Uptake and effectiveness of influenza vaccine in those aged 65 years and older in the United Kingdom, influenza seasons 2010/11 to 2016/17

Enhanced influenza vaccination for older adults in Europe: a review of the current situation and expert recommendations for the future

INTRODUCTION

Influenza causes considerable morbidity and mortality in Europe, particularly among older adults due to comorbidities, as well as immunosenescence and inflammaging, which contribute to a diminished immune response. Vaccination remains the most effective way to prevent poor outcomes; however, uptake is suboptimal and many countries recommend standard vaccines despite evidence supporting better protection with enhanced (adjuvanted and high-dose) vaccines.

AREAS COVERED

A multidisciplinary group of experts reviewed the burden of influenza in Europe and evaluated data on enhanced vaccines, providing recommendations for their use in older adults. The group discussed barriers to vaccination and strategies to increase uptake.

EXPERT OPINION

Improving protection of older adults against influenza relies upon increasing vaccine uptake and ensuring access to vaccines that overcome age-related immunological decline. Achieving higher uptake requires national policies that facilitate equitable access and clear communication about vaccine eligibility. Based on available evidence, enhanced vaccines offer better protection than standard vaccines against hospitalization and complications in older adults. National recommendations should prioritize the use of enhanced influenza vaccines over standard vaccines in older adults. Limitations to interpretation of evidence include discrepancies in reporting of influenza-related medical encounters, underreporting of complications, and lack of randomized studies comparing high-dose and adjuvanted vaccines.

The Potential for Twice-Annual Influenza Vaccination to Reduce Disease Burden

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccination is recommended annually based on the evolving nature of influenza viruses and the waning of vaccine-induced immunity. The timing of vaccination is usually before the winter influenza season in most temperate locations, where the seasonality is clear and influenza activities on average last no longer than 6 months. However, many tropical and subtropical areas have year-round influenza activity and multiple epidemics within 1 year, against which annual influenza vaccination may not offer sufficient protection at the individual level.

AIMS

A twice-annual vaccination program could utilize standard inactivated influenza vaccines or enhanced influenza vaccines. Here, we discuss three reasons to consider twice-annual vaccination as a strategy to improve protection.

DISCUSSION

The first, mentioned above, is that some locations experience prolonged or year-round influenza activity. The second reason is based on the observation that vaccine effectiveness significantly declines about 6 months after vaccination particularly for A(H3N2) strains, and therefore, vaccination twice a year might be beneficial to maintain a higher level of immunity in the second half of each year. The third reason is to allow for receipt of the most updated vaccine strains, given that these are updated twice each year by the World Health Organization. We also discuss three potential barriers or challenges. The first potential challenge is knowledge gaps, because there are very few existing studies that used twice-annual vaccination. The second potential barrier is a concern over whether more frequent vaccination would lead to reduced immunogenicity or reduced clinical protection in the longer term. The third relates to concerns about cost or feasibility.

CONCLUSION

We discuss these issues and recommend comparative assessment of the incremental benefits and cost of twice-annual vaccination versus annual vaccination, as well as other vaccination strategies aiming to reduce influenza disease burden particularly in tropical and subtropical locations where there can be year-round influenza activity.

A Profile of Influenza Vaccine Coverage for 2019-2020: Database Study of the English Primary Care Sentinel Cohort

BACKGROUND

Innovation in seasonal influenza vaccine development has resulted in a wider range of formulations becoming available. Understanding vaccine coverage across populations including the timing of administration is important when evaluating vaccine benefits and risks.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to report the representativeness, uptake of influenza vaccines, different formulations of influenza vaccines, and timing of administration within the English Primary Care Sentinel Cohort (PCSC).

METHODS

We used the PCSC of the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre. We included patients of all ages registered with PCSC member general practices, reporting influenza vaccine coverage between September 1, 2019, and January 29, 2020. We identified influenza vaccination recipients and characterized them by age, clinical risk groups, and vaccine type. We reported the date of influenza vaccination within the PCSC by International Standard Organization (ISO) week. The representativeness of the PCSC population was compared with population data provided by the Office for National Statistics. PCSC influenza vaccine coverage was compared with published UK Health Security Agency's national data. We used paired t tests to compare populations, reported with 95% CI.

