Efficacy of Recombinant Influenza Vaccine in Adults 50 Years of Age or Older

Seasonal influenza vaccine performance and the potential benefits of mRNA vaccines

Influenza remains a public health threat, partly due to suboptimal effectiveness of vaccines. One factor impacting vaccine effectiveness is strain mismatch, occurring when vaccines no longer match circulating strains due to antigenic drift or the incorporation of inadvertent (eg, egg-adaptive) mutations during vaccine manufacturing. In this review, we summarize the evidence for antigenic drift of circulating viruses and/or egg-adaptive mutations occurring in vaccine strains during the 2011-2020 influenza seasons. Evidence suggests that antigenic drift led to vaccine mismatch during four seasons and that egg-adaptive mutations caused vaccine mismatch during six seasons. These findings highlight the need for alternative vaccine development platforms. Recently, vaccines based on mRNA technology have demonstrated efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 and respiratory syncytial virus and are under clinical evaluation for seasonal influenza. We discuss the potential for mRNA vaccines to address strain mismatch, as well as new multi-component strategies using the mRNA platform to improve vaccine effectiveness.

Antibody response to sequential vaccination with cell culture, recombinant, or egg-based influenza vaccines among U.S. adults

The immune response to inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV) is influenced by multiple factors, including hemagglutinin content and egg-based manufacturing. Only two US-licensed vaccines are manufactured without egg passage: cell culture-based inactivated vaccine (ccIIV) and recombinant vaccine (RIV). We conducted a randomized open-label trial in central Wisconsin during the 2018-19 and 2019-20 seasons to compare immunogenicity of sequential vaccination. Participants 18-64 years old were randomized 1:1:1 to receive RIV, ccIIV or IIV in strata defined by number of influenza vaccine doses in the prior 3 years. They were revaccinated with the same product in year two. Paired serum samples were tested by hemagglutination inhibition against egg-adapted and cell-grown vaccine viruses. Serologic endpoints included geometric mean titer (GMT), mean fold rise, and percent seroconversion. There were 373 participants randomized and vaccinated in 2018-19; 332 were revaccinated in 2019-20. In 2018-19, RIV and ccIIV were not more immunogenic than IIV against A/H1N1. The post-vaccination GMT against the cell-grown 3C.2a A/H3N2 vaccine virus was higher for RIV vs IIV (p = .001) and RIV vs ccIIV (p = .001). The antibody response to influenza B viruses was similar across study arms. In 2019-20, GMT against the cell-grown 3C.3a A/H3N2 vaccine virus was higher for RIV vs IIV (p = .03) and for RIV vs ccIIV (p = .001). RIV revaccination generated significantly greater backboosting to the antigenically distinct 3C.2a A/H3N2 virus (2018-19 vaccine strain) compared to ccIIV or IIV. This study adds to the evidence that RIV elicits a superior immunologic response against A/H3N2 viruses compared to other licensed influenza vaccine products.

Cost-effectiveness of recombinant influenza vaccine compared with standard dose influenza vaccine in adults 18-64 years of age

BACKGROUND

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) uses the Evidence to Recommendations Framework that includes cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) for determining vaccine recommendations. ACIP's preference for protecting adults ≥ 65 years is enhanced vaccines, including recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), adjuvanted or high dose influenza vaccine. Less is known about the CEA of enhanced vaccines for younger adults.

METHODS

We used decision analysis modeling from a societal perspective to determine the cost-effectiveness, measured in quality adjusted life years (QALYs), of RIV4 compared with standard dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine (SD-IIV4) in adults 18-64 years old. Model inputs included 2018-2020 vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates based on medical record data from a large local health system, 2019-2020 national vaccination and influenza epidemic parameters, with costs and population distributions fitted to the season.

RESULTS

Among adults ages 18-64 years, RIV4 cost $94,186/QALY gained, compared to SD-IIV4. Among those 50-64 years old, RIV4 was relatively more cost-effective ($61,329/QALY gained). Cost-effectiveness estimates for 18-64-year-olds were sensitive to the absolute difference in VE between SD-IIV4 and RIV4, among other parameters. Use of RIV4 in 18-64-year-olds would result in fewer cases (669,984), outpatient visits (261,293), hospitalizations (20,046) and deaths (1,018) annually. The majority (59 %; 597 of 1018) of the decreases in deaths occurred in the 50-64-year-olds.

CONCLUSIONS

While RIV4 was effective and cost-effective relative to SD-IIV4 for both 50-64-year-old and 18-64-year-old adults, cost-effectiveness was sensitive to small changes in parameters among 18-64-year-olds. Because substantial public health benefits occur with enhanced vaccines, health systems and policy makers may opt for preferential product use in select age/risk groups (e.g., 50-64 year olds) to maximize their cost-benefit ratios.

Randomized Immunogenicity Trial Comparing 2019-2020 Recombinant and Egg-Based Influenza Vaccines among Frequently Vaccinated Healthcare Personnel in Israel

BACKGROUND

Trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine effectiveness was low in a prospective cohort of healthcare personnel (HCP) in Israel from 2016-2019. We conducted a randomized immunogenicity trial of quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4) and standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV4) among frequently and infrequently vaccinated previous cohort participants.

METHODS

From October 2019 to January 2020, we enrolled and randomly allocated HCP from two Israeli hospitals to receive IIV4 or RIV4. Hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) antibody titers against 2019-2020 vaccine reference influenza viruses were compared between vaccine groups using geometric mean titer (GMT) ratios from sera collected one-month post-vaccination and by frequency of vaccination in the past 5 years (>2 versus ≤2).

RESULTS

Among 415 HCP, the GMT ratio comparing RIV4 to IIV4 was 2.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7-2.7) for A(H1N1)pdm09, 1.6 (95% CI: 1.3-1.9) for A(H3N2), 1.8 (95% CI: 1.4-2.2) for B(Yamagata), and 1.1 (95% CI: 0.9-1.4) for B(Victoria). Similarly, RIV4 elicited higher HAI titers than IIV4 against all 2019-2020 vaccine reference viruses except B(Victoria) among infrequently and frequently vaccinated HCP (lower bound of GMT ratio 95% CIs ≥1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

RIV4 had improved immunogenicity for influenza vaccine strains among both infrequent and frequent vaccinees compared to standard-dose IIV4.

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.

Optimising vaccine immunogenicity in ageing populations: key strategies

Vaccination has been shown to be the most effective means of preventing infectious diseases, although older people commonly have a suboptimal immune response to vaccines and thus impaired protection against subsequent adverse outcomes. This Review provides an overview of the existing mechanistic insights into compromised vaccine response for respiratory infectious diseases in older people, defined as aged 65 years and older, including immunosenescence, epigenetic regulation, trained immunity, and gut microbiota. We further summarise the latest proven or potential strategies to strengthen weakened immunogenicity. Insights from these analyses will be conducive to the development of the next generation of vaccines.

