A clinical and economic assessment of adjuvanted trivalent versus standard egg-derived quadrivalent influenza vaccines among older adults in the United States during the 2018-19 and 2019-20 influenza seasons

BACKGROUND

Clinical evidence supports use of enhanced influenza vaccines in older adults. Few economic outcome studies have compared adjuvanted trivalent inactivated (aIIV3) and standard egg-derived quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4e).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted leveraging deidentified US hospital data linked to claims data during the 2018-19 and 2019-20 influenza seasons. Relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) was compared in adults aged ≥ 65 years receiving aIIV3 or IIV4e using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and Poisson regression. An economic assessment quantified potential real-world cost savings.

RESULTS

The study included 715,807 aIIV3 and 320,991 IIV4e recipients in the 2018-19 and 844,169 aIIV3 and 306,270 IIV4e recipients in the 2019-20 influenza seasons. aIIV3 was significantly more effective than IIV4e in preventing cardiorespiratory disease (2018-19 rVE = 6.2%; and 2019-20 rVE = 6.0%) and respiratory disease (2018-19 rVE = 8.9%; and 2019-20 rVE = 10.1%). During the 2018-19 influenza season cardiorespiratory hospitalization cost savings for the aIIV3 population were $392 M, and $221 M for the 2019-20 season. Respiratory hospitalization cost savings for the aIIV3 population were $145 M and $97 M, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that aIIV3 provides clinical and economic advantages versus IIV4e in the elderly.

Comparison of the local safety of two multi-component feline vaccines, adjuvanted (1 mL) versus non-adjuvanted at reduced volume (0.5 mL), using computed tomography imaging

In 2020, a new 0.5 mL presentation of PUREVAX® RCP FeLV was registered and introduced in Europe. The objectives of this study were to investigate the local safety of this non-adjuvanted vaccine at reduced volume by classical methods (clinical examination, histopathology) and to evaluate the suitability of an alternative non-invasive methodology, the computed tomography (CT). For this purpose, the course of local reactions was assessed for 3 months after subcutaneous injection of PUREVAX® RCP FeLV 0.5 mL and compared to an adjuvanted vaccine, LEUCOFELIGEN® FeLV/RCP 1.0 mL. Injection site reactions consisted mainly of swelling reactions, which were more frequent, more pronounced and long-lasting in the adjuvanted vaccine group. Microscopically, in this group, moderate to severe inflammatory reactions were observed on day 7 (D7) and D21 post-injection and still present on D84, while mild inflammatory lesions were observed in the non-adjuvanted vaccine group only on D7 and D21. With the adjuvanted vaccine, inflamed areas were measurable by CT scan in all cats on D7 and D21, whereas they were detected only on D7 and only in 20 % of cats from the non-adjuvanted vaccine group. Besides the higher frequency, the mean inflamed volume was nearly 300 times larger in adjuvanted vaccine group on D7. Using different methodologies, the favorable safety profile of PUREVAX® RCP FeLV 0.5 mL was confirmed. Furthermore, the vaccine is aligned with current vaccination guidelines by inducing less inflammatory reactions, being adjuvant-free and injectable under a reduced volume, thus improving the convenience of administration in recommended sites (eg, legs). CT scan proved to be a suitable non-invasive method for the experimental follow-up of injection site reactions, yielding results consistent with clinical assessment and histopathology on D7 and D21. CT scan substantiated large differences between the investigated vaccines with a more prominent inflammatory reaction after injection of an adjuvanted vaccine.

A retrospective cohort study assessing relative effectiveness of adjuvanted versus high-dose trivalent influenza vaccines among older adults in the United States during the 2018-19 influenza season

PURPOSE

To evaluate the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) against influenza-related hospitalizations/emergency room (ER) visits, influenza-related office visits, and cardio-respiratory disease (CRD)-related hospitalizations/ER visits and compare all-cause and influenza-related costs associated with two vaccines specifically indicated for older adults (≥65 years), adjuvanted (aTIV) and high-dose trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV-HD), for the 2018-19 influenza season.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of older adults was conducted using claims and hospital data in the United States. For clinical evaluations, adjusted analyses were conducted following inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to control for selection bias. Poisson regression was used to estimate the adjusted rVE against influenza-related hospitalizations/ER visits, influenza-related office visits, and any CRD-related hospitalizations/ER visits. For the economic evaluation, treatment selection bias was adjusted through 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). All-cause and influenza-related costs associated with hospitalizations/ER, physician office and pharmacy visits were adjusted using generalized estimating equation (GEE) models.

RESULTS

After IPTW and Poisson regression, aTIV (n = 561,315) was slightly more effective in reducing influenza-related office visits compared to TIV-HD (n = 1,672,779) (6.6%; 95% CI: 2.8-10.3%). aTIV was statistically comparable to TIV-HD (2.0%; 95% CI: -3.7%-7.3%) in preventing influenza-related hospitalizations/ER visits but more effective in reducing hospitalizations/ER visits for any CRD (2.6%; 95% CI: 2.0-3.2%). In the PSM-adjusted cohorts (n = 561,243 pairs), following GEE adjustments, predicted mean annualized all-cause and influenza-related total costs per patient were statistically similar between aTIV and TIV-HD (US$9676 vs. US$9625 and US$18.74 vs. US$17.28, respectively; both p > 0.05). Finally, influenza-related pharmacy costs were slightly lower for aTIV as compared to TIV-HD ($1.75 vs $1.85; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

During the 2018-19 influenza season, influenza-related hospitalization/ER visits and associated costs among people aged ≥ 65 were comparable between aTIV and TIV-HD. aTIV was slightly more effective in preventing influenza-related office visits and any CRD event as compared to TIV-HD in this population.

Comparative effectiveness of high dose versus adjuvanted influenza vaccine: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Adults 65 years and older (seniors) experience more complications following influenza infection than younger adults. We estimated the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of a trivalent high dose (HD-IIV3) versus an adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aIIV3) in seniors for respiratory-related hospitalizations.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using claims data from Optum's Clinformatics® Data Mart to compare outcome rates between seniors who received HD-IIV3 versus aIIV3 during the 2016/17 and 2017/18, predominantly A/H3N2 respiratory seasons. Rates were adjusted for demographic characteristics, comorbid conditions, previous influenza vaccination, and geography. We used the previous event rate ratio (PERR) approach to address bias by time-fixed unmeasured confounders.

RESULTS

We identified 842,282 HD-IIV3 and 34,157 aIIV3 recipients for the 2016/17 season and 1,058,638 HD-IIV3 and 189,636 aIIV3 recipients for the 2017/18 season. The pooled rVE of HD-IIV3 versus aIIV3 for respiratory-related hospitalizations over both seasons was 12% (95% confidence interval: 3.3%-20%); 13% (-6.4% to 32%) for the 2016/17 season and 12% (2.1%-21%) for the 2017/18 season.

CONCLUSIONS

Pooled over two predominantly A/H3N2 respiratory seasons, HD-IIV3 was associated with fewer respiratory hospital admissions than aIIV3 in senior members of large national managed health care company in the U.S.