RESULTS

The PCSC comprised 7,010,627 people from 693 general practices. The study population included a greater proportion of people aged 18-49 years (2,982,390/7,010,627, 42.5%; 95% CI 42.5%-42.6%) compared with the Office for National Statistics 2019 midyear population estimates (23,219,730/56,286,961, 41.3%; 95% CI 4.12%-41.3%; P<.001). People who are more deprived were underrepresented and those in the least deprived quintile were overrepresented. Within the study population, 24.7% (1,731,062/7,010,627; 95% CI 24.7%-24.7%) of people of all ages received an influenza vaccine compared with 24.2% (14,468,665/59,764,928; 95% CI 24.2%-24.2%; P<.001) in national data. The highest coverage was in people aged ≥65 years (913,695/1,264,700, 72.3%; 95% CI 72.2%-72.3%). The proportion of people in risk groups who received an influenza vaccine was also higher; for example, 69.8% (284,280/407,228; 95% CI 69.7%-70%) of people with diabetes in the PCSC received an influenza vaccine compared with 61.2% (983,727/1,607,996; 95% CI 61.1%-61.3%; P<.001) in national data. In the PCSC, vaccine type and brand information were available for 71.8% (358,365/498,923; 95% CI 71.7%-72%) of people aged 16-64 years and 81.9% (748,312/913,695; 95% CI 81.8%-82%) of people aged ≥65 years, compared with 23.6% (696,880/2,900,000) and 17.8% (1,385,888/7,700,000), respectively, of the same age groups in national data. Vaccination commenced during ISO week 35, continued until ISO week 3, and peaked during ISO week 41. The in-week peak in vaccination administration was on Saturdays.

CONCLUSIONS

The PCSC's sociodemographic profile was similar to the national population and captured more data about risk groups, vaccine brands, and batches. This may reflect higher data quality. Its capabilities included reporting precise dates of administration. The PCSC is suitable for undertaking studies of influenza vaccine coverage.

High Clinical Burden of Influenza Disease in Adults Aged ≥ 65 Years: Can We Do Better? A Systematic Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Influenza is a respiratory infection associated with a significant clinical burden globally. Adults aged ≥ 65 years are at increased risk of severe influenza-related symptoms and complications due to chronic comorbidity and immunosenescence. Annual influenza vaccination is recommended; however, current influenza vaccines confer suboptimal protection, in part due to antigen mismatch and poor durability. This systematic literature review characterizes the global clinical burden of seasonal influenza among adults aged ≥ 65 years.

METHODS

An electronic database search was conducted and supplemented with a conference abstract search. Included studies described clinical outcomes in the ≥ 65 years population across several global regions and were published in English between January 1, 2012 and February 9, 2022.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine publications were included (accounting for > 156,198,287 total participants globally). Clinical burden was evident across regions, with most studies conducted in the USA and Europe. Risk of influenza-associated hospitalization increased with age, particularly in those aged ≥ 65 years living in long-term care facilities, with underlying comorbidities, and infected with A(H3N2) strains. Seasons dominated by circulating A(H3N2) strains saw increased risk of influenza-associated hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and mortality within the ≥ 65 years population. Seasonal differences in clinical burden were linked to differences in circulating strains.

CONCLUSIONS

Influenza exerts a considerable burden on adults aged ≥ 65 years and healthcare systems, with high incidence of hospitalization and mortality. Substantial influenza-associated clinical burden persists despite increasing vaccination coverage among adults aged ≥ 65 years across regions included in this review, which suggests limited effectiveness of currently available seasonal influenza vaccines. To reduce influenza-associated clinical burden, influenza vaccine effectiveness must be improved. Next generation vaccine production using mRNA technology has demonstrated high effectiveness against another respiratory virus-SARS-CoV-2-and may overcome the practical limitations associated with traditional influenza vaccine production.