Protection against influenza hospitalizations from enhanced influenza vaccines among older adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccines are available to help protect persons aged ≥65 years, who experience thousands of influenza hospitalizations annually. Because some influenza vaccines may work better than others, we sought to assess benefit of high-dose (HD), adjuvanted (ADJ), and recombinant (RIV) influenza vaccines ("enhanced influenza vaccines") compared with standard-dose unadjuvanted influenza vaccines (SD) and with one another for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalizations among persons aged ≥65 years.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane Library to identify randomized or observational studies published between January 1990 and October 2023 and reporting relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of HD, ADJ, or RIV for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalizations among adults aged ≥65 years. We extracted study data, assessed risk of bias, and conducted random-effects network meta-analysis and meta-regression.

RESULTS

We identified 32 studies with 90 rVE estimates from five randomized and 27 observational studies (71,459,918 vaccinated participants). rVE estimates varied across studies and influenza seasons. Pooled rVE from randomized studies was 20% (95% CI -54 to 59) and 25% (95% CI -19 to 53) for ADJ and HD compared with SD, respectively; rVE was 6% (95% CI -109 to 58) for HD compared with ADJ; these differences were not statistically significant. In observational studies, ADJ, HD, and RIV conferred modestly increased protection compared with SD (rVE ranging from 10% to 19%), with no significant differences between HD, ADJ, and RIV. With enhanced vaccines combined, rVE versus SD was 18% (95% CI 3 to 32) from randomized and 11% (95% CI 8 to 14) from observational evidence. Meta-regression of observational studies suggested that those requiring laboratory confirmation of influenza reported greater benefit of enhanced vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

HD, ADJ, and RIV provided stronger protection than SD against influenza hospitalizations among older adults. No differences in benefit were observed in comparisons of enhanced influenza vaccines with one another.

Infectious Disease Updates for Primary Care

This article summarizes the situation with public health threats for primary care patients as of early 2024 and provides updates on strategies for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of common infections where new treatments and vaccines are available. For flu and COVID, an update on treatment is also provided-along with pearls useful for the busy primary care provider. The authors also discuss a new treatment option for drug-resistant vulvovaginal candidiasis and provide a balanced view of the increasingly popular technique of preventing bacterial sexually transmitted infections using doxycycline after condomless sex among men who have sex with men.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness and Progress Towards a Universal Influenza Vaccine

At various times in recent decades, surges have occurred in optimism about the potential for universal influenza vaccines that provide strong, broad, and long-lasting protection and could substantially reduce the disease burden associated with seasonal influenza epidemics as well as the threat posed by pandemic influenza. Each year more than 500 million doses of seasonal influenza vaccine are administered around the world, with most doses being egg-grown inactivated subunit or split-virion vaccines. These vaccines tend to have moderate effectiveness against medically attended influenza for influenza A(H1N1) and influenza B, and somewhat lower for influenza A(H3N2) where differences between vaccine strains and circulating strains can occur more frequently due to antigenic drift and egg adaptations in the vaccine strains. Several enhanced influenza vaccine platforms have been developed including cell-grown antigen, the inclusion of adjuvants, or higher antigen doses, to improve immunogenicity and protection. During the COVID-19 pandemic there was unprecedented speed in development and roll-out of relatively new vaccine platforms, including mRNA vaccines and viral vector vaccines. These new platforms present opportunities to improve protection for influenza beyond existing products. Other approaches continue to be explored. Incremental improvements in influenza vaccine performance should be achievable in the short to medium term.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2024-25 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2023-24 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) concerning the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2022;72[No. RR-2]:1-24). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. Trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV3s), trivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV3), and trivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV3) are expected to be available. All persons should receive an age-appropriate influenza vaccine (i.e., one approved for their age), with the exception that solid organ transplant recipients aged 18 through 64 years who are receiving immunosuppressive medication regimens may receive either high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3) or adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3) as acceptable options (without a preference over other age-appropriate IIV3s or RIV3). Except for vaccination for adults aged ≥65 years, ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed and recommended vaccine is available. ACIP recommends that adults aged ≥65 years preferentially receive any one of the following higher dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccines: trivalent high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3), trivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV3), or trivalent adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3). If none of these three vaccines is available at an opportunity for vaccine administration, then any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine should be used.Primary updates to this report include the following two topics: the composition of 2024-25 U.S. seasonal influenza vaccines and updated recommendations for vaccination of adult solid organ transplant recipients. First, following a period of no confirmed detections of wild-type influenza B/Yamagata lineage viruses in global surveillance since March 2020, 2024-25 U.S. influenza vaccines will not include an influenza B/Yamagata component. All influenza vaccines available in the United States during the 2024-25 season will be trivalent vaccines containing hemagglutinin derived from 1) an influenza A/Victoria/4897/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/67/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); 2) an influenza A/Thailand/8/2022 (H3N2)-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Massachusetts/18/2022 (H3N2)-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); and 3) an influenza B/Austria/1359417/2021 (Victoria lineage)-like virus. Second, recommendations for vaccination of adult solid organ transplant recipients have been updated to include HD-IIV3 and aIIV3 as acceptable options for solid organ transplant recipients aged 18 through 64 years who are receiving immunosuppressive medication regimens (without a preference over other age-appropriate IIV3s or RIV3).This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2024-25 influenza season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at https://www.cdc.gov/acip-recs/hcp/vaccine-specific/flu.html?CDC_AAref_Val=https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines. Updates and other information are available from CDC's influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

Immunogenicity and safety evaluation of a newly manufactured recombinant Baculovirus-Expressed quadrivalent influenza vaccine in adults 18 years old and Above: An Open-Label, phase III extension study

In the face of global health threats, there is a growing demand for vaccines that can be manufactured on a large scale within compressed timeline. This study responds to this imperative by delving into the evaluation of FluGuard, a novel recombinant influenza vaccine developed by Nivad Pharmed Salamat Company in Iran. Positioned as a phase 3 extension, the research aimed to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of FluGuard in volunteers aged 18 and above. The study was conducted as a single-center, open-label clinical trial. All eligible volunteers received FluGuard (2021-2022 Formula) on day 0. Safety assessments occurred at days 1, 4, 7, 14, 28 and 42 post-vaccination. Immunogenicity was measured through seroconversion, seroprotection, and geometric mean titer fold increase in subgroups of 250 volunteers. Among the 4,260 volunteers were screened and assessed for eligibility, 1000 were enrolled. At day 28 post-vaccination, seroconversion rates for A/H1N1, A/H3N2, B/Yamagata, B/Victoria were 53.4 % [95 %CI: 46.7-60], 57.7 % [95 %CI: 51.1-64.3], 54.3 % [95 %CI: 47.7-60.9], and 36.2 % [95 %CI: 29.8-42.6], respectively in volunteers 18 years and above. The most common solicited adverse events were pain at the injection site, malaise, and headache. No suspected unexpected adverse events and adverse events of special interest occurred during the study period. Our findings suggested that FluGuard® exhibits a desirable safety profile and provides sufficient immunogenicity against influenza virus types A and B. However, extended studies are warranted to assess the long-term protective efficacy. Trial Registration: The study protocol was accepted by Iranian registry of clinical trial; https://www.irct.ir; IRCT20201104049265N2.

