Evaluation of clinical and immunological effects of inactivated influenza vaccine in children with asthma

Clinical significance of cellular immunity function and inflammatory factors assays in alveolar lavage fluid for severe COVID-19 pneumonia

In this study, we aimed to investigate the changes of lymphocyte subsets (CD3⁺ , CD4⁺ , CD8⁺ ) and inflammatory factors (interleukin-6 [IL-6], hypersensitive C-reactive protein [HS-CRP], and procalcitonin [PCT]) of alveolar lavage fluid in patients with severe corona virus-2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia and their clinical impact on the assessment of disease severity and prognosis. Twenty-four patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of the Ezhou Central Hospital from February 1 to March 22, 2020. According to the 28-day prognosis, they were assigned to a death group and a survival group. On the 3rd day of ICU admission, peripheral blood and alveolar lavage fluid were collected for examination of lymphocyte subsets and inflammatory factors by flow cytometry and immunoturbidimetry, respectively. The CD3⁺ , CD4⁺ , and CD8⁺ cell counts in alveolar lavage fluid and serum were significantly higher in the survival group than those of the death group (p < .05). The levels of IL-6, HS-CRP, and PCT in the alveolar lavage fluid and serum of the death group were statistically higher than those of the survival group (p < .05); The CD3⁺ , CD4⁺ cell count, and IL-6 level were negatively correlated with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores, respectively (p < .05). The CD4⁺ cell and SOFA score have a regression relationship for the prognosis of COVID-19 severe patients. The CD3⁺ , CD4⁺ , CD8⁺ cells, and IL-6 levels are valuable in determining the prognosis of severe COVID-19 pneumonia and are strongly correlated with the severity of the disease; the CD4⁺ cell is an independent risk factor affecting the prognosis of COVID-19 pneumonia.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in people with asthma

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccination is recommended for asthmatic patients in many countries as observational studies have shown that influenza infection can be associated with asthma exacerbations. However, influenza vaccination has the potential to cause wheezing and adversely affect pulmonary function. While an overview concluded that there was no clear benefit of influenza vaccination in patients with asthma, this conclusion was not based on a systematic search of the literature.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the efficacy and safety of influenza vaccination in children and adults with asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trials register and reviewed reference lists of articles. The latest search was carried out in November 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials of influenza vaccination in children (over two years of age) and adults with asthma. We excluded studies involving people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Inclusion criteria and assessment of trial quality were applied by two review authors independently. Data extraction was done by two review authors independently. Study authors were contacted for missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials were included in the first published version of this review, and nine further trials have been included in four updates. The included studies cover a wide diversity of people, settings and types of influenza vaccination, and we pooled data from the studies that employed similar vaccines. PROTECTIVE EFFECTS OF INACTIVATED INFLUENZA VACCINE DURING THE INFLUENZA SEASON: A single parallel-group trial, involving 696 children, was able to assess the protective effects of influenza vaccination. There was no significant reduction in the number, duration or severity of influenza-related asthma exacerbations. There was no difference in the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV) although children who had been vaccinated had better symptom scores during influenza-positive weeks. Two parallel-group trials in adults did not contribute data to these outcomes due to very low levels of confirmed influenza infection. ADVERSE EFFECTS OF INACTIVATED INFLUENZA VACCINE IN THE FIRST TWO WEEKS FOLLOWING VACCINATION: Two cross-over trials involving 1526 adults and 712 children (over three years old) with asthma compared inactivated trivalent split-virus influenza vaccine with a placebo injection. These trials excluded any clinically important increase in asthma exacerbations in the two weeks following influenza vaccination (risk difference 0.014; 95% confidence interval -0.010 to 0.037). However, there was significant heterogeneity between the findings of two trials involving 1104 adults in terms of asthma exacerbations in the first three days after vaccination with split-virus or surface-antigen inactivated vaccines. There was no significant difference in measures of healthcare utilisation, days off school/symptom-free days, mean lung function or medication usage.EFFECTS OF LIVE ATTENUATED (INTRANASAL) INFLUENZA VACCINATION: There were no significant differences found in exacerbations or measures of lung function following live attenuated cold recombinant vaccine versus placebo in two small studies on 17 adults and 48 children. There were no significant differences in asthma exacerbations found for the comparison live attenuated vaccine (intranasal) versus trivalent inactivated vaccine (intramuscular) in one study on 2229 children (over six years of age).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Uncertainty remains about the degree of protection that vaccination affords against asthma exacerbations that are related to influenza infection. Evidence from more recently published randomised trials of inactivated split-virus influenza vaccination indicates that there is no significant increase in asthma exacerbations immediately after vaccination in adults or children over three years of age. We were unable to address concerns regarding possible increased wheezing and hospital admissions in infants given live intranasal vaccination.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in people with asthma

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccination is recommended for asthmatic patients in many countries as observational studies have shown that influenza infection can be associated with asthma exacerbations, but influenza vaccination itself has the potential to adversely affect pulmonary function. A recent overview concluded that there was no clear benefit of influenza vaccination in patients with asthma but this conclusion was not based on a systematic search of the literature.

