Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of cell-based seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age

Recent advances in the influenza virus vaccine landscape: a comprehensive overview of technologies and trials

SUMMARYIn the United Kingdom (UK) in 2022/23, influenza virus infections returned to the levels recorded before the COVID-19 pandemic, exerting a substantial burden on an already stretched National Health Service (NHS) through increased primary and emergency care visits and subsequent hospitalizations. Population groups ≤4 years and ≥65 years of age, and those with underlying health conditions, are at the greatest risk of influenza-related hospitalization. Recent advances in influenza virus vaccine technologies may help to mitigate this burden. This review aims to summarize advances in the influenza virus vaccine landscape by describing the different technologies that are currently in use in the UK and more widely. The review also describes vaccine technologies that are under development, including mRNA, and universal influenza virus vaccines which aim to provide broader or increased protection. This is an exciting and important era for influenza virus vaccinations, and advances are critical to protect against a disease that still exerts a substantial burden across all populations and disproportionately impacts the most vulnerable, despite it being over 80 years since the first influenza virus vaccines were deployed.

Pharmacovigilance in Vaccines: Importance, Main Aspects, Perspectives, and Challenges-A Narrative Review

Pharmacovigilance plays a central role in safeguarding public health by continuously monitoring the safety of vaccines, being critical in a climate of vaccine hesitancy, where public trust is paramount. Pharmacovigilance strategies employed to gather information on adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) include pre-registration data, media reports, clinical trials, and societal reporting. Early detection of AEFIs during clinical trials is crucial for thorough safety analysis and preventing serious reactions once vaccines are deployed. This review highlights the importance of societal reporting, encompassing contributions from community members, healthcare workers, and pharmaceutical companies. Technological advancements such as quick response (QR) codes can facilitate prompt AEFI reporting. While vaccines are demonstrably safe, the possibility of adverse events necessitates continuous post-marketing surveillance. However, underreporting remains a challenge, underscoring the critical role of public engagement in pharmacovigilance. This narrative review comprehensively examines and synthesizes key aspects of virus vaccine pharmacovigilance, with special considerations for specific population groups. We explore applicable legislation, the spectrum of AEFIs associated with major vaccines, and the unique challenges and perspectives surrounding pharmacovigilance in this domain.

Immunogenicity and safety of a quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine manufactured in Iran (FluGuard) in volunteers aged 18-60 years: A double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the non-inferiority of the FluGuard (a quadrivalent recombinant vaccine manufactured by Nivad Pharmed Salamat Company in Iran) by comparing its immunogenicity and safety with Vaxigrip Tetra (a quadrivalent inactivated vaccine manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur in France).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this double-blind, randomized controlled trial, eligible volunteers aged 18-60 were randomized to receive either FluGuard or Vaxigrip Tetra vaccines. Immunogenicity was evaluated using the Hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) assay and reported with the geometric mean titer (GMT), seroprotection, and seroconversion. In addition, vaccine safety was assessed by interviewing participants through phone calls.

RESULTS

Out of 110 randomized volunteers, 51 and 53 were entered into the final analysis in the Vaxigrip and FluGuard groups, respectively. Vaxigrip had a higher seroprotection rate for the H1N1 strain compared with FluGuard (98 % vs. 91 %). Besides, FluGuard had higher seroprotection rates for H3N2 (74 % vs. 69 %), B-Yamagata (87 % vs. 84 %), and B-Victoria (66 % vs. 41 %) strains compared with Vaxigrip. In all four strains, FluGuard was non-inferior to Vaxigrip with the upper bounds of the 95 % CI on the ratio of the GMTs < 1.5: H1N1 (1.25), H3N2 (0.94), B-Yamagata (0.62), and B-Victoria (0.59). Furthermore, FluGuard was non-inferior to Vaxigrip with the upper bounds of the 95 % CI on the difference between the seroconversion rates < 10 %: H1N1 (2 %), H3N2 (10 %), B-Yamagata (-10 %), and B-Victoria (-29 %). The prevalence of solicited adverse drug reactions did not differ between groups. Furthermore, participants did not experience serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the non-inferiority of the FluGuard vaccine to the Vaxigrip vaccine regarding immunogenicity and safety.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY

The study protocol was approved by the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT20210901052358N5).