Trivalent and quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine in adults aged 60 and older: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of influenza vaccines of any valency for adults 60 years and older.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). MEDLINE, EMBASE, JBI Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Database, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Evidence -Based Medicine database were searched from inception to 20 June 20, 2022. Two reviewers screened, abstracted, and appraised articles (Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) 2.0 tool) independently. We assessed certainty of findings using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approaches. We performed random-effects meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA), and estimated odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for count outcomes along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and prediction intervals.

PARTICIPANTS

Older adults (≥60 years old) receiving an influenza vaccine licensed in Canada or the USA (vs placebo, no vaccine, or any other licensed vaccine), at any dose.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Laboratory-confirmed influenza (LCI) and influenza-like illness (ILI). Secondary outcomes were the number of vascular adverse events, hospitalisation for acute respiratory infection (ARI) and ILI, inpatient hospitalisation, emergency room (ER) visit for ILI, outpatient visit, and mortality, among others.

RESULTS

We included 41 RCTs and 15 companion reports comprising 8 vaccine types and 206 032 participants. Vaccines may prevent LCI compared with placebo, with high-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3-HD) (NMA: 9 RCTs, 52 202 participants, OR 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.11 to 0.51), low certainty of evidence) and recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV) (OR 0.25, 95%CI (0.08 to 0.73), low certainty of evidence) among the most efficacious vaccines. Standard dose trivalent IIV3 (IIV3-SD) may prevent ILI compared with placebo, but the result was imprecise (meta-analysis: 2 RCTs, 854 participants, OR 0.39, 95%CI (0.15 to 1.02), low certainty of evidence). Any HD was associated with prevention of ILI compared with placebo (NMA: 9 RCTs, 65 658 participants, OR 0.38, 95%CI (0.15 to 0.93)). Adjuvanted quadrivalent IIV (IIV4-Adj) may be associated with the least vascular adverse events, but the results were very uncertain (NMA: eight 8 RCTs, 57 677 participants, IRR 0.18, 95%CI (0.07 to 0.43), very low certainty of evidence). RIV on all-cause mortality may be comparable to placebo (NMA: 20 RCTs, 140 577 participants, OR 1.01, 95%CI (0.23 to 4.49), low certainty of evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review demonstrated efficacy associated with IIV3-HD and RIV vaccines in protecting older persons against LCI. RIV vaccine may reduce all-cause mortality when compared with other vaccines, but the evidence is uncertain. Differences in efficacy between influenza vaccines remain uncertain with very low to moderate certainty of evidence.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020177357.

Self-Assembling Nanoparticle Hemagglutinin Influenza Vaccines Induce High Antibody Response

As a highly pathogenic avian virus, H5 influenza poses a serious threat to livestock, the poultry industry, and public health security. Hemagglutinin (HA) is both the dominant epitope and the main target of influenza-neutralizing antibodies. Here, we designed a nanoparticle hemagglutinin influenza vaccine to improve the immunogenicity of the influenza vaccine. In this study, HA5 subtype influenza virus was used as the candidate antigen and was combined with the artificially designed double-branch scaffold protein I53_dn5 A and B. A structurally correct and bioactive trimer HA5-I53_dn5B/Y98F was obtained through secretion and purification using an insect baculovirus expression system; I53_dn5A was obtained by purification using a prokaryotic expression system. HA5-I53_dn5B/Y98F and I53_dn5A self-assembled into spherical nanoparticles (HA5-I53_dn5) in vitro with a diameter of about 45 nm. Immunization and serum test results showed that both HA5-I53_dn5B/Y98F and HA5-I53_dn5 could induce HA5-specific antibodies; however, the immunogenicity of HA5-I53_dn5 was better than that of HA5-I53_dn5B/Y98F. Groups treated with HA5-I53_dn5B and HA5-I53_dn5 nanoparticles produced IgG antibody titers that were not statistically different from those of the nanoparticle-containing adjuvant group. This production of trimerized HA5-I53_dn5B and HA5-I53_dn5 nanoparticles using baculovirus expression provides a reference for the development of novel, safe, and efficient influenza vaccines.

Recommendations for Adult Immunization by the Korean Society of Infectious Diseases, 2023: Minor Revisions to the 3rd Edition

The Korean Society of Infectious Diseases has been regularly developing guidelines for adult immunization since 2007. In 2023, the guidelines for the following seven vaccines were revised: influenza, herpes zoster, pneumococcal, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap), human papillomavirus (HPV), meningococcal, and rabies vaccines. For the influenza vaccine, a recommendation for enhanced vaccines for the elderly was added. For the herpes zoster vaccine, a recommendation for the recombinant zoster vaccine was added. For the pneumococcal vaccine, the current status of the 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine and 20-valent PCV was described. For the Tdap vaccine, the possibility of using Tdap instead of tetanus-diphtheria vaccine was described. For the HPV vaccine, the expansion of the eligible age for vaccination was described. For the meningococcal vaccine, a recommendation for the meningococcal B vaccine was added. For the rabies vaccine, the number of pre-exposure prophylaxis doses was changed. This manuscript documents the summary and rationale of the revisions for the seven vaccines. For the vaccines not mentioned in this manuscript, the recommendations in the 3rd edition of the Vaccinations for Adults textbook shall remain in effect.

Vaccines for the Elderly and Vaccination Programs in Europe and the United States

The share of the elderly population is growing worldwide as life expectancy increases. Immunosenescence and comorbidities increase infectious diseases' morbidity and mortality in older adults. Here, we aimed to summarize the latest findings on vaccines for the elderly against herpes zoster, influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), COVID-19, and pneumococcal disease and to examine vaccine recommendation differences for this age group in Europe and the United States. PubMed was searched using the keywords "elders" and "vaccine" alongside the disease/pathogen in question and paraphrased or synonymous terms. Vaccine recommendations were also sought in the European and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention databases. Improved vaccines, tailored for the elderly, mainly by using novel adjuvants or by increasing antigen concentration, are now available. Significant differences exist between immunization policies, especially between European countries, in terms of the recipient's age, number of doses, vaccination schedule, and implementation (mandatory or recommended). Understanding the factors that influence the immune response to vaccination in the elderly may help to design vaccines that offer long-term protection for this vulnerable age group. A consensus-based strategy in Europe could help to fill the gaps in immunization policy in the elderly, particularly regarding vaccination against RSV and pneumococcus.

Influenza A(H3N2) Antibody Responses to Standard-Dose Versus Enhanced Influenza Vaccine Immunogenicity in Older Adults and Prior Season's Vaccine Status

BACKGROUND

Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for older adults but repeated vaccination with standard-dose influenza vaccine has been linked to reduced immunogenicity and effectiveness, especially against A(H3N2) viruses.

METHODS

Community-dwelling Hong Kong adults aged 65-82 years were randomly allocated to receive 2017-2018 standard-dose quadrivalent, MF59-adjuvanted trivalent, high-dose trivalent, and recombinant-HA quadrivalent vaccination. Antibody response to unchanged A(H3N2) vaccine antigen was compared among participants with and without self-reported prior year (2016-2017) standard-dose vaccination.

