Safety and immunogenicity of an MF59-adjuvanted subunit influenza vaccine in elderly Chinese subjects

Comparative Reactogenicity of Enhanced Influenza Vaccines in Older Adults

BACKGROUND

We analyzed data from a randomized controlled trial on the reactogenicity of 3 enhanced influenza vaccines compared with standard-dose (SD) inactivated influenza vaccine.

METHODS

We enrolled community-dwelling older adults in Hong Kong, and we randomly allocated them to receive 2017-2018 northern hemisphere formulations of SD vaccine (FluQuadri; Sanofi Pasteur), MF59-adjuvanted vaccine (FLUAD; Seqirus), high-dose (HD) vaccine (Fluzone High-Dose; Sanofi Pasteur), or recombinant hemagglutinin vaccine (Flublok; Sanofi Pasteur). Local and systemic reactions were evaluated at days 1, 3, 7, and 14 after vaccination.

RESULTS

Reported reactions were generally mild and short-lived. Systemic reactions occurred in similar proportions of participants by vaccine. Some local reactions were slightly more frequently reported among recipients of the MF59-adjuvanted and HD vaccines than among SD vaccine recipients. Participants reporting feverishness 1 day after vaccination had mean fold rises in postvaccination hemagglutination inhibition titers that were 1.85-fold higher (95% confidence interval, 1.01-3.38) for A(H1N1) than in those who did not report feverishness.

CONCLUSIONS

Some acute local reactions were more frequent after vaccination with MF59-adjuvanted and HD influenza vaccines, compared with SD inactivated influenza vaccine, whereas systemic symptoms occurred at similar frequencies in all groups. The association between feverishness and immunogenicity should be further investigated in a larger population.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT03330132.

Enhanced Passive Safety Surveillance (EPSS) confirms an optimal safety profile of the use of MF59® -adjuvanted influenza vaccine in older adults: Results from three consecutive seasons

BACKGROUND

In Europe, the enhanced safety surveillance (ESS) of seasonal influenza vaccines is mandatory, in order to detect any potential increase in reactogenicity when the vaccine composition is updated. The MF59® -adjuvanted influenza vaccine (Fluad™) is the first and the only licensed adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine in Europe.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to summarize the safety data of Fluad™ over three consecutive seasons.

METHODS

A passive approach to ESS (EPSS) was adopted, in which reporting of spontaneous adverse events (AEs) by vaccinees and vaccine exposure was estimated, in order to generate a near real-time reporting rate. EPSS was conducted in Italy during the 2015, 2016, and 2017 influenza seasons in the primary care setting. All AEs reported within 7 days following immunization were analyzed by season, type and seriousness. Fisher's exact test was used to compare frequencies between seasons.

RESULTS

Total exposure accounted for approximately 1,000 doses of Fluad™ for each season. A total of 0.5% (2015), 0.7% (2016), and 0.5% (2017) individual case safety reports (ICSRs) were received, corresponding to a total of 9 (2015), 18 (2016), and 12 (2017) spontaneous AEs. The frequencies of AEs of interest were below those expected on the basis of the known safety profile of the vaccine. Most AEs were mild-to-moderate in severity. No between-season difference was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analyses confirmed that the safety data observed were consistent with the known safety profile of Fluad™, which has been amply established over the last 20 years. No significant changes in the safety profile were observed.