Estimates of Seasonal Influenza Burden That Could Be Averted by Improved Influenza Vaccines in the Australian Population Aged Under 65 Years, 2015-2019

BACKGROUND

The interpretation of relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of improved influenza vaccines is complex. Estimation of burden averted is useful to contextualise their potential impact across different seasons. For the population aged under 65 years in Australia, this study estimated the additional morbidity and mortality that could be averted using improved influenza vaccines.

METHODS

We used observed, season-specific (2015-2019) influenza notification and influenza-coded hospitalisation frequencies and published modelled estimates of influenza-associated hospitalisations and deaths that occurred under the prevailing influenza vaccination coverage scenario. After back-calculating to the estimated burden in the population without vaccination, we applied published standard influenza vaccine effectiveness and coverage estimates to calculate the burden potentially averted by standard and improved influenza vaccines. A plausible range of rVE values were used, assuming 50% coverage.

RESULTS

The percentage point difference in absolute vaccine effectiveness (VE) of an improved vaccine compared to a standard vaccine is directly proportional to its rVE and inversely proportional to the effectiveness of the standard vaccine. The incremental burden averted by an improved vaccine is a function of both its difference in absolute VE and the severity of the influenza season. Assuming an rVE of 15% with 50% coverage, the improved vaccine was estimated to additionally avert 1517 to 12,641 influenza notifications, 287 to 1311 influenza-coded hospitalisations and 9 to 33 modelled all-cause influenza deaths per year compared to the standard vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Improved vaccines can have substantial clinical and population impact, particularly when the effectiveness of standard vaccines is low, and burden is high.

Repeated vaccination with homologous influenza hemagglutinin broadens human antibody responses to unmatched flu viruses

The on-going diversification of influenza virus necessicates annual vaccine updating. The vaccine antigen, the viral spike protein hemagglutinin (HA), tends to elicit strain-specific neutralizing activity, predicting that sequential immunization with the same HA strain will boost antibodies with narrow coverage. However, repeated vaccination with homologous SARS-CoV-2 vaccine eventually elicits neutralizing activity against highly unmatched variants, questioning this immunological premise. We evaluated a longitudinal influenza vaccine cohort, where each year the subjects received the same, novel H1N1 2009 pandemic vaccine strain. Repeated vaccination gradually enhanced receptor-blocking antibodies (HAI) to highly unmatched H1N1 strains within individuals with no initial memory recall against these historical viruses. An in silico model of affinity maturation in germinal centers integrated with a model of differentiation and expansion of memory cells provides insight into the mechanisms underlying these results and shows how repeated exposure to the same immunogen can broaden the antibody response against diversified targets.

Effectiveness of Cell-Based Quadrivalent Seasonal Influenza Vaccine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cell-based seasonal influenza vaccine viruses may more closely match recommended vaccine strains than egg-based options. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of seasonal cell-based quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIVc), as reported in the published literature. A systematic literature review was conducted (PROSPERO CRD42020160851) to identify publications reporting on the effectiveness of QIVc in persons aged ≥6 months relative to no vaccination or to standard-dose, egg-based quadrivalent or trivalent influenza vaccines (QIVe/TIVe). Publications from between 1 January 2016 and 25 February 2022 were considered. The review identified 18 relevant publications spanning three influenza seasons from the 2017-2020 period, with an overall pooled relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of 8.4% (95% CI, 6.5-10.2%) for QIVc vs. QIVe/TIVe. Among persons aged 4-64 years, the pooled rVE was 16.2% (95% CI, 7.6-24.8%) for 2017-2018, 6.1% (4.9-7.3%) for 2018-2019, and 10.1% (6.3-14.0%) for 2019-2020. For adults aged ≥65 years, the pooled rVE was 9.9% (95% CI, 6.9-12.9%) in the egg-adapted 2017-2018 season, whereas there was no significant difference in 2018-2019. For persons aged 4-64 years, QIVc was consistently more effective than QIVe/TIVe over the three influenza seasons. For persons aged ≥65 years, protection with QIVc was greater than QIVe or TIVe during the 2017-2018 season and comparable in 2018-2019.