RESULTS

Mean fold rise (MFR) in antibody titers from day 0 to day 30 by hemagglutination inhibition and virus microneutralization assays were lower among 2017-2018 standard-dose and enhanced vaccine recipients with (range, 1.7-3.0) versus without (range, 4.3-14.3) prior 2016-2017 vaccination. MFR was significantly reduced by about one-half to four-fifths for previously vaccinated recipients of standard-dose and all 3 enhanced vaccines (β range, .21-.48). Among prior-year vaccinated older adults, enhanced vaccines induced higher 1.43 to 2.39-fold geometric mean titers and 1.28 to 1.74-fold MFR versus standard-dose vaccine by microneutralization assay.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of unchanged A(H3N2) vaccine strain, prior-year vaccination was associated with reduced antibody response among both standard-dose and enhanced influenza vaccine recipients. Enhanced vaccines improved antibody response among older adults with prior-year standard-dose vaccination.

Effectiveness of inactivated influenza vaccine against laboratory-confirmed influenza among Chinese elderly: a test-negative design

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the effectiveness of influenza vaccination in the elderly is limited, and results are controversial. There are also few reports from China.

METHODS

We conducted a test-negative case-control study design to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated visits among elderly (aged ≥ 60 years) across four influenza seasons in Ningbo, China, from 2018 to 19 to 2021-22. Influenza-positive cases and negative controls were randomly matched in a 1:1 ratio according to age, sex, hospital, and date of influenza testing. We used logistic regression models to compare vaccination odds ratios (ORs) in cases to controls. We calculated the VE as [100% × (1-adjusted OR)] and calculated the 95% confidence interval (CI) around the estimate.

RESULTS

A total of 30,630 elderly patients tested for influenza with virus nucleic acid or antigen during the study period. After exclusions, we included 1 825 influenza-positive cases and 1 825 influenza-negative controls. Overall, the adjusted VE for influenza-related visits was 63.5% (95% CI, 56.3-69.5%), but varied by season. Influenza VE was 59.8% (95% CI, 51.5-66.7%) for influenza A and 89.6% (95% CI, 77.1-95.3%) for influenza B. The VE for ages 60-69 and 70-79 was 65.2% (95% CI, 55.4-72.9%) and 69.8% (95% CI, 58.7-77.9%), respectively, but only 45.4% (95% CI, 6.2-68.2%) for ages 80 and over.

CONCLUSIONS

Standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine has shown good protection in the elderly in China. However, protection may not be satisfactory in people aged 80 years and older.

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.

Immunogenicity of Enhanced Influenza Vaccines Against Mismatched Influenza Strains in Older Adults: A Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Antigenic drift is a major driver of viral evolution and a primary reason why influenza vaccines must be reformulated annually. Mismatch between vaccine and circulating viral strains negatively affects vaccine effectiveness and often contributes to higher rates of influenza-related hospitalizations and deaths, particularly in years dominated by A(H3N2). Several countries recommend enhanced influenza vaccines for older adults, who are at the highest risk of severe influenza complications and mortality. The immunogenicity of enhanced vaccines against heterologous A(H3N2) strains has been examined in nine studies to date. In six studies, an enhanced, licensed MF59-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3) consistently increased heterologous antibody titers relative to standard influenza vaccine, with evidence of a broad heterologous immune response across multiple genetic clades. In one study, licensed high-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3) also induced higher heterologous antibody titers than standard influenza vaccine. In a study comparing a higher dose licensed quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4) with HD-IIV3 and aIIV3, no significant differences in antibody titers against a heterologous strain were observed, although seroconversion rates were higher with RIV4 versus comparators. With the unmet medical need for improved influenza vaccines, the paucity of studies especially with enhanced vaccines covering mismatched strains highlights a need for further investigation of cross-protection in older adults.

Redirecting antibody responses from egg-adapted epitopes following repeat vaccination with recombinant or cell culture-based versus egg-based influenza vaccines

Repeat vaccination with egg-based influenza vaccines could preferentially boost antibodies targeting the egg-adapted epitopes and reduce immunogenicity to circulating viruses. In this randomized trial (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03722589), sera pre- and post-vaccination with quadrivalent inactivated egg-based (IIV4), cell culture-based (ccIIV4), and recombinant (RIV4) influenza vaccines were collected from healthcare personnel (18-64 years) in 2018-19 (N = 723) and 2019-20 (N = 684) influenza seasons. We performed an exploratory analysis. Vaccine egg-adapted changes had the most impact on A(H3N2) immunogenicity. In year 1, RIV4 induced higher neutralizing and total HA head binding antibodies to cell- A(H3N2) virus than ccIIV4 and IIV4. In year 2, among the 7 repeat vaccination arms (IIV4-IIV4, IIV4-ccIIV4, IIV4-RIV4, RIV4-ccIIV4, RIV4-RIV4, ccIIV4-ccIIV4 and ccIIV4-RIV4), repeat vaccination with either RIV4 or ccIIV4 further improved antibody responses to circulating viruses with decreased neutralizing antibody egg/cell ratio. RIV4 also had higher post-vaccination A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2) HA stalk antibodies in year 1, but there was no significant difference in HA stalk antibody fold rise among vaccine groups in either year 1 or year 2. Multiple seasons of non-egg-based vaccination may be needed to redirect antibody responses from immune memory to egg-adapted epitopes and re-focus the immune responses towards epitopes on the circulating viruses to improve vaccine effectiveness.

Vaccine effectiveness of recombinant and standard dose influenza vaccines against outpatient illness during 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 calculated using a retrospective test-negative design

Newer influenza vaccine formulations have entered the market, but real-world effectiveness studies are not widely conducted until there is sufficient uptake. We conducted a retrospective test-negative case-control study to determine relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of recombinant influenza vaccine or RIV4, compared with standard dose vaccines (SD) in a health system with significant RIV4 uptake. Using the electronic medical record (EMR) and the Pennsylvania state immunization registry to confirm influenza vaccination, VE against outpatient medically attended visits was calculated. Immunocompetent outpatients ages 18-64 years seen in hospital-based clinics or emergency departments who were tested for influenza using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays during the 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 influenza seasons were included. Propensity scores with inverse probability weighting were used to adjust for potential confounders and determine rVE. Among this mostly white and female cohort of 5,515 individuals, 510 were vaccinated with RIV4 and 557 were vaccinated with SD, with the balance of 4,448 (81%) being unvaccinated. Adjusted influenza VE estimates were 37% overall (95% CI = 27, 46), 40% (95% CI = 25, 51) for RIV4 and 35% (95% CI = 20, 47) for standard dose vaccines. Overall, rVE of RIV4 compared to SD was not significantly higher (11%; 95% CI = -20, 33). Influenza vaccines were moderately protective against medically attended outpatient influenza during the 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 seasons. Although the point estimates are higher for RIV4, the large confidence intervals around VE estimates suggest this study was underpowered to detect significant rVE of individual vaccine formulations.

