Exploring the effect of previous inactivated influenza vaccination on seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness against medically attended influenza: Results of the European I-MOVE multicentre test-negative case-control study, 2011/2012-2016/2017

Long Prime-Boost Interval and Heightened Anti-GD2 Antibody Response to Carbohydrate Cancer Vaccine

The carbohydrate ganglioside GD2/GD3 cancer vaccine adjuvanted by β-glucan stimulates anti-GD2 IgG1 antibodies that strongly correlate with improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients with high-risk neuroblastoma. Thirty-two patients who relapsed on the vaccine (first enrollment) were re-treated on the same vaccine protocol (re-enrollment). Titers during the first enrollment peaked by week 32 at 751 ± 270 ng/mL, which plateaued despite vaccine boosts at 1.2-4.5 month intervals. After a median wash-out interval of 16.1 months from the last vaccine dose during the first enrollment to the first vaccine dose during re-enrollment, the anti-GD2 IgG1 antibody rose to a peak of 4066 ± 813 ng/mL by week 3 following re-enrollment (p < 0.0001 by the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test). Yet, these peaks dropped sharply and continually despite repeated boosts at 1.2-4.5 month intervals, before leveling off by week 20 to the first enrollment peak levels. Despite higher antibody titers, patients experienced no pain or neuropathic side effects, which were typically associated with immunotherapy using monoclonal anti-GD2 antibodies. By the Kaplan-Meier method, PFS was estimated to be 51%, and OS was 81%. The association between IgG1 titer during re-enrollment and β-glucan receptor dectin-1 SNP rs3901533 was significant (p = 0.01). A longer prime-boost interval could significantly improve antibody responses in patients treated with ganglioside conjugate cancer vaccines.

Antigenic drift and subtype interference shape A(H3N2) epidemic dynamics in the United States

Influenza viruses continually evolve new antigenic variants, through mutations in epitopes of their major surface proteins, hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA). Antigenic drift potentiates the reinfection of previously infected individuals, but the contribution of this process to variability in annual epidemics is not well understood. Here we link influenza A(H3N2) virus evolution to regional epidemic dynamics in the United States during 1997-2019. We integrate phenotypic measures of HA antigenic drift and sequence-based measures of HA and NA fitness to infer antigenic and genetic distances between viruses circulating in successive seasons. We estimate the magnitude, severity, timing, transmission rate, age-specific patterns, and subtype dominance of each regional outbreak and find that genetic distance based on broad sets of epitope sites is the strongest evolutionary predictor of A(H3N2) virus epidemiology. Increased HA and NA epitope distance between seasons correlates with larger, more intense epidemics, higher transmission, greater A(H3N2) subtype dominance, and a greater proportion of cases in adults relative to children, consistent with increased population susceptibility. Based on random forest models, A(H1N1) incidence impacts A(H3N2) epidemics to a greater extent than viral evolution, suggesting that subtype interference is a major driver of influenza A virus infection dynamics, presumably via heterosubtypic cross-immunity.

Symptomatic Differences between Influenza A/H3N2 and A/H1N1 in Korea

BACKGROUND

Limited understanding exists regarding clinical distinctions between influenza A/H3N2 and A/H1N1 subtypes, particularly in primary health care. We conducted a comparative analysis of symptomatic characteristics of influenza subtypes in Korea. This retrospective study analyzed medical records of patients who presented with positive test results for influenza-like illness (rapid influenza diagnostic test; RIDT) during the H3N2-dominant 2016-2017 and H1N1-dominant 2018-2019 seasons. Symptomatic manifestations, contact history, vaccination history, and clinical course were analyzed between the two seasons. The most frequent symptom in the RIDT-positive patients was fever (80.1% and 79.1%, respectively). The average body temperature was higher, and the number of patients with high fever was greater in the H3N2-dominant season than in the H1N1-dominant season (p < 0.001). Conversely, other symptoms, such as myalgia, cough, and sore throat, were significantly more common in the H1N1-dominant season than in the H3N2-dominant season (p < 0.001). Antiviral drugs were prescribed to most febrile RIDT-positive patients (82.2% and 81.3%, respectively, p = 0.516). Analyzing primary care data revealed different clinical manifestations according to the subtype. Therefore, physicians should consider these variable hallmarks and employ tailored therapeutic strategies to reduce the complication rate.

Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Persons Aged 15-64 Years: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Influenza is a respiratory disease caused by the influenza virus, which is highly transmissible in humans. This paper presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and test-negative designs (TNDs) to assess the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of seasonal influenza vaccines (SIVs) in humans aged 15 to 64 years. An electronic search to identify all relevant studies was performed. The outcome measure of interest was VE on laboratory-confirmed influenza (any strain). Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for TNDs. The search identified a total of 2993 records, but only 123 studies from 73 papers were included in the meta-analysis. Of these studies, 9 were RCTs and 116 were TNDs. The pooled VE was 48% (95% CI: 42-54) for RCTs, 55.4% (95% CI: 43.2-64.9) when there was a match between the vaccine and most prevalent circulating strains and 39.3% (95% CI: 23.5-51.9) otherwise. The TNDs' adjusted VE was equal to 39.9% (95% CI: 31-48), 45.1 (95% CI: 38.7-50.8) when there was a match and 35.1 (95% CI: 29.0-40.7) otherwise. The match between strains included in the vaccine and strains in circulation is the most important factor in the VE. It increases by more than 25% when there is a match with the most prevalent circulating strains. The laboratorial method for confirmation of influenza is a possible source of bias when estimating VE.

Does repeated influenza vaccination attenuate effectiveness? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccines require annual readministration; however, several reports have suggested that repeated vaccination might attenuate the vaccine's effectiveness. We aimed to estimate the reduction in vaccine effectiveness associated with repeated influenza vaccination.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL Complete databases for articles published from Jan 1, 2016, to June 13, 2022, and Web of Science for studies published from database inception to June 13, 2022. For studies published before Jan 1, 2016, we consulted published systematic reviews. Two reviewers (EJ-G and EJR) independently screened, extracted data using a data collection form, assessed studies' risk of bias using the Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) and evaluated the weight of evidence by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). We included observational studies and randomised controlled trials that reported vaccine effectiveness against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, influenza A(H3N2), or influenza B using four vaccination groups: current season; previous season; current and previous seasons; and neither season (reference). For each study, we calculated the absolute difference in vaccine effectiveness (ΔVE) for current season only and previous season only versus current and previous season vaccination to estimate attenuation associated with repeated vaccination. Pooled vaccine effectiveness and ∆VE were calculated by season, age group, and overall. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021260242.

FINDINGS

We identified 4979 publications, selected 681 for full review, and included 83 in the systematic review and 41 in meta-analyses. ΔVE for vaccination in both seasons compared with the current season was -9% (95% CI -16 to -1, I2=0%; low certainty) for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, -18% (-26 to -11, I2=7%; low certainty) for influenza A(H3N2), and -7% (-14 to 0, I2=0%; low certainty) for influenza B, indicating lower protection with consecutive vaccination. However, for all types, A subtypes and B lineages, vaccination in both seasons afforded better protection than not being vaccinated.

INTERPRETATION

Our estimates suggest that, although vaccination in the previous year attenuates vaccine effectiveness, vaccination in two consecutive years provides better protection than does no vaccination. The estimated effects of vaccination in the previous year are concerning and warrant additional investigation, but are not consistent or severe enough to support an alternative vaccination regimen at this time.

FUNDING

WHO and the US National Institutes of Health.

[Effectiveness of the influenza vaccine in the prevention of influenza in people over 65 years of age]

INTRODUCTION

Influenza is one of the diseases with the greatest epidemiological impact and of maximum relevance in the management of health services. The flu vaccine can have great variability each season, so our objective was to find out the effectiveness of the flu vaccine for the 2017/2018 season for the prevention of severe cases of flu in people over 65 years of age in a 385-bed acute general hospital.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Study of cases and controls. All hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza older than 65 years during the 2017/2018 season were included. Those who met the criteria for a severe case of influenza were considered cases. Those who did not meet the severity criteria were considered controls. Factors associated with the development of severe influenza were calculated.

RESULTS

The median age was 68 years (SD 91.87). The attack rate was 0.23 per hundred inhabitants and the vaccine effectiveness was 38%. The vaccinated and unvaccinated groups were different in terms of age (p < 0.0481). Vaccination status against severe influenza was found to be an independent protective factor (OR = 0.840; 0.746-0.913).