Enhancing the protection of influenza virus vaccines with BECC TLR4 adjuvant in aged mice

Influenza A virus (IAV) is a leading cause of respiratory disease worldwide often resulting in severe morbidity and mortality. We have previously shown that the Bacterial Enzymatic Combinatorial Chemistry (BECC) adjuvants, BECC438 and BECC470, formulated with an influenza virus hemagglutinin (HA) protein vaccine, offer greater protection from influenza virus challenge in mouse respiratory models using adult mice than standard HA:adjuvant combinations. In this study, we determined that immunization with HA + BECC adjuvants also significantly broadened the epitopes targeted on HA as compared with other adjuvants, resulting in increased titers of antibodies directed against the highly conserved HA stalk domain. Importantly, we demonstrate that BECC470 combined with an influenza virus HA protein antigen in a prime-only immunization regimen was able to achieve complete protection from challenge in a ~ 12-month-old mouse aged model. Together, this demonstrates the heightened protection provided by the BECC470 adjuvant in an influenza virus vaccine model and shows the enhanced immune response, as compared to other adjuvants elicited by the formulation of HA with BECC470.

Systematic Review on the Cost-Effectiveness of Seasonal Influenza Vaccines in Older Adults

OBJECTIVES

Older adults are at high risk of influenza-related complications or hospitalization. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the relative cost-effectiveness of all influenza vaccine options for older adults.

METHODS

This systematic review identified economic evaluation studies assessing the cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccines in adults ≥65 years of age from 5 literature databases. Two reviewers independently selected, extracted, and appraised relevant studies using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Economic Evaluations and Heyland's generalizability checklist. Costs were converted to 2019 Canadian dollars and adjusted for inflation and purchasing power parity.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies were included. There were 18 comparisons of quadrivalent inactivated vaccine (QIV) versus trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV): 5 showed QIV dominated TIV (ie, lower costs and higher health benefit), and 13 showed the results depended on willingness to pay (WTP). There were 9 comparisons of high-dose TIV (TIV-HD) versus TIV: 5 showed TIV-HD dominated TIV, and 4 showed the results depended on WTP. There were 8 comparisons of adjuvanted TIV (TIV-ADJ) versus TIV: 4 showed TIV-ADJ dominated TIV, and 4 showed the results depended on WTP. There were few pairwise comparisons among QIV, TIV-HD, and TIV-ADJ.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests QIV, TIV-HD, and TIV-ADJ are cost-effective against TIV for a WTP threshold of $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Future studies should include new and existing vaccine options for broad age ranges and use more robust methodologies-such as real-world evaluations or modeling studies accounting for methodological, structural, and parameter uncertainty.

The cost-effectiveness of an adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine in the United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom (UK), both the MF59-adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine (aQIV) and the high-dose QIV (QIV-HD) are preferred for persons aged 65 years and older but only aQIV is reimbursed by the National Health Service (NHS). The objective was to determine the potential cost-effectiveness of vaccinating adults aged 65 years and above with aQIV compared with QIV-HD in the UK. A dynamic transmission model, calibrated to match infection data from the UK, was used to estimate the impact of vaccination in 10 influenza seasons. Vaccine effectiveness was based on a meta-analysis that concluded the vaccines were not significantly different. Vaccine coverage, physician visits, hospitalizations, deaths, utility losses and NHS costs were estimated using published UK sources. The list price of aQIV was £11.88 while a range of prices were tested for QIV-HD. The price of the trivalent high-dose vaccine (TIV-HD) is £20.00 but a list price for QIV-HD is not yet available. The projected differences between the vaccines in terms of clinical cases and influenza treatment costs are minimal. Our analysis demonstrates that in order to be cost-effective, the price of QIV-HD must be similar to that of aQIV and may range from £7.57 to £12.94 depending on the relative effectiveness of the vaccines. The results of the analysis were most sensitive to variation in vaccine effectiveness and the rate of hospitalization due to influenza. Given the evidence, aQIV is cost-saving unless QIV-HD is priced lower than the existing list price of TIV-HD.

Low Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Against A(H3N2)-Associated Hospitalizations in 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 of the Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN)

BACKGROUND

The 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 influenza seasons were notable for the high number of hospitalizations for influenza A(H3N2) despite vaccine and circulating strain match.

METHODS

We evaluated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalization in the test-negative HAIVEN study. Nasal-throat swabs were tested by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for influenza and VE was determined based on odds of vaccination by generalized estimating equations. Vaccine-specific antibody was measured in a subset of enrollees.