Recombinant or Standard-Dose Influenza Vaccine in Adults under 65 Years of Age

BACKGROUND

Quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccines contain three times the amount of hemagglutinin protein as standard-dose egg-based vaccines, and the recombinant formulation is not susceptible to antigenic drift during manufacturing. Data are needed on the relative effectiveness of recombinant vaccines as compared with standard-dose vaccines against influenza-related outcomes in adults under the age of 65 years.

METHODS

In this cluster-randomized observational study, Kaiser Permanente Northern California facilities routinely administered either a high-dose recombinant influenza vaccine (Flublok Quadrivalent) or one of two standard-dose influenza vaccines during the 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 influenza seasons to adults 50 to 64 years of age (primary age group) and 18 to 49 years of age. Each facility alternated weekly between the two vaccine formulations. The primary outcome was influenza (A or B) confirmed by polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) testing. Secondary outcomes included influenza A, influenza B, and influenza-related hospitalization outcomes. We used Cox regression analysis to estimate the hazard ratio of the recombinant vaccine as compared with the standard-dose vaccines against each outcome. We calculated the relative vaccine effectiveness as 1 minus the hazard ratio.

RESULTS

The study population included 1,630,328 vaccinees between the ages of 18 and 64 years (632,962 in the recombinant-vaccine group and 997,366 in the standard-dose group). During this study period, 1386 cases of PCR-confirmed influenza were diagnosed in the recombinant-vaccine group and 2435 cases in the standard-dose group. Among the participants who were 50 to 64 years of age, 559 participants (2.00 cases per 1000) tested positive for influenza in the recombinant-vaccine group as compared with 925 participants (2.34 cases per 1000) in the standard-dose group (relative vaccine effectiveness, 15.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.9 to 23.8; P = 0.002). In the same age group, the relative vaccine effectiveness against influenza A was 15.7% (95% CI, 6.0 to 24.5; P = 0.002). The recombinant vaccine was not significantly more protective against influenza-related hospitalization than were the standard-dose vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

The high-dose recombinant vaccine conferred more protection against PCR-confirmed influenza than an egg-based standard-dose vaccine among adults between the ages of 50 and 64 years. (Funded by Sanofi; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03694392.).

Co-evolution of immunity and seasonal influenza viruses

Seasonal influenza viruses cause recurring global epidemics by continually evolving to escape host immunity. The viral constraints and host immune responses that limit and drive the evolution of these viruses are increasingly well understood. However, it remains unclear how most of these advances improve the capacity to reduce the impact of seasonal influenza viruses on human health. In this Review, we synthesize recent progress made in understanding the interplay between the evolution of immunity induced by previous infections or vaccination and the evolution of seasonal influenza viruses driven by the heterogeneous accumulation of antibody-mediated immunity in humans. We discuss the functional constraints that limit the evolution of the viruses, the within-host evolutionary processes that drive the emergence of new virus variants, as well as current and prospective options for influenza virus control, including the viral and immunological barriers that must be overcome to improve the effectiveness of vaccines and antiviral drugs.

Estimated Effectiveness of Coadministration of the BNT162b2 BA.4/5 COVID-19 Vaccine With Influenza Vaccine

Importance

No data comparing the estimated effectiveness of coadministering COVID-19 vaccines with seasonal influenza vaccine (SIV) in the community setting exist.

Objective

To examine the comparative effectiveness associated with coadministering the BNT162b2 BA.4/5 bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2-biv [Pfizer BioNTech]) and SIV vs giving each vaccine alone.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective comparative effectiveness study evaluated US adults aged 18 years or older enrolled in commercial health insurance or Medicare Advantage plans and vaccinated with BNT162b2-biv only, SIV only, or both on the same day between August 31, 2022, and January 30, 2023. Individuals with monovalent or another brand of mRNA bivalent COVID-19 vaccine were excluded.

Exposure

Same-day coadministration of BNT162b2-biv and SIV; receipt of BNT162b2-biv only (for COVID-19-related outcomes) or SIV only (for influenza-related outcomes) were the comparator groups. For adults aged 65 years or older, only enhanced SIVs were included.

Main Outcomes and Measures

COVID-19-related and influenza-related hospitalization, emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) encounters, and outpatient visits.

Results

Overall, 3 442 996 individuals (57.0% female; mean [SD] age, 65 [16.7] years) were included. A total of 627 735 individuals had BNT162b2-biv and SIV vaccine coadministered, 369 423 had BNT162b2-biv alone, and 2 445 838 had SIV alone. Among those aged 65 years or older (n = 2 210 493; mean [SD] age, 75 [6.7] years; 57.9% female), the coadministration group had a similar incidence of COVID-19-related hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.87-1.24) and slightly higher incidence of emergency department or urgent care encounters (AHR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02-1.23) and outpatient visits (AHR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11) compared with the BNT162b2-biv-only group. Among individuals aged 18 to 64 years (n = 1 232 503; mean [SD] age, 47 [13.1] years; 55.4% female), the incidence of COVID-19-related outcomes was slightly higher among those who received both vaccines vs BNT162b2-biv alone (AHR point estimate range, 1.14-1.57); however, fewer events overall in this age group resulted in wider CIs. Overall, compared with those who received SIV alone, the coadministration group had a slightly lower incidence of most influenza-related end points (AHR point estimates 0.83-0.93 for those aged ≥65 years vs 0.76-1.08 for those aged 18-64 years). Negative control outcomes suggested residual bias and calibration of COVID-19-related and influenza-related outcomes with negative controls moved all estimates closer to the null, with most CIs crossing 1.00.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, coadministration of BNT162b2-biv and SIV was associated with generally similar effectiveness in the community setting against COVID-19-related and SIV-related outcomes compared with giving each vaccine alone and may help improve uptake of both vaccines.

Novel Influenza Vaccines: From Research and Development (R&D) Challenges to Regulatory Responses

Influenza vaccines faced significant challenges in achieving sufficient protective efficacy and production efficiency in the past. In recent decades, novel influenza vaccines, characterized by efficient and scalable production, advanced platforms, and new adjuvant technologies, have overcome some of these weaknesses and have been widely licensed. Furthermore, researchers are actively pursuing the development of next-generation and universal influenza vaccines to provide comprehensive protection against potential pandemic subtypes or strains. However, new challenges have emerged as these novel vaccines undergo evaluation and authorization. In this review, we primarily outline the critical challenges and advancements in research and development (R&D) and highlight the improvements in regulatory responses for influenza vaccines.

Adult Immunization Policy in Korea

Although adult immunization is different from children's, vaccine preventable diseases (VPDs) for adults are significant in that they are more severe and cause more deaths than VPDs for children. Additionally, the emergence of new vaccines and an increase in the elderly population are increasing demands for policy support for adult vaccination. Accordingly, in this paper, I will look at the characteristics of adult immunization, policies that have been implemented in Korea, and considerations.

