Safety of live attenuated influenza vaccine in mild to moderately immunocompromised children with cancer

Evaluation of Vaccine Immunogenicity-Correlates to Real-World Protection: Influenza

Recent events highlighted that, despite decades of studying vaccine immunogenicity and efforts toward finding correlates of protection, evaluating real-world vaccine efficacy as well as establishing meaningful licensing criteria still represents a significant challenge. In this paper, we review all aspects of influenza vaccine immunogenicity, including animal and human challenge studies, humoral and cellular immunity parameters, and their potential correlation with real-life protection from disease.

Immunization of Solid Organ Transplant Candidates and Recipients: A 2022 Update

Immunizations are a relatively safe and cost-effective intervention to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with vaccine preventable infection (VPIs). As such, immunizations are a critical part of the care of pre and posttransplant patients and should be prioritized. New tools are needed to continue to disseminate and implement the most up-to-date vaccine recommendations for the SOT population. These tools will help both primary care providers and multi-disciplinary transplant team members taking care of transplant patients to stay abreast of evidence-based best practices regarding the immunization of the SOT patient.

Safety of vaccines used for routine immunization in the United States: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Understanding the safety of vaccines is critical to inform decisions about vaccination. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of the safety of vaccines recommended for children, adults, and pregnant women in the United States.

METHODS

We searched the literature in November 2020 to update a 2014 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality review by integrating newly available data. Studies of vaccines that used a comparator and reported the presence or absence of key adverse events were eligible. Adhering to Evidence-based Practice Center methodology, we assessed the strength of evidence (SoE) for all evidence statements. The systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020180089).

RESULTS

Of 56,603 reviewed citations, 338 studies reported in 518 publications met inclusion criteria. For children, SoE was high for no increased risk of autism following measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. SoE was high for increased risk of febrile seizures with MMR. There was no evidence of increased risk of  intussusception with rotavirus vaccine at the latest follow-up (moderate SoE), nor of diabetes (high SoE). There was no evidence of increased risk or insufficient evidence for key adverse events for newer vaccines such as 9-valent human papillomavirus and meningococcal B vaccines. For adults, there was no evidence of increased risk (varied SoE) or insufficient evidence for key adverse events for the new adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine and recombinant adjuvanted zoster vaccine. We found no evidence of increased risk (varied SoE) for key adverse events among pregnant women following tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccine, including stillbirth (moderate SoE).

CONCLUSIONS

Across a large body of research we found few associations of vaccines and serious key adverse events; however, rare events are challenging to study. Any adverse events should be weighed against the protective benefits that vaccines provide.

Nonthermal plasma as part of a novel strategy for vaccination

Vaccination has been one of the most effective health intervention mechanisms to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with infectious diseases. Vaccines stimulate the body's protective immune responses through controlled exposure to modified versions of pathogens that establish immunological memory. However, only a few diseases have effective vaccines. The biological effects of nonthermal plasma on cells suggest that plasma could play an important role in improving efficacy of existing vaccines and overcoming some of the limitations and challenges with current vaccination strategies. This review summarizes the opportunities for nonthermal plasma for immunization and therapeutic purposes.

Immunization of Solid Organ Transplant Candidates and Recipients: A 2018 Update

This article discusses the recommended vaccines used before and after solid organ transplant period, including data regarding vaccine safety and efficacy and travel-related vaccines. Vaccination is an important part of the preparation for solid organ transplantation, because vaccine-preventable diseases contribute to the morbidity and mortality of these patients. A pretransplantation protocol should be encouraged in every transplant center. The main goal of vaccination is to provide seroprotection before transplantation, because iatrogenically immunosuppressed patients posttransplant have a lower seroresponse to vaccines.

Evaluation of the safety of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) in children and adolescents with asthma and high-risk conditions: a population-based prospective cohort study conducted in England with the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) in children in high-risk groups.

DESIGN

Non-interventional cohort study.

SETTING

England during 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 influenza seasons.

PARTICIPANTS

LAIV recipients identified from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, aged 2-17 years, and with at least one underlying high-risk condition. LAIV recipients were matched with inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) recipients and unvaccinated controls.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary safety endpoints were any hospitalisation documented in the linked Hospital Episodes Statistics database within 42 days and up to 6 months after vaccination.