Comparative Immunogenicity of Enhanced Seasonal Influenza Vaccines in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A number of enhanced influenza vaccines have been developed for use in older adults, including high-dose, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal vaccines.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review examining the improvements in antibody responses measured by the hemagglutination inhibition assay associated with these enhanced vaccines, compared with each other and with the standard-dose (SD) vaccine using random effects models.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine trials were included. Compared with adults aged ≥60 years receiving SD vaccines, those receiving enhanced vaccines had significantly higher postvaccination titers (for all vaccine strains) and higher proportions with elevated titers ≥40 (for most vaccine strains). High-dose vaccine elicited 82% higher postvaccination titer to A(H3N2) compared with SD vaccine; this was significantly higher than the 52% estimated for MF59-adjuvanted versus SD vaccines (P = .04), which was higher than the 32% estimated for intradermal versus SD vaccines (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, by summarizing current evidence, we found that enhanced vaccines had greater antibody responses than the SD vaccine. Indications of differences among enhanced vaccines highlight the fact that further research is needed to compare new vaccine options, especially during seasons with mismatched circulating strains and for immune outcomes other than hemagglutination inhibition titers as well as vaccine efficacy.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the safety of newly adjuvanted vaccines among older adults

INTRODUCTION

New adjuvants have been developed to improve the efficacy of vaccines and for dose-sparing capacity and may overcome immuno senescence in the elderly. We reviewed the safety of newly-adjuvanted vaccines in older adults.

METHODS

We searched Medline for clinical trials (CTs) including new adjuvant systems (AS01, AS02, AS03, or MF59), used in older adults, published between 01/1995 and 09/2017. Safety outcomes were: serious adverse events (SAEs); solicited local and general AEs (reactogenicity); unsolicited AEs; and potentially immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs). Standard random effects meta-analyses were conducted by type of safety event and adjuvant type, reporting Relative Risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

RESULTS

We identified 1040 publications, from which we selected 7, 7, and 12 CTs on AS01/AS02, AS03 and MF59, respectively. 47,602 study participants received newly-adjuvanted vaccine and 44,521 control vaccine, or placebo. Rates of SAEs (RR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.96-1.02), deaths (RR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.92-1.06) and pIMDs (RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.79-1.1) were comparable in newly-adjuvanted and control groups. Vaccine-related SAEs occurred in <1% of the subjects in both groups. The reactogenicity of AS01/AS02 and AS03 adjuvanted vaccines was higher compared to control vaccines, whereas MF59-adjuvanted vaccines resulted only in more pain. Grade 3 reactogenicity was reported infrequently, with fatigue (RR = 2.48, 95% CI = 1.69-3.64), headache (RR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.24-6.95), and myalgia (RR = 2.68, 95% CI = 1.86-3.80) occurring more frequently in newly-adjuvanted groups. Unsolicited AEs occurred slightly more frequently in newly-adjuvanted groups (RR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.00-1.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Our review suggests that, within the clinical trial setting, the use of new adjuvants in older adults has not led to any safety concerns, with no increase in SAEs or fatalities. Higher rates for solicited AEs were observed, especially for AS01/AS02 and AS03 adjuvanted vaccines, but AEs were mostly mild and transient. Further evidence will need to come from the use of new adjuvants in the real-world setting, where larger numbers can be studied to potentially detect rare reactions.

Influenza vaccines for preventing cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original review published in 2008. The risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes is increased with influenza-like infection, and vaccination against influenza may improve cardiovascular outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the potential benefits of influenza vaccination for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases on 18 October 2013: The Cochrane Library (including Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Economic Evaluation Database (EED) and Health Technology Assessment database (HTA)), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science and ongoing trials registers (www.controlled-trials.com/ and www.clinicaltrials.gov). We examined reference lists of relevant primary studies and systematic reviews. We performed a limited PubMed search on 20 February 2015, just before publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of influenza vaccination compared with placebo or no treatment in participants with or without cardiovascular disease, assessing cardiovascular death or non-fatal cardiovascular events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We carried out meta-analyses only for cardiovascular death, as other outcomes were reported too infrequently. We expressed effect sizes as risk ratios (RRs), and we used random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials of influenza vaccination compared with placebo or no vaccination, with 12,029 participants receiving at least one vaccination or control treatment. We included six new studies (n = 11,251), in addition to the two included in the previous version of the review. Four of these trials (n = 10,347) focused on prevention of influenza in the general or elderly population and reported cardiovascular outcomes among their safety analyses; four trials (n = 1682) focused on prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with established coronary heart disease. These populations were analysed separately. Follow-up continued between 42 days and one year. Five RCTs showed deficits in at least three of the risk of bias criteria assessed. When reported (seven studies), vaccination provided adequate immunogenicity or protection against influenza. Cardiovascular mortality was reported by four secondary prevention trials and was significantly reduced by influenza vaccination overall (risk ratio (RR) 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 0.76; P value 0.003) with no significant heterogeneity between studies, and by three trials reporting cardiovascular mortality as part of their safety analyses when the numbers of events were too small to permit conclusions. In studies of patients with coronary heart disease, composite outcomes of cardiovascular events tended to be decreased with influenza vaccination compared with placebo. Generally no significant difference was found between comparison groups regarding individual outcomes such as myocardial infarction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In patients with cardiovascular disease, influenza vaccination may reduce cardiovascular mortality and combined cardiovascular events. However, studies had some risk of bias, and results were not always consistent, so additional higher-quality evidence is necessary to confirm these findings. Not enough evidence was available to establish whether influenza vaccination has a role to play in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Immunogenicity of intramuscular MF59-adjuvanted and intradermal administered influenza enhanced vaccines in subjects aged over 60: A literature review