An Advax-CpG55.2 adjuvanted recombinant hemagglutinin vaccine provides immunity against H7N9 influenza in adult and neonatal mice

There is a major unmet need for strategies to improve the immunogenicity and effectiveness of pandemic influenza vaccines, particularly in poor responder populations such as neonates. Recombinant protein approaches to pandemic influenza offer advantages over more traditional inactivated virus approaches, as they are free of problems such as egg adaptation or need for high level biosecurity containment for manufacture. However, a weakness of recombinant proteins is their low immunogenicity. We asked whether the use of an inulin polysaccharide adjuvant (Advax) alone or combined with a TLR9 agonist (CpG55.2) would enhance the immunogenicity and protection of a recombinant hemagglutinin vaccine against H7N9 influenza (rH7HA), including in neonatal mice. Advax adjuvant induced predominantly IgG1 responses against H7HA, whereas Advax-CpG55.2 adjuvant also induced IgG2a, IgG2b and IgG3 responses, consistent with the TLR9 agonist component inducing a Th1 bias. Advax-CpG55.2 adjuvanted rH7HA induced high serum neutralizing antibody titers in adult mice. In newborns it similarly overcame immune hypo-responsiveness and enhanced serum anti-rH7HA IgG levels in 7-day-old BALB/C and C57BL/6 mice. Immunized adult mice were protected against a lethal H7N9 virus challenge. When formulated with Advax-CpG55.2 adjuvant, greater protection was seen with rH7HA than with inactivated H7 whole virus antigen. Advax-CpG55.2 adjuvanted rH7HA represents a promising influenza vaccine platform for further development.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices — United States, 2023–24 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2022–23 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) concerning the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (

MMWR Recomm Rep 2022;71[No. RR-1]:1–28). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. All seasonal influenza vaccines expected to be available in the United States for the 2023–24 season are quadrivalent, containing hemagglutinin (HA) derived from one influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, one influenza A(H3N2) virus, one influenza B/Victoria lineage virus, and one influenza B/Yamagata lineage virus. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) are expected to be available.

For most persons who need only 1 dose of influenza vaccine for the season, vaccination should ideally be offered during September or October. However, vaccination should continue after October and throughout the season as long as influenza viruses are circulating and unexpired vaccine is available. Influenza vaccines might be available as early as July or August, but for most adults (particularly adults aged ≥65 years) and for pregnant persons in the first or second trimester, vaccination during July and August should be avoided unless there is concern that vaccination later in the season might not be possible. Certain children aged 6 months through 8 years need 2 doses; these children should receive the first dose as soon as possible after vaccine is available, including during July and August. Vaccination during July and August can be considered for children of any age who need only 1 dose for the season and for pregnant persons who are in the third trimester during these months if vaccine is available

ACIP recommends that all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications receive a licensed and age-appropriate seasonal influenza vaccine. With the exception of vaccination for adults aged ≥65 years, ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. ACIP recommends that adults aged ≥65 years preferentially receive any one of the following higher dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccines: quadrivalent high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV4), quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), or quadrivalent adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV4). If none of these three vaccines is available at an opportunity for vaccine administration, then any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine should be used

Primary updates to this report include the following two topics: 1) the composition of 2023–24 U.S. seasonal influenza vaccines and 2) updated recommendations regarding influenza vaccination of persons with egg allergy. First, the composition of 2023–24 U.S. influenza vaccines includes an update to the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 component. U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines will contain HA derived from 1) an influenza A/Victoria/4897/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/67/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); 2) an influenza A/Darwin/9/2021 (H3N2)-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Darwin/6/2021 (H3N2)-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); 3) an influenza B/Austria/1359417/2021 (Victoria lineage)-like virus; and 4) an influenza B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage)-like virus. Second, ACIP recommends that all persons aged ≥6 months with egg allergy should receive influenza vaccine. Any influenza vaccine (egg based or nonegg based) that is otherwise appropriate for the recipient’s age and health status can be used. It is no longer recommended that persons who have had an allergic reaction to egg involving symptoms other than urticaria should be vaccinated in an inpatient or outpatient medical setting supervised by a health care provider who is able to recognize and manage severe allergic reactions if an egg-based vaccine is used. Egg allergy alone necessitates no additional safety measures for influenza vaccination beyond those recommended for any recipient of any vaccine, regardless of severity of previous reaction to egg. All vaccines should be administered in settings in which personnel and equipment needed for rapid recognition and treatment of acute hypersensitivity reactions are available

This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2023–24 influenza season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html . These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used according to Food and Drug Administration–licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC’s influenza website ( https://www.cdc.gov/flu ). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

Advances in Adjuvanted Influenza Vaccines

The numerous influenza infections that occur every year present a major public health problem. Influenza vaccines are important for the prevention of the disease; however, their effectiveness against infection can be suboptimal. Particularly in the elderly, immune induction can be insufficient, and the vaccine efficacy against infection is usually lower than that in young adults. Vaccine efficacy can be improved by the addition of adjuvants, and an influenza vaccine with an oil-in-water adjuvant MF59, FLUAD, has been recently licensed in the United States and other countries for persons aged 65 years and older. Although the adverse effects of adjuvanted vaccines have been a concern, many adverse effects of currently approved adjuvanted influenza vaccines are mild and acceptable, given the overriding benefits of the vaccine. Since sufficient immunity can be induced with a small amount of vaccine antigen in the presence of an adjuvant, adjuvanted vaccines promote dose sparing and the prompt preparation of vaccines for pandemic influenza. Adjuvants not only enhance the immune response to antigens but can also be effective against antigenically different viruses. In this narrative review, we provide an overview of influenza vaccines, both past and present, before presenting a discussion of adjuvanted influenza vaccines and their future.

Vaccine effectiveness of recombinant and standard dose influenza vaccines against influenza related hospitalization using a retrospective test-negative design

BACKGROUND

Relative effectiveness of various vaccine formulations provide important input for vaccine policy decisions and provider purchasing decisions. We used electronic databases to conduct a test-negative case control study to determine relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4) compared with standard dose vaccines (SD-IIV4) against influenza hospitalization.

METHODS

Adults 18-64 and ≥65 years of age hospitalized in a large U.S. health system (19 hospitals) in 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 who were clinically tested for influenza using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays were included. The hospital system electronic medical record (EMR) and the state immunization registry were used to confirm influenza vaccination. Propensity scores with inverse probability weighting were used to adjust for potential confounders and determine rVE.

RESULTS

Of the 14,590 individuals included in the primary analysis, 3,338 were vaccinated with RIV4 and 976 were vaccinated with SD-IIV4, with the balance of 10,276 being unvaccinated. Most participants were white (80 %), most (70 %) had a high-risk condition, just over half were female (54 %) and age 65 years or older (53 %). Overall RIV4 rVE was significant when adjusted for propensity scores with inverse probability weights (rVE = 31; 95 % CI = 11 %, 46 %). Among younger adults (18-64 years-old), overall rVE of RIV4 was significant (rVE = 29; 95 % CI = 4 %, 47 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Over all adults, both RIV4 and SD-IIV4 were effective against influenza hospitalization, with RIV4 providing better protection compared with SD-IIV4 overall, for females, younger adults, and those with no high-risk conditions.