RESULTS

11 463 children and adolescents were included: 4718 received the trivalent LAIV formulation during the 2013-2014 influenza season and 6745 received the quadrivalent formulation during the 2014-2015 influenza season. The risks of hospitalisation within 42 days were 231 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 193 to 275) in season 2013-2014 and 231 (95% CI 198 to 267) in season 2014-2015. These risks were not significantly different when compared with matched unvaccinated children (relative risks (RR) 0.96 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.19) in season 2013-2014, 0.90 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.07) in season 2014-2015) and consistently lower than after IIV administration (RR 0.47 (95% CI: 0.37 to 0.59) in season 2013-2014, 0.42 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.51) in season 2014-2015). A similar pattern was observed up to 6 months postvaccination with a risk of hospitalisation after LAIV administration that did not differ from what was observed in unvaccinated controls and was lower than after IIV administration.

CONCLUSIONS

This study did not identify new safety concerns associated with the administration of LAIV in children and adolescents with high-risk conditions. However, as with any other observational study, treatment administration was not randomly assigned and our findings may be confounded by differences between the groups at baseline.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EUPAS18527.

Development of Endotoxin Tolerance Does Not Influence the Response to a Challenge with the Mucosal Live-Attenuated Influenza Vaccine in Humans In Vivo

Introduction

The effects of bacterial infections on the response to subsequent viral infections are largely unknown. This is important to elucidate to increase insight into the pathophysiology of bacterial and viral co-infections, and to assess whether bacterial infections may influence the course of viral infections.

Methods

Healthy male subjects received either bacterial endotoxin [Escherichia coli-derived lipopolysaccharide (LPS), 2 ng/kg, n = 15] or placebo (n = 15) intravenously, followed by intranasal Fluenz (live-attenuated influenza vaccine) 1 week later.

Results

LPS administration resulted in increased plasma cytokine levels and development of endotoxin tolerance in vivo and ex vivo, illustrated by attenuated cytokine production upon rechallenge with LPS. Following Fluenz administration, infectivity for the Fluenz A/B strains was similar between the LPS-Fluenz and placebo-Fluenz groups (13/15 subjects in both groups). Also, the Fluenz-induced increase in temperature and IL-6, G-CSF and IP-10 concentrations in nasal wash were similar between both groups.

Conclusion

While endotoxemia profoundly attenuates the immune response upon a second LPS challenge, it does not influence the Fluenz-induced immune response. These results suggest immune suppression after bacterial infection does not alter the response to a subsequent viral infection.

Influenza Virus Detection Following Administration of Live-Attenuated Intranasal Influenza Vaccine in Children With Cystic Fibrosis and Their Healthy Siblings

Background.  We aimed to explore the detection profile of influenza viruses following live-attenuated intranasal influenza vaccination (LAIV) in children aged 2-19 years with and without cystic fibrosis (CF). Methods.  Before the 2013-2014 influenza season, flocked nasal swabs were obtained before vaccination and 4 times in the week of follow-up from 76 participants (n_CF: 57; n_healthy: 19). Influenza was detected by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays. A Bayesian hierarchical logistic regression model was used to estimate the effect of CF status and age on influenza detection. Results.  Overall, 69% of the study cohort shed influenza RNA during follow-up. The mean duration of RT-PCR detection was 2.09 days (95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.73-2.48). The odds of influenza RNA detection on day 1 following vaccination decreased with age in years (odds ratio [OR]: 0.82 per year; 95% CrI: 0.70-0.95), and subjects with CF had higher odds of influenza RNA detection on day 1 of follow-up (OR: 5.09; 95% CrI: 1.02-29.9). Conclusion.  Despite the small sample size, our results indicate that LAIV vaccine strains are detectable during the week after LAIV, mainly in younger individuals and vaccinees with CF. It remains unclear whether recommendations for avoiding contact with severely immunocompromised patients should differ for these groups.

Immunisation of the immunocompromised child

Immunocompromised children have a higher risk of developing infections and associated higher rates of mortality and morbidity. Although this group could benefit the most from vaccine administration, specific considerations regarding immunisations are required. This review is a summary of the vaccines that are relevant to the immunocompromised host, covering both live and non-live vaccines. The burden of disease, safety, immunogenicity/effectiveness and specific recommendations for each vaccine are described as well as specific guidelines from different organisations.

Improving influenza vaccination in chronically ill children using a tertiary-care based vaccination clinic: Is there a role for the live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV)?

BACKGROUND

Children with underlying medical conditions should receive influenza vaccine (IV) yearly; yet this remains sub-optimal. We aimed to describe our experience with a tertiary-care hospital-based influenza vaccination clinic for this at-risk population.