Because of the age-related immune system decline, 2 potentiated influenza vaccines were specifically licensed for the elderly: Fluad(®), an MF59-adjuvanted vaccine administered intramuscularly (IM-MF59), and Intanza 15 mcg(®), a non adjuvanted vaccine administered intradermally (ID). The objective of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of studies that evaluated antibody responses in the elderly following immunization with IM-MF59 or ID vaccines. The two potentiated vaccines induced immune responses satisfying, in most instances, the European Medicine Agency immunogenicity criteria, both against vaccine antigens and heterovariant drifted strains. Considering pooled data reported in the articles analyzed and papers directly comparing the 2 vaccines, the antibody responses elicited by IM-MF59 and ID were found to be generally comparable. The use of IM-MF59 and ID vaccines can be proposed as an appropriate strategy for elderly seasonal influenza vaccination although further studies are required for a more complete characterization of the 2 vaccines.

Comparison of the immunogenicity and safety of the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal influenza vaccines in the elderly

The influenza vaccination is known as the most effective method for preventing influenza infection and its complications in the elderly. Conventional subunit (Agrippal S1; Novartis), MF59-adjuvanted (Fluad; Novartis), and intradermal (IDflu15; Sanofi Pasteur) influenza vaccines are widely used throughout South Korea. However, few comparative studies evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of these vaccines are available. Prior to the beginning of the 2011-2012 influenza season, 335 healthy elderly volunteers randomly received one of three seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines, the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, or intradermal influenza vaccine. Serum hemagglutination-inhibiting antibody levels were measured at the time of vaccination and at 1 and 6 months after vaccination. Adverse events were recorded prospectively. A total of 113 conventional subunit, 111 MF59-adjuvanted, and 111 intradermal influenza vaccine volunteers were followed up during a 6-month postvaccination period. One month after vaccination, all three vaccines satisfied Committee for Medical Products for Human Use (CHMP) immunogenicity criteria for the A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 strains but not for the B strain. Compared with the subunit vaccine, the intradermal vaccine exhibited noninferiority, while the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine exhibited superiority. Furthermore, the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine was more immunogenic against the A/H3N2 strain than was the subunit vaccine up to 6 months postvaccination. The most common local and systemic reactions to the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal influenza vaccines were pain at the injection site (7.1%, 10.8%, and 6.3%, respectively) and generalized myalgia (0.9%, 8.1%, and 5.4%, respectively). Local and systemic reactions were similar among the three vaccine groups. MF59-adjuvanted vaccine exhibited superior immunogenicity compared with a conventional subunit vaccine and had a comparable safety profile. For older adults, the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine is preferable for providing superior immunogenicity.