OBJECTIVES

Whilst influenza may cause asthma exacerbations, there is controversy about the use of influenza vaccinations, since they may precipitate an asthma attack in some people. The objective of this review was to assess the efficacy of influenza vaccination in children and adults with asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trials register and checked reference lists of articles. The last search was carried out in September 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of influenza vaccination in children (over two years of age) and adults with asthma. Studies involving people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Inclusion criteria and assessment of trial quality were applied by two reviewers independently. Data extraction was done by two reviewers independently. Study authors were contacted for missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials were initially included. Four of these trials were of high quality. Six further articles have been included in three updates (Bueving 2003; Castro 2001; Fleming 2006; Redding 2002; Reid 1998). The included studies covered a wide diversity of people, settings and types of influenza vaccination, but data from the more recent studies that used similar vaccines have been pooled.

BENEFITS

Bueving 2003 studied 696 children with asthma and did not demonstrate a significant reduction in influenza related asthma exacerbations (Risk Difference 0.01; 95% confidence interval -0.02 to 0.04).

HARMS

The pooled results of two trials involving 2306 people with asthma did not demonstrate a significant increase in asthma exacerbations in the two weeks following influenza vaccination (Risk Difference 0.00; 95% confidence interval -0.02 to 0.02).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Uncertainty remains about the degree of protection vaccination affords against asthma exacerbations that are related to influenza infection. Evidence from recently published trials indicates that there is no significant increase in asthma exacerbations immediately after vaccination (at least with inactivated influenza vaccination). There is concern regarding possible increased wheezing and hospital admissions in infants given live intranasal vaccination.

The complex link between immunization against childhood diseases and allergy

Vaccines can be at the origin of allergic manifestations in susceptible children. Such manifestations include: immediate-type hypersensitivity (anaphylactic shock, rash or angioedema) within 1 h after the injection; semi-late hypersensitivity (local inflammatory lesion such as the Arthus phenomenon) a few hours after the injection; and delayed-type hypersensitivity (abscess or eczema at the site of the injection). Furthermore, early-life vaccinations have been implicated in the modulation of the immune system as they could promote the development of allergy by avoiding infections. However, most population-based studies have not found an increased risk of allergies in vaccinated children. Due to methodological problems in conducting the studies, further investigations are needed to better understand the phenomenon.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of live attenuated cold-adapted influenza vaccine, trivalent, with trivalent inactivated influenza virus vaccine in children and adolescents with asthma

BACKGROUND

Despite their potential for increased morbidity, 75% to 90% of asthmatic children do not receive influenza vaccination. Live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV), a cold-adapted, temperature-sensitive, trivalent influenza vaccine, is approved for prevention of influenza in healthy children 5 to 19 years of age. LAIV has been studied in only a small number of children with asthma.

METHODS

Children 6 to 17 years of age, with a clinical diagnosis of asthma, received a single dose of either intranasal CAIV-T (an investigational refrigerator-stable formulation of LAIV; n = 1114) or injectable trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV; n = 1115) in this randomized, open-label study during the 2002-2003 influenza season. Participants were followed up for culture-confirmed influenza illness, respiratory outcome, and safety.

RESULTS

The incidence of community-acquired culture-confirmed influenza illness was 4.1% (CAIV-T) versus 6.2% (TIV), demonstrating a significantly greater relative efficacy of CAIV-T versus TIV of 34.7% (90% confidence interval [CI] 9.4%-53.2%; 95% CI = 3.9%-56.0%). There were no significant differences between treatment groups in the incidence of asthma exacerbations, mean peak expiratory flow rate findings, asthma symptom scores, or nighttime awakening scores. The incidence of runny nose/nasal congestion was higher for CAIV-T (66.2%) than TIV (52.5%) recipients. Approximately 70% of TIV recipients reported injection site reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

CAIV-T was well tolerated in children and adolescents with asthma. There was no evidence of a significant increase in adverse pulmonary outcomes for CAIV-T compared with TIV. CAIV-T had a significantly greater relative efficacy of 35% compared with TIV in this high-risk population.

Influenza vaccine in patients with asthma

Influenza virus continues to be a major cause of respiratory infection and is an important contributor to morbidity and mortality in at-risk populations, including those with underlying pulmonary conditions such as asthma. Vaccination with inactivated influenza vaccine remains the most popular method in controlling influenza through prevention. Current guidelines recommend the administration of the influenza vaccine to all patients with asthma. However, a third or fewer of those patients with asthma are currently receiving this vaccine. In this review, the risk-versus-benefit of influenza vaccination in children and adults with asthma is evaluated, based on the current evidence.

Is influenza vaccination in asthma helpful?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Influenza infections are frequently involved in asthma exacerbations. During influenza epidemics substantial excess morbidity due to respiratory tract complications is reported in all age categories as well as excess mortality among the elderly. Vaccines are available for protection against influenza. Worldwide, vaccination is advised and considered a quality point for asthma care. However, the protective effect of influenza vaccination in patients with asthma is still disputed. In order to establish the current state of affairs we reviewed the recent literature on the protective effect of influenza vaccination and its usefulness in patients with asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several studies were found addressing influenza and the protective aspects of vaccination. They discussed the incidence, the adverse effects of vaccination, the coverage of influenza vaccination among patients with asthma and the effectiveness of the vaccine.

SUMMARY

Influenza vaccination can safely be used in patients with asthma. Allegations that vaccination could provoke asthma exacerbations are convincingly invalidated by previous and recent research. Although patients with asthma are one of the major target groups for immunization, vaccine coverage in all age categories remains low. So far, no unequivocal beneficial effect of influenza vaccination in patients with asthma was found in observational and experimental studies in the sense of reduction of asthma exacerbations and other complications. Recent studies confirm these negative findings. More long-term randomized, placebo-controlled studies, focusing on influenza- proven illness in patients with asthma, are needed to address the question of how helpful influenza vaccination is in these patients.