METHODS

From October to December 2012, 2013, and 2014, we ran an influenza vaccination clinic at the Montreal Children's Hospital, where children with high-risk conditions come for their follow-up. Both injectable IV (IIV) and live-attenuated IV (LAIV) were offered free of charge to patients and their household contacts. Upon vaccination, parents were asked to fill a pre-piloted questionnaire.

RESULTS

We vaccinated a total of 2640 high-risk children and 1912 household members during the three influenza vaccination seasons. In 2012 and 2013, 631 and 630 patients with chronic illnesses were vaccinated, compared to 1379 in 2014. Caregivers preferred LAIV primarily because no needle was involved (49.0%) and because it was perceived as less painful (46.9%). LAIV was administered to 69% (2012), 55% (2013) and 47% (2014) of high-risk children. The main reason for not receiving LAIV was because it was contra-indicated. A small fraction of children previously vaccinated with LAIV who did not present any contraindication to LAIV opted for IIV: 12/101 (11.8%) in 2013 and 16/272 (5.9%) in 2014. In 2014, this was mainly due to a previous negative experience with LAIV (11/16).

CONCLUSION

Having an influenza vaccination clinic on site at a tertiary care hospital, where children come for their scheduled visits, facilitates yearly influenza vaccination in children with chronic illnesses. LAIV is preferred by caregivers and patients, when not contraindicated.

The safety of influenza vaccines in children: An Institute for Vaccine Safety white paper

Most influenza vaccines are generally safe, but influenza vaccines can cause rare serious adverse events. Some adverse events, such as fever and febrile seizures, are more common in children than adults. There can be differences in the safety of vaccines in different populations due to underlying differences in genetic predisposition to the adverse event. Live attenuated vaccines have not been studied adequately in children under 2 years of age to determine the risks of adverse events; more studies are needed to address this and several other priority safety issues with all influenza vaccines in children. All vaccines intended for use in children require safety testing in the target age group, especially in young children. Safety of one influenza vaccine in children should not be extrapolated to assumed safety of all influenza vaccines in children. The low rates of adverse events from influenza vaccines should not be a deterrent to the use of influenza vaccines because of the overwhelming evidence of the burden of disease due to influenza in children.

Safety, immunogenicity and shedding of LAIV4 in HIV-infected and uninfected children

OBJECTIVES

HIV-infected children have poor responses to inactivated influenza vaccines. Live vaccines (LAIVs) are highly efficacious in children, but they are not used in HIV-infected children du e to limited information. We investigated the safety, immunogenicity and viral shedding of LAIV4 in HIV-infected compared with uninfected children.

DESIGN

Forty-six HIV-infected and 56 uninfected children 2 to 25 years old, who had been previously vaccinated against influenza, consented to receive a single dose of LAIV4. All grade adverse events (AEs) were recorded in the first month post-vaccination and serious AEs (SAEs) throughout the influenza season. Nasopharyngeal swabs for influenza PCR and IgA ELISA and blood for hemagglutination inhibition antibody (HAI) measurements were collected at entry, 2-5, 7-10 and 21-28 days post-vaccination.

RESULTS

The HIV-infected subjects had median CD4+ cells of 649 cells/μL and plasma HIV RNA of 20 copies/mL. AEs were similar in the two groups. There were no vaccine-related SAEs. Shedding of ≥1 vaccine virus was detected in 67% HIV-infected and 50% uninfected participants (p=0.14). HAI titers did not appreciably change, but mucosal IgA antibodies significantly increased post-vaccination in both groups. High baseline HAI and IgA antibody concentrations were associated with decreased viral shedding in controls, but not in HIV-infected subjects. Similar proportions of HIV-infected vaccinees and controls reported influenza-like illnesses (12% and 6%) throughout the season.

CONCLUSIONS

LAIV4 was equally safe and immunogenic and caused similar viral shedding in HIV-infected and uninfected children. A correlate of protection against vaccine viral shedding was not identified in HIV-infected participants, although both circulating and mucosal antibodies correlated with protection in controls.

