostic and clinical-therapeutic management of patients have motivated the search for a new preventive approach through the development of a vaccine. The vaccine currently in use with live-attenuated virus (ZVL) has been shown to be effective in reducing the incidence of HZ, its impact, and the onset of PHN, although the efficacy is lower in older subjects and tends to decrease some years after immunization. A new adjuvanted recombinant subunit vaccine (HZ/su), containing the VZV glycoprotein E (gE) and the AS01B adjuvant system, is now a very promising alternative to ZVL; in several clinical studies, it showed a good safety profile and was able to elicit high immune humoral and cell-mediated responses, both maintained up to 9 years. Furthermore, HZ/su vaccine was effective both in preventing HZ and in reducing the onset of PHN and other complications. HZ/su has been recommended and preferred over ZVL by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for the prevention of HZ and its complications in immunocompetent adults aged ≥50 years, even if already vaccinated with ZVL, through a two-dose schedule. HZ/su has been approved in Canada, USA, Europe, and Japan and is currently being approved in Australia. The aim of this review was to describe the epidemiological data, HZ and PHN risks and their impact on the social life and common life of infected people, and ZVL and HZ/su vaccine development including various clinical trials and efficacy, safety, and tolerability profiles.

Zoster Vaccine Recombinant, Adjuvanted

Each month, subscribers to The Formulary Monograph Service receive 5 to 6 well-documented monographs on drugs that are newly released or are in late phase 3 trials. The monographs are targeted to Pharmacy & Therapeutics Committees. Subscribers also receive monthly 1-page summary monographs on agents that are useful for agendas and pharmacy/nursing in-services. A comprehensive target drug utilization evaluation/medication use evaluation (DUE/MUE) is also provided each month. With a subscription, the monographs are available online to subscribers. Monographs can be customized to meet the needs of a facility. Through the cooperation of The Formulary, Hospital Pharmacy publishes selected reviews in this column. For more information about The Formulary Monograph Service, contact Wolters Kluwer customer service at 866-397-3433.

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.

Herpes Zoster

Primary care providers and hospitalists frequently encounter older or immunocompromised patients with herpes zoster accompanied by debilitating pain. Atypical presentations and zosteriform herpes simplex may present diagnostic challenges to clinicians. This article summarizes the background, evidence, and guidelines for the diagnosis, complications, treatment, and prevention of herpes zoster. Diagnosis of challenging cases relies on polymerase chain reaction as the preferred test. Treatment focuses on optimal use of antiviral therapy and analgesics. Prevention emphasizes utilization of a new recombinant zoster vaccine, which reduces the incidence of herpes zoster by more than 90% and is preferred to the live attenuated herpes zoster vaccine.