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of influenza vaccination provided greater protection against infection and reduced the severity of influenza in older hospitalized patients. These findings should be taken into account to improve vaccination strategies and achieve better vaccination coverage in the population at risk.

[Effectiveness of influenza vaccine in preventing severe influenza]

INTRODUCTION

Influenza is one of the diseases with the greatest epidemiological impact and the greatest relevance in the management of health services. The flu vaccine can have great variability each season, so our objective was to know the effectiveness of the flu vaccine for the 2017/2018 season for the prevention of severe cases of flu in a general acute hospital in 385 beds.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Case control study. All hospitalized patients with laboratory confirmed influenza during the 2017/2018 season were included. Those who met the criteria for a severe case of influenza were considered cases. Those that did not meet the severity criteria were considered controls. The factors associated with the development of severe influenza were calculated.

RESULTS

The effectiveness adjusted by age group and comorbidity was 60.7% (20.5-80.5). The vaccinated and unvaccinated groups were different in terms of age (P<.0381). The highest proportion of cases were concentrated in those over 65 years of age (45.5%). Vaccination status against severe influenza was found to be an independent protective factor (OR=.746; .694-.831).

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of influenza vaccination provided greater protection against infection and reduced the severity of influenza in hospitalized patients. These findings should be considered to improve vaccination strategies and achieve better vaccination coverage in the population at risk.

Opposing Effects of Prior Infection versus Prior Vaccination on Vaccine Immunogenicity against Influenza A(H3N2) Viruses

Prior vaccination can alternately enhance or attenuate influenza vaccine immunogenicity and effectiveness. Analogously, we found that vaccine immunogenicity was enhanced by prior A(H3N2) virus infection among participants of the Ha Nam Cohort, Viet Nam, but was attenuated by prior vaccination among Australian Health Care Workers (HCWs) vaccinated in the same year. Here, we combined these studies to directly compare antibody titers against 35 A(H3N2) viruses spanning 1968-2018. Participants received licensed inactivated vaccines containing A/HongKong/4801/2014 (H3N2). The analysis was limited to participants aged 18-65 Y, and compared those exposed to A(H3N2) viruses circulating since 2009 by infection (Ha Nam) or vaccination (HCWs) to a reference group who had no recent A(H3N2) infection or vaccination (Ha Nam). Antibody responses were compared by fitting titer/titer-rise landscapes across strains, and by estimating titer ratios to the reference group of 2009-2018 viruses. Pre-vaccination, titers were lowest against 2009-2014 viruses among the reference (no recent exposure) group. Post-vaccination, titers were, on average, two-fold higher among participants with prior infection and two-fold lower among participants with 3-5 prior vaccinations compared to the reference group. Titer rise was negligible among participants with 3-5 prior vaccinations, poor among participants with 1-2 prior vaccinations, and equivalent or better among those with prior infection compared to the reference group. The enhancing effect of prior infection versus the incrementally attenuating effect of prior vaccinations suggests that these exposures may alternately promote and constrain the generation of memory that can be recalled by a new vaccine strain.

Influence of Prior Influenza Vaccination on Current Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Children Aged 1 to 5 Years

BACKGROUND

Although annual influenza vaccination is an important strategy used to prevent influenza-related morbidity and mortality, some studies have reported the negative influence of prior vaccination on vaccine effectiveness (VE) for current seasons. Currently, the influence of prior vaccination is not conclusive, especially in children.

METHODS

We evaluated the association between current-season VE and prior season vaccination using a test-negative design in children aged 1-5 years presenting at nine outpatient clinics in Japan during the 2016/17 and 2017/18 influenza seasons. Children with influenza-like illness were enrolled prospectively and tested for influenza using real-time RT-PCR. Their recent vaccination history was categorized into six groups according to current vaccination doses (0/1/2) and prior vaccination status (unvaccinated = 0 doses/vaccinated = 1 dose or 2 doses): (1) 0 doses in the current season and unvaccinated in prior seasons (reference group); (2) 0 doses in the current season and vaccinated in a prior season; (3) 1 dose in the current season and unvaccinated in a prior season; (4) 1 dose in the current season and vaccinated in a prior season; (5) 2 doses in the current season and unvaccinated in a prior season, and (6) 2 doses in the current season and vaccinated in a prior season.