Live attenuated influenza vaccine tetravalent: a clinical review

Live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) has been available as a trivalent formulation in the EU since 2012. Influenza B strains from two lineages have co-circulated outside Asia in Europe, Israel and North America since the early 2000s. The trivalent vaccine contained a single influenza B lineage virus chosen primarily on the basis of the previous year's circulating lineage. Failure to align the vaccine virus with the circulating virus leaves even vaccinated patients, particularly children, at risk for infection with B viruses from the other lineage. Recently, a tetravalent formulation was approved and use will begin during the 2014-2015 influenza season. Approval of LAIV Tetra was based on the established efficacy and safety of trivalent LAIV and studies demonstrating similar immunogenicity between the trivalent and tetravalent vaccines. Addition of a fourth strain to the vaccine will address the issue of co-circulation of influenza B viruses and provide a broader range of protection.

Vaccination of children with a live-attenuated, intranasal influenza vaccine - analysis and evaluation through a Health Technology Assessment

BACKGROUND

Influenza is a worldwide prevalent infectious disease of the respiratory tract annually causing high morbidity and mortality in Germany. Influenza is preventable by vaccination and this vaccination is so far recommended by the The German Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO) as a standard vaccination for people from the age of 60 onwards. Up to date a parenterally administered trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV) has been in use almost exclusively. Since 2011 however a live-attenuated vaccine (LAIV) has been approved additionally. Consecutively, since 2013 the STIKO recommends LAIV (besides TIV) for children from 2 to 17 years of age, within the scope of vaccination by specified indications. LAIV should be preferred administered in children from 2 to 6 of age. The objective of this Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is to address various research issues regarding the vaccination of children with LAIV. The analysis was performed from a medical, epidemiological and health economic perspective, as well as from an ethical, social and legal point of view.

METHOD

An extensive systematic database research was performed to obtain relevant information. In addition a supplementary research by hand was done. Identified literature was screened in two passes by two independent reviewers using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included literature was evaluated in full-text using acknowledged standards. Studies were graded with the highest level of evidence (1++), if they met the criteria of European Medicines Agency (EMA)-Guidance: Points to consider on applications with 1. meta-analyses; 2. one pivotal study.

RESULTS

For the medical section, the age of the study participants ranges from 6 months to 17 years. Regarding study efficacy, in children aged 6 months to ≤7 years, LAIV is superior to placebo as well as to a vac-cination with TIV (Relative Risk Reduction - RRR - of laboratory confirmed influenza infection approx. 80% and 50%, respectively). In children aged >7 to 17 years (= 18th year of their lives), LAIV is superior to a vaccination with TIV (RRR 32%). For this age group, no studies that compared LAIV with placebo were identified. It can be concluded that there is high evidence for superior efficacy of LAIV (compared to placebo or TIV) among children aged 6 months to ≤7 years. For children from >7 to 17 years, there is moderate evidence for superiority of LAIV for children with asthma, while direct evidence for children from the general population is lacking for this age group. Due to the efficacy of LAIV in children aged 6 months to ≤7 years (high evidence) and the efficacy of LAIV in children with asthma aged >7 to 17 years (moderate evidence), LAIV is also very likely to be efficacious among children in the general population aged >7 to 17 years (indirect evidence). In the included studies with children aged 2 to 17 years, LAIV was safe and well-tolerated; while in younger children LAIV may increase the risk of obstruction of the airways (e.g. wheezing). In the majority of the evaluated epidemiological studies, LAIV proved to be effective in the prevention of influenza among children aged 2-17 years under everyday conditions (effectiveness). The trend appears to indicate that LAIV is more effective than TIV, although this can only be based on limited evidence for methodological reasons (observational studies). In addition to a direct protective effect for vaccinated children themselves, indirect protective ("herd protection") effects were reported among non-vaccinated elderly population groups, even at relatively low vaccination coverage of children. With regard to safety, LAIV generally can be considered equivalent to TIV. This also applies to the use among children with mild chronically obstructive conditions, from whom LAIV therefore does not have to be withheld. In all included epidemiological studies, there was some risk of bias identified, e.g. due to residual confounding or other methodology-related sources of error. In the evaluated studies, both the vaccination of children with previous illnesses and the routine vaccination of (healthy) children frequently involve cost savings. This is especially the case if one includes indirect costs from a societal perspective. From a payer perspective, a routine vaccination of children is often regarded as a highly cost-effective intervention. However, not all of the studies arrive at consistent results. In isolated cases, relatively high levels of cost-effectiveness are reported that make it difficult to perform a conclusive assessment from an economic perspective. Based on the included studies, it is not possible to make a clear statement about the budget impact of using LAIV. None of the evaluated studies provides results for the context of the German healthcare setting. The efficacy of the vaccine, physicians' recommendations, and a potential reduction in influenza symptoms appear to play a role in the vaccination decision taken by parents/custodians on behalf of their children. Major barriers to the utilization of influenza vaccination services are a low level of perception and an underestimation of the disease risk, reservations concerning the safety and efficacy of the vaccine, and potential side effects of the vaccine. For some of the parents surveyed, the question as to whether the vaccine is administered as an injection or nasal spray might also be important.