Vaccine-preventable diseases: from paediatric to adult targets

The morbidity and mortality related to many communicable infectious diseases have significantly decreased in Western countries largely because of the use of antibiotics, and the implementation of well-planned vaccination strategies and national immunisation schedules specifically aimed at infants and children. However, although immunisation has proved to be highly effective for public health, more effort is needed to improve the currently sub-optimal rates of vaccination against various diseases among adults who may be at risk because of their age, medical condition or occupation. The vaccines currently licenced in Western countries are safe, immunogenic and effective against many infectious diseases and their complications, but the availability of newer vaccines or vaccines with new indications, the evolving ecology and epidemiology of many infections, population ageing, and other demographic changes (i.e. the increasing prevalence of chronic comorbidities and immunodeficiencies, mass migration, new working relationships, and widespread international tourism) require changes in the approach to immunisation. There is now a need for appropriate preventive measures for adults and the elderly aimed at protecting people at risk by using every possible catch-up opportunity and recommending specific age-related schedules on the basis of local epidemiology.

Vaccine strategies to enhance immune responses in the aged

The elderly population is more susceptible to infections with higher risks of morbidity and mortality. This is caused by the accumulation of immune defects with aging. The best way to protect people against infections is vaccination. Unfortunately, the same immune defects that render the elderly susceptible to infectious diseases also prevent the development of protective immunity following immunization. A good example of this is the influenza vaccine that only protects between 40 and 60% of the vaccinees over 65 years. In the past decade, tremendous efforts have been put toward improving the influenza vaccine for the elderly. We therefore use this example to present various strategies employed to overcome these age-associated immune defects and hence make vaccines more efficacious for the aged.

Superior immunogenicity of seasonal influenza vaccines containing full dose of MF59 (®) adjuvant: results from a dose-finding clinical trial in older adults

BACKGROUND

MF59-adjuvanted influenza vaccines have superior immunogenicity in older adults compared with non-adjuvanted vaccines. We assessed whether changing formulation (i.e., increasing H3N2 antigen or decreasing the quantity of adjuvant) of the licensed, MF59-adjuvanted trivalent influenza subunit vaccine Fluad (®) (Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics) improves the risk-benefit profile in vaccinees aged ≥ 65 years.

RESULTS

A significant dose-response relationship was observed between antibody levels and MF59 dose; full dose formulations elicited the strongest immune responses, meeting immunogenicity licensure criteria by Day 8. Doubling H3N2 antigen content did not increase the response to this antigen. Increased frequency of circulating CD4+ T-cells specific for vaccine antigens were detected by Day 8; magnitude and functional profile of the CD4+ T-cell response was comparable across the different vaccination groups. Mild to moderate solicited local reactions were more common with vaccines formulated with higher doses of MF59 (®) , but there were no MF59- or antigen dose-related increase in the frequency of solicited systemic reactions or unsolicited adverse events and serious adverse events.

METHODS

We report on 357 subjects who received one of eight intramuscular vaccine formulations. Hemagglutination-inhibiting antibodies were assayed on Days 1, 8 and 22; magnitude and functional profile of CD4+ T-cell responses to vaccine antigens were assessed in subsets. Solicited adverse reactions were reported via diary cards for seven days after vaccination and spontaneous adverse events were monitored throughout the study.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that the current formulation is the optimal one for MF59-adjuvanted influenza vaccine for use in older adults.