RESULTS

A total of 799 cases and 1196 controls were analyzed. The median age of the subjects was 3 years, and the proportion of males was 54%. Overall, the vaccination rates (any vaccination in the current season) in the cases and controls were 36% and 53%, respectively. The VEs of the groups were: (2) 29% (95% confidence interval: -25% to 59%); (3) 53% (6% to 76%); (4) 70% (45% to 83%); (5) 56% (32% to 72%), and (6) 61% (42% to 73%). The one- and two-dose VEs of the current season were significant regardless of prior vaccination status. The results did not differ when stratified by influenza subtype/lineage.

CONCLUSION

Prior vaccination did not attenuate the current-season VE in children aged 1 to 5 years, supporting the annual vaccination strategy.

Spotlight influenza: Estimation of influenza vaccine effectiveness in elderly people with assessment of residual confounding by negative control outcomes, Finland, 2012/13 to 2019/20

Background

Cohort studies on vaccine effectiveness are prone to confounding bias if the distribution of risk factors is unbalanced between vaccinated and unvaccinated study subjects.

Aim

We aimed to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness in the elderly population in Finland by controlling for a sufficient set of confounders based on routinely available register data.

Methods

For each of the eight consecutive influenza seasons from 2012/13 through 2019/20, we conducted a cohort study comparing the hazards of laboratory-confirmed influenza in vaccinated and unvaccinated people aged 65–100 years using individual-level medical and demographic data. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as 1 minus the hazard ratio adjusted for the confounders age, sex, vaccination history, nights hospitalised in the past and presence of underlying chronic conditions. To assess the adequacy of the selected set of confounders, we estimated hazard ratios of off-season hospitalisation for acute respiratory infection as a negative control outcome.

Results

Each analysed cohort comprised around 1 million subjects, of whom 37% to 49% were vaccinated. Vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza ranged from 16% (95% confidence interval (CI): 12–19) to 48% (95% CI: 41–54). More than 80% of the laboratory-confirmed cases were hospitalised. The adjusted off-season hazard ratio estimates varied between 1.00 (95% CI: 0.94–1.05) and 1.08 (95% CI: 1.01–1.15), indicating that residual confounding was absent or negligible.

Conclusion

Seasonal influenza vaccination reduces the hazard of severe influenza disease in vaccinated elderly people. Data about age, sex, vaccination history and utilisation of hospital care proved sufficient to control confounding.

Simple models to include influenza vaccination history when evaluating the effect of influenza vaccination

Background

Most reports of influenza vaccine effectiveness consider current-season vaccination only.

Aim

We evaluated a method to estimate the effect of influenza vaccinations (EIV) considering vaccination history.

Methods

We used a test-negative design with well-documented vaccination history to evaluate the average EIV over eight influenza seasons (2011/12–2018/19; n = 10,356). Modifying effect was considered as difference in effects of vaccination in current and previous seasons and current-season vaccination only. We also explored differences between current-season estimates excluding from the reference category people vaccinated in any of the five previous seasons and estimates without this exclusion or only for one or three previous seasons.

Results

The EIV was 50%, 45% and 38% in people vaccinated in the current season who had previously received none, one to two and three to five doses, respectively, and it was 30% and 43% for one to two and three to five prior doses only. Vaccination in at least three previous seasons reduced the effect of current-season vaccination by 12 percentage points overall, 31 among outpatients, 22 in 9–65 year-olds, and 23 against influenza B. Including people vaccinated in previous seasons only in the unvaccinated category underestimated EIV by 9 percentage points on average (31% vs 40%). Estimates considering vaccination of three or five previous seasons were similar.

Conclusions

Vaccine effectiveness studies should consider influenza vaccination in previous seasons, as it can retain effect and is often an effect modifier. Vaccination status in three categories (current season, previous seasons only, unvaccinated) reflects the whole EIV.

Effects of Prior Season Vaccination on Current Season Vaccine Effectiveness in the United States Flu Vaccine Effectiveness Network, 2012-2013 Through 2017-2018

BACKGROUND

We compared effects of prior vaccination and added or lost protection from current season vaccination among those previously vaccinated.

METHODS

Our analysis included data from the US Flu Vaccine Effectiveness Network among participants ≥9 years old with acute respiratory illness from 2012-2013 through 2017-2018. Vaccine protection was estimated using multivariate logistic regression with an interaction term for effect of prior season vaccination on current season vaccine effectiveness. Models were adjusted for age, calendar time, high-risk status, site, and season for combined estimates. We estimated protection by combinations of current and prior vaccination compared to unvaccinated in both seasons or current vaccination among prior vaccinated.