CONCLUSION

In children aged 2 to 17 years, the use of LAIV can lead to a reduction of the number of influenza cases and the associated burden of disease. In addition, indirect preventive effects may be expected, especially among elderly age groups. Currently there are no data available for the German healthcare setting. Long-term direct and indirect effectiveness and safety should be supported by surveillance programs with a broader use of LAIV. Since there is no general model available for the German healthcare setting, statements concerning the cost-effectiveness can be made only with precaution. Beside this there is a need to conduct health eco-nomic studies to show the impact of influenza vaccination for children in Germany. Such studies should be based on a dynamic transmission model. Only these models are able to include the indirect protective effects of vaccination correctly. With regard to ethical, social and legal aspects, physicians should discuss with parents the motivations for vaccinating their children and upcoming barriers in order to achieve broader vaccination coverage. The present HTA provides an extensive basis for further scientific approaches and pending decisions relating to health policy.

Overview of Influenza Vaccines in Children

Prevention of influenza infection through vaccination is the best strategy to reduce its disease burden; however, annual revaccination is required to provide protection from circulating virus strains. Currently available influenza vaccines are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV) or live-attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIV); however, quadrivalent formulations of IIV and LAIV are expected to be available for the 2013-2014 influenza season. Among children 6 months through 8 years of age receiving their first influenza vaccination, 2 doses of vaccines are required to provide adequate protection. Because of the wide range of circulating influenza viruses and host immune responses, estimates of vaccine effectiveness vary widely by year, age group, and vaccine studied. We summarize the evidence base for pediatric influenza vaccination, and we describe the challenges and limitations of protecting this population with currently available vaccines.

Vaccinations for healthcare personnel: update on influenza, hepatitis B, and pertussis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Healthcare personnel (HCP) are at risk for exposure to and transmission of potentially life-threatening vaccine preventable diseases to patients and colleagues. The Centers for Disease Control and Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommend routine influenza immunization and maintenance of immunity to hepatitis B and pertussis, among others. In this article, we aim to review recently approved influenza vaccines, as well as address some of the issues regarding hepatitis B and pertussis vaccinations in HCP.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several new formulations of influenza vaccines are now available, including quadrivalent vaccines and non-egg-based vaccines; their use in HCP requires further study. An alarming rise in pertussis rates has led to a revision of ACIP guidelines recommending vaccination for women during each pregnancy. Persistent lack of immunity to hepatitis B after vaccine series remains a problem for many HCP.

SUMMARY

Inactivated trivalent influenza vaccines remain the safest and most widely studied influenza vaccinations for healthcare workers. A pertussis booster in the form of Tdap is now recommended for most HCP. More studies are needed regarding the issue of nonresponders in HCP who receive the three-dose hepatitis B vaccine series, as there are some promising strategies available that may boost immune responses.

Correlates of vaccine protection from influenza and its complications

Despite use of influenza vaccines for more than 65 y, influenza and its complications are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Most deaths during influenza virus infections are due to underlying co-morbidities or secondary bacterial pneumonia. The measures of immune response currently used for licensure of influenza vaccines are relevant mainly for protection from viral infection in healthy adults. Development of new or improved influenza vaccines will require a definition of novel, and specific correlates of protection. These correlates should associate immune responses with outcomes that are relevant to specific risk groups, such as asthma exacerbation, hospitalization or disruptions to care or daily activities. Assessment of vaccine effectiveness for both viral and bacterial vaccines should include measures of impact on secondary bacterial pneumonia.

Immunization in special populations

In summary, immunizations in special populations require understanding the underlying disease and how it might affect the immune system's ability to mount an antibody response to vaccines or predispose certain patient populations to developing certain serious infections. There is still a great need for research on the optimal timing of vaccines after transplants, how to assess protection and development of a protective antibody response after immunization, and whether certain groups (eg, HIV) need to be revaccinated after a certain amount of time if their antibody levels decline. In addition, there are limited data on efficacy of the newer vaccines in these special patient populations, which also requires further investigation.

Influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients: systematic review and meta-analysis from a public health policy perspective

BACKGROUND

Immunocompromised patients are vulnerable to severe or complicated influenza infection. Vaccination is widely recommended for this group. This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients in terms of preventing influenza-like illness and laboratory confirmed influenza, serological response and adverse events.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Electronic databases and grey literature were searched and records were screened against eligibility criteria. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed in duplicate. Results were synthesised narratively and meta-analyses were conducted where feasible. Heterogeneity was assessed using I(2) and publication bias was assessed using Begg's funnel plot and Egger's regression test. Many of the 209 eligible studies included an unclear or high risk of bias. Meta-analyses showed a significant effect of preventing influenza-like illness (odds ratio [OR]=0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.16-0.34; p<0.001) and laboratory confirmed influenza infection (OR=0.15; 95% CI=0.03-0.63; p=0.01) through vaccinating immunocompromised patie nts compared to placebo or unvaccinated controls. We found no difference in the odds of influenza-like illness compared to vaccinated immunocompetent controls. The pooled odds of seroconversion were lower in vaccinated patients compared to immunocompetent controls for seasonal influenza A(H1N1), A(H3N2) and B. A similar trend was identified for seroprotection. Meta-analyses of seroconversion showed higher odds in vaccinated patients compared to placebo or unvaccinated controls, although this reached significance for influenza B only. Publication bias was not detected and narrative synthesis supported our findings. No consistent evidence of safety concerns was identified.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Infection prevention and control strategies should recommend vaccinating immunocompromised patients. Potential for bias and confounding and the presence of heterogeneity mean the evidence reviewed is generally weak, although the directions of effects are consistent. Areas for further research are identified.

Contribution of murine innate serum inhibitors toward interference within influenza virus immune assays

Please cite this paper as: Cwach et al. (2011) Contribution of murine innate serum inhibitors toward interference within influenza virus immune assays. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses DOI: 10.1111/j.1750‐2659.2011.00283.x.

Background  Prior to detection of an antibody response toward influenza viruses using the hemagglutination inhibition assay (HAI), sera are routinely treated to inactivate innate inhibitors using both heat inactivation (56°C) and recombinant neuraminidase [receptor‐destroying enzyme (RDE)].

Objectives  We revisited the contributions of innate serum inhibitors toward interference with influenza viruses in immune assays, using murine sera, with emphasis on the interactions with influenza A viruses of the H3N2 subtype.

Methods  We used individual serum treatments: 56°C alone, RDE alone, or RDE + 56°C, to treat sera prior to evaluation within HAI, microneutralization, and macrophage uptake assays.

Results  Our data demonstrate that inhibitors present within untreated murine sera interfere with the HAI assay in a manner that is different from that seen for the microneutralization assay. Specifically, the γ class inhibitor α₂‐Macroglobulin (A2‐M) can inhibit H3N2 viruses within the HAI assay, but not in the microneutralization assay. Based on these findings, we used a macrophage uptake assay to demonstrate that these inhibitors can increase uptake by macrophages when the influenza viruses express an HA from a 1968 H3N2 virus isolate, but not a 1997 H3N2 isolate.

Conclusions  The practice of treating sera to inactivate innate inhibitors of influenza viruses prior to evaluation within immune assays has allowed us to effectively detect influenza virus‐specific antibodies for decades. However, this practice has yielded an under‐appreciation for the contribution of innate serum inhibitors toward host immune responses against these viruses, including contributions toward neutralization and macrophage uptake.

Effectiveness and safety of influenza vaccination in children: European perspective

Accumulating evidence for the substantial burden of influenza in children has increased interest in the vaccination of young children against influenza. So far, however, few European countries have issued official recommendations to vaccinate healthy children, which is largely due to the popular belief that inactivated influenza vaccines are ineffective in young children. Virologically confirmed studies performed during different seasons have yielded widely varying estimates for vaccine effectiveness and suggested that the match between the vaccine and the circulating strains of influenza viruses is one of the key drivers of the effectiveness of the vaccine. In seasons with good antigenic match, inactivated influenza vaccines are clearly effective also in children younger than 2 years of age. The live attenuated influenza vaccine provides even greater effectiveness in children, but the overall potential of this vaccine is limited by its licensure for only children older than 2 years of age. The safety record of seasonal inactivated influenza vaccines is excellent even in the youngest children.