Inactivated influenza vaccines: recent progress and implications for the elderly

The current public health strategy for the containment of influenza is annual vaccination, which is recommended for the elderly and for those in risk factor categories that present the highest morbidity and mortality. However, because the immune response in the elderly is known to be less vigorous than in younger adults, research in the last decade has focused on improving the immune response to vaccination and increasing the protection of aged populations. The decreased efficacy of vaccines in the elderly is due to several factors, such as a decrease in the number of Langerhans cells, the limited capacity of dendritic cells to present antigen, defects in the expression of Toll-like receptors and the reduced expression of MHC class I and II molecules. Also, production of mature naive T cells by the thymus decreases with age. Among several approaches proposed to address the need for more immunogenic vaccines compared with conventional agents, the most well proven is the use of adjuvants. The first licensed adjuvant, aluminium-based mineral salts (alum), introduced in the 1920s, remains the standard worldwide adjuvant for human use and it has been widely used for almost a century. However, the addition of alum adjuvant to a split or subunit influenza vaccine has induced only marginal improvements. Other adjuvants have been developed and approved for human use since 1997; in particular, MF59, an oil-in-water adjuvant emulsion of squalene, which is able to increase immunogenicity of seasonal, pre-pandemic and pandemic subunit vaccines while maintaining acceptable safety and tolerability profiles. More recently, another oil-in-water emulsion, AS03, has been approved as a component of pre-pandemic H5N1 and pandemic H1N1 2009 vaccines. Besides adjuvants, several other strategies have been assessed to enhance antibody response in the elderly and other less responsive subjects, such as high-dose antigen vaccines, carrier systems (liposomes/virosomes) and the intradermal route of immunization. In particular, the potential of intradermal vaccination is well documented and the recent availability of an appropriate injection system, which combines simplicity, safety and ease of use, has allowed evaluation of the tolerability, safety and immunogenicity of the intradermal influenza vaccine in large numbers of subjects. Data that emerged from large clinical trials showed an improved immunogenicity compared with that of standard vaccine. Observational studies or comparisons between adjuvanted, intradermal or high-dose versus conventional vaccines are needed to evaluate whether the greater immunogenicity observed in a number of recent studies is correlated with greater protection against influenza and influenza-related complications and death.

Cost-effectiveness of adjuvanted versus nonadjuvanted influenza vaccine in adult hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Currently more than 340,000 individuals are receiving long-term hemodialysis (HD) therapy for end-stage renal disease and therefore are particularly vulnerable to influenza, prone to more severe influenza outcomes, and less likely to achieve seroprotection from standard influenza vaccines. Influenza vaccine adjuvants, chemical or biologic compounds added to a vaccine to boost the elicited immunologic response, may help overcome this problem.

STUDY DESIGN

Economic stochastic decision analytic simulation model.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

US adult HD population.

MODEL, PERSPECTIVE, & TIMEFRAME

The model simulated the decision to use either an adjuvanted or nonadjuvanted vaccine, assumed the societal perspective, and represented a single influenza season, or 1 year.

INTERVENTION

Adjuvanted influenza vaccine at different adjuvant costs and efficacies. Sensitivity analyses explored the impact of varying influenza clinical attack rate, influenza hospitalization rate, and influenza-related mortality.

OUTCOMES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of adjuvanted influenza vaccine (vs nonadjuvanted) with effectiveness measured in quality-adjusted life-years.

RESULTS

Adjuvanted influenza vaccine would be cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$50,000/quality-adjusted life-year) at a $1 adjuvant cost (on top of the standard vaccine cost) when adjuvant efficacy (in overcoming the difference between influenza vaccine response in HD patients and healthy adults) ≥60% and economically dominant (provides both cost savings and health benefits) when the $1 adjuvant's efficacy is 100%. A $2 adjuvant would be cost-effective if adjuvant efficacy was 100%.

LIMITATIONS

All models are simplifications of real life and cannot capture all possible factors and outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvanted influenza vaccine with adjuvant cost ≤$2 could be a cost-effective strategy in a standard influenza season depending on the potency of the adjuvant.

Safety and immunogenicity of a trivalent single dose seasonal influenza vaccine containing pandemic A(H1N1) antigen in younger and elderly subjects: a phase III open-label single-arm study

BACKGROUND

During the pandemic of the 2009 A(H1N1) influenza virus strain, 20-40% of the population in some areas were infected. Infection with A(H1N1) may be mild, with an average case fatality rate below 0.25%, but severe disease is not limited to patients with underlying medical conditions. Since A(H1N1) is expected to continue to circulate it is included in the seasonal influenza vaccines for the 2010-2011 winter season. We investigated the immunogenicity and safety of a preservative-free non-adjuvanted seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine.