Real-World Evidence in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Enhanced Influenza Vaccines in Adults ≥ 65 Years of Age: Literature Review and Expert Opinion

Influenza vaccination can benefit most populations, including adults ≥ 65 years of age, who are at greater risk of influenza-related complications. In many countries, enhanced vaccines, such as adjuvanted, high-dose, and recombinant trivalent/quadrivalent influenza vaccines (aTIV/aQIV, HD-TIV/HD-QIV, and QIVr, respectively), are recommended in older populations to provide higher immunogenicity and increased relative vaccine efficacy/effectiveness (rVE) than standard-dose vaccines. This review explores how efficacy and effectiveness data from randomized controlled trials and real-world evidence (RWE) are used in economic evaluations. Findings from published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) on enhanced influenza vaccines for older adults are summarized, and the assumptions and approaches used in these CEA are assessed alongside discussion of the importance of RWE in CEA. Results from many CEA showed that adjuvanted and high-dose enhanced vaccines were cost-effective compared with standard vaccines, and that differences in rVE estimates and acquisition price may drive differences in cost-effectiveness estimates between enhanced vaccines. Overall, RWE and CEA provide clinical and economic rationale for enhanced vaccine use in people ≥ 65 years of age, an at-risk population with substantial burden of disease. Countries that consider RWE when making vaccine recommendations have preferentially recommended aTIV/aQIV, as well as HD-TIV/HD-QIV and QIVr, to protect older individuals.

Cost-effectiveness of routine annual influenza vaccination by age and risk status

BACKGROUND

The epidemiology of circulating seasonal influenza strains changed following the 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1). A universal influenza vaccination recommendation has been implemented and new vaccine types have become available post-2009. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine annual influenza vaccination in the context of this new evidence.

METHODS

A state transition simulation model was constructed to estimate the health and economic outcomes of influenza vaccination compared to no vaccination for hypothetical US cohorts stratified by age and risk status. Model input parameters were derived from multiple sources, including post-2009 vaccine effectiveness data from the US Flu Vaccine Effectiveness Network. The analysis used societal and healthcare sector perspectives and a one-year time horizon, except permanent outcomes were also included. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in dollars per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained.

RESULTS

Compared to no vaccination, vaccination yielded ICERs lower than $95,000/QALY for all age and risk groups, except for non-high-risk adults 18-49 years ($194,000/QALY). Vaccination was cost-saving for adults ≥50 years at higher risk for influenza-related complications. Results were most sensitive to changes in the probability of influenza illness. Performing the analysis from the healthcare sector perspective, excluding vaccination time costs, delivering vaccinations in lower-cost settings, and including productivity losses improved the cost-effectiveness of vaccination. Sensitivity analysis revealed that vaccination remains below $100,000/QALY for older persons ≥65 years at vaccine effectiveness estimates as low as 4 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination varied by age and risk status and was less than $95,000/QALY for all subgroups, except for non-high-risk working-age adults. Results were sensitive to the probability of influenza illness and vaccination was more favorable under certain scenarios. Vaccination for higher risk subgroups resulted in ICERs below $100,000/QALY even at low levels of vaccine effectiveness or circulating virus.

Hemagglutinin virus-like particles incorporated with membrane-bound cytokine adjuvants provide protection against homologous and heterologous influenza virus challenge in aged mice

BACKGROUND

Current influenza vaccines deliver satisfactory results in young people but are less effective in the elderly. Development of vaccines for an ever-increasing aging population has been an arduous challenge due to immunosenescence that impairs the immune response in the aged, both quantitatively and qualitatively.

RESULTS

To potentially enhance vaccine efficacy in the elderly, we investigated the immunogenicity and cross-protection of influenza hemagglutinin virus-like particles (HA-VLP) incorporated with glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored cytokine-adjuvants (GPI-GM-CSF and GPI-IL-12) via protein transfer in aged mice. Lung viral replication against homologous and heterologous influenza viruses was significantly reduced in aged mice after vaccination with cytokine incorporated VLPs (HA-VLP-Cyt) in comparison to HA-VLP alone. Enhanced IFN-γ+CD4+ and IFN-γ+CD8+ T cell responses were also observed in aged mice immunized with HA-VLP-Cyt when compared to HA-VLP alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Cytokine-adjuvanted influenza HA-VLP vaccine induced enhanced protective response against homologous influenza A virus infection in aged mice. Influenza HA-VLP vaccine with GPI-cytokines also induced enhanced T cell responses correlating with better protection against heterologous infection in the absence of neutralizing antibodies. The results suggest that a vaccination strategy using cytokine-adjuvanted influenza HA-VLPs could be used to enhance protection against influenza A virus in the elderly.

Regional characteristics of influenza seasonality patterns in mainland China, 2005-2017: a statistical modeling study

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the seasonal and antigenic characteristics of influenza to help understand influenza activity and inform vaccine recommendations.

METHODS

We employed a generalized linear model with harmonic terms to quantify the seasonal pattern of influenza in China from 2005-2017, including amplitude (circulatory intensity), semiannual periodicity (given two peaks a year), annual peak time, and epidemic duration. The antigenic differences were distinguished as antigenic similarity between 2009 and 2020. We categorized regions above 33° N, between 27° N and 33° N, and below 27° N as the north, central, and south regions, respectively.

RESULTS

We estimated that the amplitude in the north region (median: 0.019, 95% CI: 0.018-0.021) was significantly higher than that in the central region (median: 0.011, 95% CI: 0.01-0.012, P <0.001) and south region (median: 0.008, 95% CI: 0.007-0.008, P <0.001) for influenza A virus subtype H3N2 (A/H3N2). The A/H3N2 in the central region had a semiannual periodicity (median: 0.548, 95% CI: 0.517-0.577), while no semiannual pattern was found in other regions or subtypes/lineages. The antigenic similarity was low (below 50% in the 2009-2010, 2014-2015, 2016-2018, and 2019-2020 seasons) for A/H3N2.

CONCLUSION

Our study depicted the seasonal pattern differences and antigenic differences of influenza in China, which provides information for vaccination strategies.

Vaccine-Preventable Diseases in Older Adults

Older adults are at an increased risk of vaccine-preventable diseases partly because of physiologic changes in the immune and other body systems related to age and/or accumulating comorbidities that increase the vulnerability to infections and decrease the response to vaccines. Strategies to improve the response to vaccines include using a higher antigenic dose (such as in the high-dose inactivated influenza vaccines) as well as adding adjuvants (such as MF59 in the adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine).

An Economic Comparison in the Elderly of Adjuvanted Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine with Recombinant Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine in Spain

Influenza infections impose a high burden of morbidity and mortality among older adults, at great cost to individuals and society. Enhanced influenza vaccines, which contain either an immune adjuvant or higher than normal doses of influenza virus antigens, are recommended for older adults. We used a health economics model to evaluate the cost effectiveness in Spain of a recently licensed recombinant quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIVr), which contains three times the standard dose of influenza virus hemagglutinin but no neuraminidase, compared with an MF59-adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine (aQIV). Based on current tender prices in Spain and a conservative assumption that QIVr is 10.7% relatively more effective than aQIV, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for QIVr was EUR 101,612.41 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. To meet the Spanish willingness-to-pay threshold of EUR 25,000 per QALY gained, QIVr would need to be 34.1% relatively more effective than aQIV. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis conducted to confirm the robustness of the analysis, 99.7% of simulations for QIVr were higher than the willingness-to-pay curve. These findings suggest that QIVr is not currently a cost-effective influenza vaccine option relative to aQIV for older persons living in Spain.