RESULTS

A total of 6129 adults were enrolled from 10 hospitals. Adjusted VE against A(H3N2) was 22.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3% to 35.0%), pooled across both years and 49.4% (95% CI, 34.3% to 61.1%) against B/Yamagata. In 2017-2018, the A(H3N2) VE point estimate for the cell-based vaccine was 43.0% (95% CI, -36.3% to 76.1%; 56 vaccine recipients) compared to 24.0% (95% CI, 3.9% to 39.9%) for egg-based vaccines. Among 643 with serology data, hemagglutinin antibodies against the egg-based A(H3N2) vaccine strain were increased in influenza-negative individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

Low VE for the A/Hong Kong/4801/2014 vaccine virus in both A(H3N2) seasons emphasizes concerns for continued changes in H3N2 antigenic epitopes, including changes that may impact glycosylation and ultimately reduce VE.

Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in People With Asthma: A National Test-Negative Design Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

Influenza infection is a trigger of asthma attacks. Influenza vaccination can potentially reduce the incidence of influenza in people with asthma, but uptake remains persistently low, partially reflecting concerns about vaccine effectiveness (VE).

METHODS

We conducted a test-negative designed case-control study to estimate the effectiveness of influenza vaccine in people with asthma in Scotland over 6 seasons (2010/2011 to 2015/2016). We used individual patient-level data from 223 practices, which yielded 1 830 772 patient-years of data that were linked with virological (n = 5910 swabs) data.

RESULTS

Vaccination was associated with an overall 55.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 45.8-62.7) risk reduction of laboratory-confirmed influenza infections in people with asthma over 6 seasons. There were substantial variations in VE between seasons, influenza strains, and age groups. The highest VE (76.1%; 95% CI, 55.6-87.1) was found in the 2010/2011 season, when the A(H1N1) strain dominated and there was a good antigenic vaccine match. High protection was observed against the A(H1N1) (eg, 2010/2011; 70.7%; 95% CI, 32.5-87.3) and B strains (eg, 2010/2011; 83.2%; 95% CI, 44.3-94.9), but there was lower protection for the A(H3N2) strain (eg, 2014/2015; 26.4%; 95% CI, -12.0 to 51.6). The highest VE against all viral strains was observed in adults aged 18-54 years (57.0%; 95% CI, 42.3-68.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccination gave meaningful protection against laboratory-confirmed influenza in people with asthma across all seasons. Strategies to boost influenza vaccine uptake have the potential to substantially reduce influenza-triggered asthma attacks.

Influenza-associated mortality in hospital care: a retrospective cohort study of risk factors and impact of oseltamivir in an English teaching hospital, 2016 to 2017

Background

Evidence of an oseltamivir treatment effect on influenza A(H3N2) virus infections in hospitalised patients is incomplete.

Aims

This cohort study aimed to evaluate risk factors for death among PCR-confirmed hospitalised cases of seasonal influenza A(H3N2) of all ages and the impact of oseltamivir.

Methods

Participants included all 332 PCR-confirmed influenza A(H3N2) cases diagnosed between 30 August 2016 and 17 March 2017 in an English university teaching Hospital. Oseltamivir treatment effect on odds of inpatient death was assessed by backward stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis.

Results

The odds of death were reduced by two thirds (odds ratio (OR): 0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.11–0.93), in inpatients treated with a standard course of oseltamivir 75 mg two times daily for 5 days – compared with those untreated with oseltamivir, after adjustment for age, sex, current excess alcohol intake, receipt of 2016/17 seasonal influenza vaccine, serum haemoglobin and hospital vs community attribution of acquisition of influenza.

Conclusions

Oseltamivir treatment given according to National Institutes of Clinical Excellence (NICE); United States Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines was shown to be effective in reducing the odds of mortality in inpatients with PCR-confirmed seasonal influenza A(H3N2) after adjustment in a busy routine English hospital setting. Our results highlight the importance of hospitals complying with relevant guidelines for prompt seasonal influenza PCR testing and ensuring standard oseltamivir treatment to all PCR-confirmed cases of seasonal influenza.