RESULTS

A total of 31 819 participants were included. Vaccine protection against any influenza averaged 42% (95% confidence interval [CI], 38%-47%) among those vaccinated only the current season, 37% (95% CI, 33-40) among those vaccinated both seasons, and 26% (95% CI, 18%-32%) among those vaccinated only the prior season, compared with participants vaccinated neither season. Current season vaccination reduced the odds of any influenza among patients unvaccinated the prior season by 42% (95% CI, 37%-46%), including 57%, 27%, and 55% against A(H1N1), A(H3N2), and influenza B, respectively. Among participants vaccinated the prior season, current season vaccination further reduced the odds of any influenza by 15% (95% CI, 7%-23%), including 29% against A(H1N1) and 26% against B viruses, but not against A(H3N2).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations for annual influenza vaccination. Benefits of current season vaccination varied among participants with and without prior season vaccination, by virus type/subtype and season.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness: New Insights and Challenges

Methods for assessing influenza vaccine efficacy and effectiveness have evolved over six decades. Randomized trials remain the gold standard for licensure, but observational studies are needed for annual assessment of vaccine effectiveness (VE). The test-negative design (TND) has become the de facto standard for these field studies. Patients who seek medical care with acute respiratory illness are tested for influenza, and VE is estimated from the odds of vaccination among influenza cases versus test-negative controls. VE varies across seasons, populations, age groups, and products, but VE estimates are consistently higher for A(H1N1)pdm09 and type B compared with A(H3N2). VE studies are increasingly used in combination with molecular epidemiology to understand the viral and immune system factors that drive clinical efficacy and effectiveness. The emerging field of immunoepidemiology offers the potential to understand complex host-virus interactions that affect vaccine protection, and this knowledge will contribute to universal vaccine development.

The impact of repeated vaccination using 10-year vaccination history on protection against influenza in older adults: a test-negative design study across the 2010/11 to 2015/16 influenza seasons in Ontario, Canada

Introduction

Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for older adults, but evidence regarding the impact of repeated vaccination has been inconclusive.

Aim

We investigated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza and the impact of repeated vaccination over 10 previous seasons on current season VE among older adults.

Methods

We conducted an observational test-negative study in community-dwelling adults aged > 65 years in Ontario, Canada for the 2010/11 to 2015/16 seasons by linking laboratory and health administrative data. We estimated VE using multivariable logistic regression. We assessed the impact of repeated vaccination by stratifying by previous vaccination history.

Results

We included 58,304 testing episodes for respiratory viruses, with 11,496 (20%) testing positive for influenza and 31,004 (53%) vaccinated. Adjusted VE against laboratory-confirmed influenza for the six seasons combined was 21% (95% confidence interval (CI): 18 to 24%). Patients who were vaccinated in the current season, but had received no vaccinations in the previous 10 seasons, had higher current season VE (34%; 95%CI: 9 to 52%) than patients who had received 1–3 (26%; 95%CI: 13 to 37%), 4–6 (24%; 95%CI: 15 to 33%), 7–8 (13%; 95%CI: 2 to 22%), or 9–10 (7%; 95%CI: −4 to 16%) vaccinations (trend test p = 0.001). All estimates were higher after correcting for misclassification of current season vaccination status. For patients who were not vaccinated in the current season, residual protection rose significantly with increasing numbers of vaccinations received previously.

Conclusions

Although VE appeared to decrease with increasing numbers of previous vaccinations, current season vaccination likely provides some protection against influenza regardless of the number of vaccinations received over the previous 10 influenza seasons.

Semiannual Versus Annual Influenza Vaccination in Older Adults in the Tropics: An Observer-blind, Active-comparator-controlled, Randomized Superiority Trial

BACKGROUND

Antibody titres and vaccine effectiveness decline within 6 months after influenza vaccination in older adults. Biannual vaccination may be necessary to provide year-round protection in the tropics, where influenza circulates throughout the year.