Three seasons of enhanced safety surveillance of a cell culture-based quadrivalent influenza vaccine

The objective of this paper is to summarize annual enhanced safety surveillance activity across three seasons (2019/20-2021/22) for cell culture-based quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIVc; Flucelvax® Tetra) in all age groups. This activity was conducted in primary care setting in Genoa (Italy) during the seasons 2019/20, 2020/21 and 2021/22. All adverse events registered within the first seven days following immunization were analyzed by season, type, age group and seriousness. Over three seasons, 3,603 QIVc exposures were recorded within the enhanced passive safety surveillance activity. No safety signals were identified. The overall reporting rates of individual case safety reports for the seasons 2019/20, 2020/21 and 2021/22 were 1.75%, 0.48% and 0.40%, respectively. The average number of adverse events per individual case safety report was similar (range 3.3-3.8 adverse events per case report) across the three seasons. Most adverse events were reactogenic in nature. The rate of adverse events was similarly low in all age groups. Enhanced passive safety surveillance activity is a feasible approach for the post-marketing monitoring of seasonal influenza vaccines. Within its limitations, results of this study support the favorable safety profile of QIVc. These safety data could further bolster public trust in influenza vaccines with the goal to increase vaccination uptake in all target groups.

Challenges encountered during the systematic review of newer and enhanced influenza vaccines and recommendations for the future

There are a variety of challenges in the conduct of systematic reviews of influenza vaccines. We describe our experience of completing four systematic reviews of newer and enhanced inactivated seasonal influenza vaccines. The reporting of the included studies created significant challenges for study identification, data extraction and analysis. Those challenges have implications for the resources required to conduct reviews and, more significantly, for the accuracy of the estimated treatment effect. There is a substantial burden of morbidity and mortality associated with seasonal influenza, and the evidence used to support vaccination strategies requires regular review. An improved review process will facilitate robust decision-making both nationally and internationally. We recommend the development of reporting guidelines, increased engagement between researchers and decision makers, a database of identified trials, and research into search optimisation.

Characteristics and methodological standards across systematic reviews with Meta-analysis of efficacy and/or effectiveness of influenza vaccines: an overview of reviews

BACKGROUND

While systematic reviews (SR) generally suggest that vaccination is an effective way to prevent influenza infection, it is not clear if these conclusions are based on high quality SR methods. As such, we systematically identified, critically appraised, and summarised the characteristics and adherence to methodological standards in SRs with meta-analysis of efficacy/effectiveness of influenza vaccines.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Global Health, and CDSR for English-language SR publications up to July 11, 2022. We summarised the characteristics, adherence to methodological standards and SR quality (AMSTAR 2).

RESULTS

From 11,193 retrieved citations, we included 48 publications (47 SRs). Seventy-five percent were of a critically low quality, 19% of a low quality, 2% of a moderate quality, and 4% of a high quality. Thirteen percent were industry-funded, about 13% co-authored by industry employee(s), and 4% commissioned by an organisation or authority. Only 45% percent reported protocol registration, 6% reported collaboration with a knowledge synthesis librarian/information specialist, and 60% utilised a reporting checklist (e.g. PRISMA).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

SRs with meta-analysis of efficacy/effectiveness of influenza vaccines are mostly of critically low quality and even the more recent reviews did not follow current best SR practices. These findings are significant in view of the controversies that surround influenza vaccines, and the use of SRs in informed decision-making. However, the findings do not justify curtailment or cessation of influenza vaccine use as vaccines continue to offer substantial net public health benefit.HighlightsWe systematically identified, critically appraised, and summarised the characteristics and adherence to methodological standards in 47 systematic reviews with meta-analysis of efficacy/effectiveness of influenza vaccines.13% of the reviews were industry-funded.About 13% of the reviews were co-authored by industry employee(s).4% of the reviews were commissioned by an organisation/authority.45% of the reviews reported protocol registration.6% of the reviews reported collaborating with a knowledge synthesis librarian/information specialist to prepare the search strategy.60% of the reviews reported using the PRISMA (or similar) checklist.75% of the reviews were judged to be of critically low quality; 19% of low quality; 2% of moderate quality; 4% of high quality.