Integrating molecular point-of-care testing for influenza into primary care: a mixed-methods feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Molecular point-of-care testing (POCT) for influenza in primary care could influence clinical care and patient outcomes.

AIM

To assess the feasibility of incorporating influenza POCT into general practice in England.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A mixed-methods study conducted in six general practices that had not previously participated in respiratory virology sampling, which are part of the Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre English sentinel surveillance network, from February 2019 to May 2019.

METHOD

A sociotechnical perspective was adopted using the Public Health England POCT implementation toolkit and business process modelling notation to inform qualitative analysis. Quantitative data were collected about the number of samples taken, their representativeness, and the virology results obtained, comparing them with the rest of the sentinel system over the same weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 312 POCTs were performed; 276 were used for quantitative analysis, of which 60 were positive for influenza and 216 were negative. The average swabbing rate was 0.4 per 1000 population and swab positivity was between 16.7% (n = 14/84) and 41.4% (n = 12/29). Given a positive influenza POCT result, the odds ratio of receiving an antiviral was 14.1 (95% confidence intervals [CI] = 2.9 to 70.0, P<0.001) and of receiving an antibiotic was 0.4 (95% CI = 0.2 to 0.8, P = 0.01), compared with patients with a negative result. Qualitative analysis showed that it was feasible for practices to implement POCT, but there is considerable variation in the processes used.

CONCLUSION

Testing for influenza using POCT is feasible in primary care and may improve antimicrobial use. However, further evidence from randomised trials of influenza POCT in general practice is needed.

Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 among patients in the Oxford Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre primary care network: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

There are few primary care studies of the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to identify demographic and clinical risk factors for testing positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) within the Oxford Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre primary care network.

METHODS

We analysed routinely collected, pseudonymised data for patients in the RCGP Research and Surveillance Centre primary care sentinel network who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between Jan 28 and April 4, 2020. We used multivariable logistic regression models with multiple imputation to identify risk factors for positive SARS-CoV-2 tests within this surveillance network.

FINDINGS

We identified 3802 SARS-CoV-2 test results, of which 587 were positive. In multivariable analysis, male sex was independently associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (296 [18·4%] of 1612 men vs 291 [13·3%] of 2190 women; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·55, 95% CI 1·27-1·89). Adults were at increased risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared with children, and people aged 40-64 years were at greatest risk in the multivariable model (243 [18·5%] of 1316 adults aged 40-64 years vs 23 [4·6%] of 499 children; adjusted OR 5·36, 95% CI 3·28-8·76). Compared with white people, the adjusted odds of a positive test were greater in black people (388 [15·5%] of 2497 white people vs 36 [62·1%] of 58 black people; adjusted OR 4·75, 95% CI 2·65-8·51). People living in urban areas versus rural areas (476 [26·2%] of 1816 in urban areas vs 111 [5·6%] of 1986 in rural areas; adjusted OR 4·59, 95% CI 3·57-5·90) and in more deprived areas (197 [29·5%] of 668 in most deprived vs 143 [7·7%] of 1855 in least deprived; adjusted OR 2·03, 95% CI 1·51-2·71) were more likely to test positive. People with chronic kidney disease were more likely to test positive in the adjusted analysis (68 [32·9%] of 207 with chronic kidney disease vs 519 [14·4%] of 3595 without; adjusted OR 1·91, 95% CI 1·31-2·78), but there was no significant association with other chronic conditions in that analysis. We found increased odds of a positive test among people who are obese (142 [20·9%] of 680 people with obesity vs 171 [13·2%] of 1296 normal-weight people; adjusted OR 1·41, 95% CI 1·04-1·91). Notably, active smoking was linked with decreased odds of a positive test result (47 [11·4%] of 413 active smokers vs 201 [17·9%] of 1125 non-smokers; adjusted OR 0·49, 95% CI 0·34-0·71).

INTERPRETATION

A positive SARS-CoV-2 test result in this primary care cohort was associated with similar risk factors as observed for severe outcomes of COVID-19 in hospital settings, except for smoking. We provide evidence of potential sociodemographic factors associated with a positive test, including deprivation, population density, ethnicity, and chronic kidney disease.