METHODS

Tropical Influenza Control Strategies (TROPICS1) was a single-center, 1:1 randomized, observer-blinded, active-comparator-controlled, superiority study in 200 community-resident adults aged ≥65 years. Participants received a standard-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccination (IIV3) at enrollment, and either tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis vaccination or IIV3 6 months later. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with haemagglutination-inhibition (HI) geometric mean titre (GMT) ≥1:40 1 month after the second vaccination (month 7). Secondary outcomes included GMTs to month 12, the incidence of influenza-like illness (ILI), and adverse reactions after vaccination.

RESULTS

At month 7, the proportion of participants with an HI tire ≥1:40 against A/H1N1 increased by 21.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.6-33.4) in the semiannual vaccination group. This proportion was not significantly higher for A/H3N2 (4.3, 95% CI -1.1-10.8) or B (2.1, 95% CI -2.0-7.3). Semiannual vaccination significantly increased GMTs against A/H1N1 and A/H3N2, but not B, at month 7. Participants receiving a repeat vaccination of IIV3 reported a significantly lower incidence of ILI in the 6 months after the second vaccination (relative vaccine effectiveness 57.1%, 95% CI 0.6-81.5). The frequency of adverse events was similar after the first and second influenza vaccinations.

CONCLUSIONS

Semiannual influenza vaccination in older residents of tropical countries has the potential to improve serological measures of protection against infection. Alternative vaccination strategies should also be studied.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT02655874.

Variations in Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness due to Study Characteristics: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Test-Negative Design Studies

BACKGROUND

Study characteristics influence vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimation. We examined the influence of some of these on seasonal influenza VE estimates from test-negative design (TND) studies.

METHODS

We systematically searched bibliographic databases and websites for full-text publications of TND studies on VE against laboratory-confirmed seasonal influenza in outpatients after the 2009 pandemic influenza. We followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines. We examined influence of source of vaccination information, respiratory specimen swab time, and covariate adjustment on VE. We calculated pooled adjusted VE against H1N1 and H3N2 influenza subtypes, influenza B, and all influenza using an inverse-variance random-effects model.

RESULTS

We included 70 full-text articles. Pooled VE against H1N1 and H3N2 influenza subtypes, influenza B, and all influenza was higher for studies that used self-reported vaccination than for those that used medical records. Pooled VE was higher with respiratory specimen collection within ≤7 days vs ≤4 days of symptom onset, but the opposite was observed for H1N1. Pooled VE was higher for studies that adjusted for age but not for medical conditions compared with those that adjusted for both. There was, however, a lack of statistical significance in almost all differences in pooled VE between compared groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence is not strong enough to conclude that influenza VE from TND studies varies by source of vaccination information, respiratory specimen swab time, or adjustment for age/medical conditions. The evidence is, however, indicative that these factors ought to be considered while designing or evaluating TND studies of influenza VE.

Vaccine effectiveness against influenza A(H3N2) and B among laboratory-confirmed, hospitalised older adults, Europe, 2017-18: A season of B lineage mismatched to the trivalent vaccine

Background

Influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1)pdm09 and B viruses co‐circulated in Europe in 2017‐18, predominated by influenza B. WHO‐recommended, trivalent vaccine components were lineage‐mismatched for B. The I‐MOVE hospital network measured 2017‐18 seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against influenza A(H3N2) and B among hospitalised patients (≥65 years) in Europe.

Methods

Following the same generic protocol for test‐negative design, hospital teams in nine countries swabbed patients ≥65 years with recent onset (≤7 days) severe acute respiratory infection (SARI), collecting information on demographics, vaccination status and underlying conditions. Cases were RT‐PCR positive for influenza A(H3N2) or B; controls: negative for any influenza. “Vaccinated” patients had SARI onset >14 days after vaccination. We measured pooled IVE against influenza, adjusted for study site, age, sex, onset date and chronic conditions.

Results

We included 3483 patients: 376 influenza A(H3N2) and 928 B cases, and 2028 controls. Most (>99%) vaccinated patients received the B lineage‐mismatched trivalent vaccine. IVE against influenza A(H3N2) was 24% (95% CI: 2 to 40); 35% (95% CI: 6 to 55) in 65‐ to 79‐year‐olds and 14% (95% CI: −22 to 39) in ≥80‐year‐olds. Against influenza B, IVE was 30% (95% CI: 16 to 41); 37% (95% CI: 19 to 51) in 65‐ to 79‐year‐olds and 19% (95% CI: −7 to 38) in ≥80‐year‐olds.