METHODS

We conducted a single center single-arm study involving 142 subjects (77 adults of 18-60 years and 65 subjects 61 years and above) to test the immunogenicity, safety, and tolerability of a trivalent split influenza vaccine. The vaccine contained 15μg of hemagglutinin of each of the virus strains recommended for the 2010-2011 northern hemisphere winter season (A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)-like strain; A/Perth/16/2009 (H3N2)-like strain; B/Brisbane/60/2008-like strain) in a non-adjuvanted preservative-free formulation. Antibody response to each antigen was measured by hemagglutination inhibition (HI) 21 days after immunization. Subject diary cards and additional telephone interviews were used to assess the safety profile.

RESULTS

By day 21 after the vaccination, seroconversion, or a 4-fold antibody increase in HI antibody titers, was detectable against A(H1N1) in 84% and 75% of younger and older adults, against A(H3N2) in 80% and 57%, and against the B influenza strain in 61% and 33%. HI antibody titers of 40 or more were observed against A(H1N1) in 99% and 90% of younger and older adults, against A(H3N2) in 100% and 90%, and against the B influenza strain in 91% and 78%. Pre-vaccination antibody titers were protective against A(H1N1), A(H3N2), and B in 26%, 44% and 33%, respectively of the adults below 61 years and in 27%, 54% and 44% of the subjects of 61 years and above. Local and systemic reactions were more common in younger than in older subjects and the most frequently reported reactions were pain at the injection site (36%), myalgia (24%), and fatigue (15%). Five percent elderly subjects and 1% of younger subjects had mild or moderate unsolicited adverse events such as prolonged ecchymosis or night sweats that resolved within 7 days after vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

This single dose trivalent seasonal influenza vaccine generated protective antibodies to all three viral strains and had an acceptable safety profile in both younger and older adults (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01147081).

The ABC of clinical and experimental adjuvants--a brief overview

Adjuvants are compounds that can increase and/or modulate the intrinsic immunogenicity of an antigen and elicit strong and long lasting immune responses. During the last 80 years many adjuvants have been used in experimental settings, but due to various shortcomings of most of them only aluminum compounds made it into regular clinical usage. However, during the last years promising candidates have arisen that may finally adjunct or displace aluminum substances as main adjuvant. This review summarizes information on adjuvants currently used in clinical as well as in experimental settings.

Influenza control in the 21st century: Optimizing protection of older adults

Older adults (> or =65 years of age) are particularly vulnerable to influenza illness. This is due to a waning immune system that reduces their ability to respond to infection, which leads to more severe cases of disease. The majority ( approximately 90%) of influenza-related deaths occur in older adults and, in addition, catastrophic disability resulting from influenza-related hospitalization represents a significant burden in this vulnerable population. Current influenza vaccines provide benefits for older adults against influenza; however, vaccine effectiveness is lower than in younger adults. In addition, antigenic drift is also a concern, as it can impact on vaccine effectiveness due to a mismatch between the vaccine virus strain and the circulating virus strain. As such, vaccines that offer higher and broader protection against both homologous and heterologous virus strains are desirable. Approaches currently available in some countries to meet this medical need in older adults may include the use of adjuvanted vaccines. Future strategies under evaluation include the use of high-dose vaccines; novel or enhanced adjuvantation of current vaccines; use of live attenuated vaccines in combination with current vaccines; DNA vaccines; recombinant vaccines; as well as the use of different modes of delivery and alternative antigens. However, to truly evaluate the benefits that these solutions offer, further efficacy and effectiveness studies, and better correlates of protection, including a precise measurement of the T cell responses that are markers for protection, are needed. While it is clear that vaccines with greater immunogenicity are required for older adults, and that adjuvanted vaccines may offer a short-term solution, further research is required to exploit the many other new technologies.