FUNDING

Wellcome Trust.

The Use of Test-negative Controls to Monitor Vaccine Effectiveness: A Systematic Review of Methodology

BACKGROUND

The test-negative design is an increasingly popular approach for estimating vaccine effectiveness (VE) due to its efficiency. This review aims to examine published test-negative design studies of VE and to explore similarities and differences in methodological choices for different diseases and vaccines.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search on PubMed, Web of Science, and Medline, for studies reporting the effectiveness of any vaccines using a test-negative design. We screened titles and abstracts and reviewed full texts to identify relevant articles. We created a standardized form for each included article to extract information on the pathogen of interest, vaccine(s) being evaluated, study setting, clinical case definition, choices of cases and controls, and statistical approaches used to estimate VE.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 348 articles, including studies on VE against influenza virus (n = 253), rotavirus (n = 48), pneumococcus (n = 24), and nine other pathogens. Clinical case definitions used to enroll patients were similar by pathogens of interest but the sets of symptoms that defined them varied substantially. Controls could be those testing negative for the pathogen of interest, those testing positive for nonvaccine type of the pathogen of interest, or a subset of those testing positive for alternative pathogens. Most studies controlled for age, calendar time, and comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review highlights similarities and differences in the application of the test-negative design that deserve further examination. If vaccination reduces disease severity in breakthrough infections, particular care must be taken in interpreting vaccine effectiveness estimates from test-negative design studies.

Relapse of polymyalgia rheumatica following adjuvanted influenza vaccine: A case-based review

Polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) is the most common inflammatory rheumatological condition affecting individuals aged >50 years. There have been rare reports of PMR and other vasculitides developing within 3 months of influenza vaccination. Influenza is a major public health issue associated with seasonal increased mortality and intensified health care service use. Annual vaccination is the most effective intervention to prevent influenza, especially in elderly individuals. We report a severe "flare" of PMR in a 70-year-old patient after receiving the adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine, as recommended by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisations for this age group in the UK National Health Service in 2018-2019. The adverse event (AE) could be interpreted as the newly described autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA syndrome) as both PMR and ASIA display hyperactive immune responses. Caution is warranted in the use of vaccine adjuvants in patients with PMR with pre-existing imbalance of B and T cell homeostasis. Rare AEs are important to individuals, and personalized medicine means we should move away from "one size fits all" for vaccines, as well as for therapeutics.

Effectiveness of inactivated influenza vaccine in children by vaccine dose, 2013-18

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) by vaccine dose in children aged 6 months to 12 years for whom two doses are recommended in Japan to ascertain the appropriate vaccine doses.

METHODS

VE was assessed according to a test-negative case-control design based on rapid influenza diagnostic test (RIDT) results. Children aged 6 months to 12 years with a fever ≥38 °C who had received an RIDT in outpatient clinics of 24 hospitals were enrolled for all five seasons since 2013/14. VE by vaccine dose (none vs. once or twice, and once vs. twice) was analyzed.

RESULTS

In the dose analysis, 20,033 children were enrolled. Both one- and two-dose regimens significantly reduced cases in preventing any influenza, influenza A, and influenza B, but there was no significant difference in adjusted VE between one- and two-dose regimens overall (adjusted OR, 0.560 [95% CI, 0.505-0.621], 0.550 [95% CI, 0.516-0.586]), 0.549 [95% CI, 0.517-0.583], and 1.014 [95% CI, 0.907-1.135], for none vs. once, none vs. twice, none vs. once or twice, and once vs. twice for any influenza, respectively). Both one- and two-dose regimens significantly reduced cases with any influenza and influenza A every season. Also, both regimens significantly reduced cases of any influenza, influenza A, and influenza B among children aged 1-12 years, especially among those aged 1-5 years. In the 2013/14, 2015/16, and 2016/17 seasons, however, only the two-dose regimen was significantly effective in preventing influenza B. Both one- and two-dose regimens significantly reduced cases involving hospitalization due to any influenza and influenza A.

CONCLUSIONS

Both one- and two-doses regimens of IIV were effective in preventing influenza for children aged 6 months to 12 years. The two-dose regimen was more effective against influenza B in some seasons.