Conclusions

IVE against influenza B was similar to A(H3N2) in hospitalised older adults, despite trivalent vaccine and circulating B lineage mismatch, suggesting some cross‐protection. IVE was lower in those ≥80 than 65‐79 years. We reinforce the importance of influenza vaccination in older adults as, even with a poorly matched vaccine, it still protects one in three to four of this population from severe influenza.

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.

The economic and public health impact of influenza vaccinations: contributions of Swiss pharmacies in the 2016/17 and 2017/18 influenza seasons and implications for vaccination policy

AIMS OPF THE STUDY Healthy adults have had the option to receive prescriptionless vaccination against influenza in pharmacies of several Swiss cantons since the 2015/16 influenza season. We aimed to assess in a cost-benefit analysis the resulting net benefits for the Swiss economy and public health, and the benefits that could be expected if an extension of the current vaccination recommendations was implemented. METHODS The proportion of influenza vaccines administered in pharmacies was calculated from data provided by pharmacies entering information in phS-net.ch, data from vaccines covered by insurance companies, and vaccine supply data. The economic and public health impact was estimated in a cost-benefit analysis based on published data. RESULTS In the 2016/17 and 2017/18 influenza seasons, 7306 of a total of 1.07 million (0.7%) and 15,617 of a total of 1.15 million (1.4%) influenza vaccine doses, respectively, were administered in pharmacies in Switzerland. The net cost savings for the economy due to vaccination in pharmacies in the 2016/17 and 2017/18 seasons were CHF 66,633 and CHF 143,021, respectively. In the 2017/18 season, this resulted –in a net saving per 100,000 inhabitants of CHF 1918, 94.4 cases of illness, 17.6 visits to primary care physicians, 0.328 hospitalisations, 1.1 hospitalisation days, 0.019 deaths prevented, and 0.353 life-years gained. Influenza vaccination proved to be cost-effective provided that a vaccine efficacy of 59% is exceeded. Extrapolations for the healthy, working-age population revealed that a vaccination coverage rate of 50% and a vaccine efficacy of 70% could save the Swiss economy CHF 18.4 million annually. CONCLUSIONS The service allowing citizens to receive influenza vaccination in Swiss pharmacies is sparsely used. Since influenza vaccination is cost-beneficial as soon as vaccine efficacy surpasses a critical threshold, an extension of the vaccine recommendation for healthy, working-age adults should be considered from an economic point of view.

Adjuvanted versus nonadjuvanted influenza vaccines and risk of hospitalizations for pneumonia and cerebro/cardiovascular events in the elderly

Background: The higher effectiveness of MF59®-adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (MF59-TIV) vs. nonadjuvanted TIV in preventing influenza-related hospitalizations was found considering few influenza seasons, local and heterogeneous settings. This study evaluated the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of MF59-TIV vs. nonadjuvanted TIV on the risk of hospitalization for pneumonia and cerebro/cardiovascular events across 15 consecutive influenza seasons. Research design and methods: Using Health Search Database, a case-control study was nested in a cohort of elderly vaccinated with MF59-TIV or TIV. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of hospitalizations potentially related to influenza in patients vaccinated with MF59-TIV or TIV. Results: Of 43,000 patients vaccinated with MF59-TIV (66.2%) and TIV (33.8%) for the first time, 103 cases of hospitalization for pneumonia or cerebro/cardiovascular events (0.11 per 1,000 person-weeks) during 15 influenza seasons were identified. The MF59-TIV was associated with a reduced risk of hospitalizations for pneumonia and cerebro/cardiovascular events vs. TIV [rVE: 39% (95% CI: 4-61%)]. Conclusions: In a 15-season cohort of elderly, MF59-TIV seems to reduce the risk of hospitalizations for pneumonia and cerebro/cardiovascular events when compared with nonadjuvanted TIV. Our findings support the recommendation for MF59-TIV in the elderly population.

Baseline characteristics and clinical symptoms related to respiratory viruses identified among patients presenting with influenza-like illness in primary care

Objectives

We aimed to identify patients' clinical characteristics associated with respiratory viruses identified among patients presenting with influenza-like illness (ILI).

Methods

A sample of patients of all ages presenting with ILI was included by physicians of the French Sentinelles network during two seasons (2015/16 and 2016/17). Nasopharyngeal samples were tested for the presence of influenza virus (IV), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), human rhinovirus (HRV) and human metapneumovirus (HMPV). Patients' characteristics associated with each of the four virus classes were studied using multivariate logistic regressions.

Results

A total of 5859 individuals were included in the study: 48.0% tested positive for IV, 7.9% for HRV, 7.5% for RSV and 4.1% for HMPV. Cough was associated with IV (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.81–2.52) RSV (OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.75–3.74) and HMPV detection (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.40–3.45). Rhinorrhoea was associated mainly with HRV detection (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.34–2.32). Headache was associated with IV detection (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.34–2.32), whereas absence of headache was associated with RSV and HMPV detection. Dyspnoea was associated with RSV detection (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.73–3.12) and absence of dyspnoea with IV detection. Conjunctivitis was associated with IV detection (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.08–1.50). Some associations were observed only in children: dyspnoea and cough with RSV detection (age <5 years), conjunctivitis with IV detection (age <15 years). Period of onset of symptoms differed among aetiological diagnoses. Seasonal influenza vaccination decreased the risk of IV detection (OR, 0.67, 95% CI 0.51–0.86).

Conclusions

This study allowed the identification of symptoms associated with several viral aetiologies in patients with ILI. A proper knowledge and understanding of these clinical signs may improve the medical management of patients.

Estimating Vaccine-Driven Selection in Seasonal Influenza

Vaccination could be an evolutionary pressure on seasonal influenza if vaccines reduce the transmission rates of some ("targeted") strains more than others. In theory, more vaccinated populations should have a lower prevalence of targeted strains compared to less vaccinated populations. We tested for vaccine-induced selection in influenza by comparing strain frequencies between more and less vaccinated human populations. We defined strains in three ways: first as influenza types and subtypes, next as lineages of type B, and finally as clades of influenza A/H3N2. We detected spatial differences partially consistent with vaccine use in the frequencies of subtypes and types and between the lineages of influenza B, suggesting that vaccines do not select strongly among all these phylogenetic groups at regional scales. We did detect a significantly greater frequency of an H3N2 clade with known vaccine escape mutations in more vaccinated countries during the 2014⁻2015 season, which is consistent with vaccine-driven selection within the H3N2 subtype. Overall, we find more support for vaccine-driven selection when large differences in vaccine effectiveness suggest a strong effect size. Variation in surveillance practices across countries could obscure signals of selection, especially when strain-specific differences in vaccine effectiveness are small. Further examination of the influenza vaccine's evolutionary effects would benefit from improvements in epidemiological surveillance and reporting.

Exploring the effect of previous inactivated influenza vaccination on seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness against medically attended influenza: Results of the European I-MOVE multicentre test-negative case-control study, 2011/2012-2016/2017

BACKGROUND

Results of previous influenza vaccination effects on current season influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) are inconsistent.

OBJECTIVES

To explore previous influenza vaccination effects on current season VE among population targeted for vaccination.

METHODS

We used 2011/2012 to 2016/2017 I-MOVE primary care multicentre test-negative data. For each season, we compared current season adjusted VE (aVE) between individuals vaccinated and unvaccinated in previous season. Using unvaccinated in both seasons as a reference, we then compared aVE between vaccinated in both seasons, current only, and previous only.

RESULTS

We included 941, 2645 and 959 influenza-like illness patients positive for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B, respectively, and 5532 controls. In 2011/2012, 2014/2015 and 2016/2017, A(H3N2) aVE point estimates among those vaccinated in previous season were -68%, -21% and -19%, respectively; among unvaccinated in previous season, these were 33%, 48% and 46%, respectively (aVE not computable for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B). Compared to current season vaccination only, VE for both seasons' vaccination was (i) similar in two of four seasons for A(H3N2) (absolute difference [ad] 6% and 8%); (ii) lower in three of four seasons for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (ad 18%, 26% and 29%), in two seasons for influenza A(H3N2) (ad 27% and 39%) and in two of three seasons for influenza B (ad 26% and 37%); (iii) higher in one season for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (ad 20%) and influenza B (ad 24%).

CONCLUSIONS

We did not identify any pattern of previous influenza vaccination effect. Prospective cohort studies documenting influenza infections, vaccinations and vaccine types are needed to understand previous influenza vaccinations' effects.