Cell-Based Manufacturing Technology Increases Antigenic Match of Influenza Vaccine and Results in Improved Effectiveness

To ensure that vaccination offers the best protection against an infectious disease, sequence identity between the vaccine and the circulating strain is paramount. During replication of nucleic acid, random mutations occur due to the level of polymerase fidelity. In traditional influenza vaccine manufacture, vaccine viruses are propagated in fertilized chicken eggs, which can result in egg-adaptive mutations in the antigen-encoding genes. Whilst this improves infection and replication in eggs, mutations may reduce the effectiveness of egg-based influenza vaccines against circulating human viruses. In contrast, egg-adaptive mutations are avoided when vaccine viruses are propagated in Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cell lines during manufacture of cell-based inactivated influenza vaccines. The first mammalian cell-only strain was included in Flucelvax® Quadrivalent in 2017. A sequence analysis of the viruses selected for inclusion in this vaccine (n = 15 vaccine strains, containing both hemagglutinin and neuraminidase) demonstrated that no mutations occur in the antigenic sites of either hemagglutinin or neuraminidase, indicating that cell adaptation does not occur during production of this cell-based vaccine. The development of this now entirely mammalian-based vaccine system, which incorporates both hemagglutinin and neuraminidase, ensures that the significant protective antigens are equivalent to the strains recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) in both amino acid sequence and glycosylation pattern. The inclusion of both proteins in a vaccine may provide an advantage over recombinant vaccines containing hemagglutinin alone. Findings from real world effectiveness studies support the use of cell-based influenza vaccines.

Seasonal influenza, its complications and related healthcare resource utilization among people 60 years and older: A descriptive retrospective study in Japan

Evidence suggests that older people aged ≥65 years and those aged 60–64 years with chronic medical conditions are at higher risk of developing severe complications due to influenza virus infection when compared with young, healthy adults. Although seasonal influenza is monitored through a nationwide passive surveillance in Japan, influenza related outcomes and medical resource consumption have not been fully documented. This retrospective database study aimed to describe the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of medically attended influenza cases aged ≥60 years and the associated medical resource consumption in Japan. We used clinically diagnosed influenza (CDI) based on the international classification of disease codes, and laboratory-confirmed influenza (LCI) based on influenza test results, to identify the patient population during a total of nine seasons (2010/2011 to 2018/2019). A total of 372,356 CDI and 31,122 LCI cases were identified from 77 medical institutions. The highest numbers of medically-attended influenza episodes were in patients aged 65–74 years and 75–84 years. On average, across seasons, 5.9% of all-cause hospitalizations were attributable to CDI and 0.4% were LCI. Influenza viruses type A and B co-circulated annually in varying degree of intensity and were associated with similar level of complications, including cardiovascular-related. Oxygen therapy increased with age; by contrast, mechanical ventilation, dialysis, blood transfusion, and intensive care unit admission were higher in the younger groups. In-hospital mortality for inpatients aged ≥ 85 years with CDI and LCI were 18.6% and 15.5%, respectively. Considering the burden associated with medically-attended influenza in this population, influenza prevention, laboratory confirmation and clinical management should be emphasized by general practicians and specialists like cardiologists to protect this aging population.

Controlled Human Infection Models To Accelerate Vaccine Development

The timelines for developing vaccines against infectious diseases are lengthy, and often vaccines that reach the stage of large phase 3 field trials fail to provide the desired level of protective efficacy. The application of controlled human challenge models of infection and disease at the appropriate stages of development could accelerate development of candidate vaccines and, in fact, has done so successfully in some limited cases. Human challenge models could potentially be used to gather critical information on pathogenesis, inform strain selection for vaccines, explore cross-protective immunity, identify immune correlates of protection and mechanisms of protection induced by infection or evoked by candidate vaccines, guide decisions on appropriate trial endpoints, and evaluate vaccine efficacy. We prepared this report to motivate fellow scientists to exploit the potential capacity of controlled human challenge experiments to advance vaccine development. In this review, we considered available challenge models for 17 infectious diseases in the context of the public health importance of each disease, the diversity and pathogenesis of the causative organisms, the vaccine candidates under development, and each model's capacity to evaluate them and identify correlates of protective immunity. Our broad assessment indicated that human challenge models have not yet reached their full potential to support the development of vaccines against infectious diseases. On the basis of our review, however, we believe that describing an ideal challenge model is possible, as is further developing existing and future challenge models.

Genetic engineering of baculovirus-insect cell system to improve protein production

The Baculovirus Expression Vector System (BEVS), a mature foreign protein expression platform, has been available for decades, and has been effectively used in vaccine production, gene therapy, and a host of other applications. To date, eleven BEVS-derived products have been approved for use, including four human vaccines [Cervarix against cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV), Flublok and Flublok Quadrivalent against seasonal influenza, Nuvaxovid/Covovax against COVID-19], two human therapeutics [Provenge against prostate cancer and Glybera against hereditary lipoprotein lipase deficiency (LPLD)] and five veterinary vaccines (Porcilis Pesti, BAYOVAC CSF E2, Circumvent PCV, Ingelvac CircoFLEX and Porcilis PCV). The BEVS has many advantages, including high safety, ease of operation and adaptable for serum-free culture. It also produces properly folded proteins with correct post-translational modifications, and can accommodate multi-gene- or large gene insertions. However, there remain some challenges with this system, including unstable expression and reduced levels of protein glycosylation. As the demand for biotechnology increases, there has been a concomitant effort into optimizing yield, stability and protein glycosylation through genetic engineering and the manipulation of baculovirus vector and host cells. In this review, we summarize the strategies and technological advances of BEVS in recent years and explore how this will be used to inform the further development and application of this system.

Seroresponse to Inactivated and Recombinant Influenza Vaccines Among Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

High-dose influenza vaccine provides better protection against influenza infection in older adults than standard-dose vaccine. We compared vaccine seroresponse among hemodialysis patients over a period of 4 months after administration of high-dose trivalent inactivated (HD-IIV3), standard-dose quadrivalent inactivated (SD-IIV4), or quadrivalent recombinant quadrivalent (RIV4) influenza vaccine.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Patients at 4 hemodialysis clinics who received influenza vaccine.

EXPOSURE

Type of influenza vaccine.

OUTCOME

Hemagglutination inhibition (HI) titers were measured at baseline and at 1, 2, 3, and 4 months after vaccination. The primary outcome was seroprotection rates at HI titers of at least 1:40 and at least 1:160 (antibody levels providing protection from infection in approximately 50% and 95% of immunocompetent individuals, respectively) at 1, 2, 3, and 4 months after vaccination.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

We calculated geometric mean titer as well as seroprotection and seroconversion rates. Adjusted generalized linear models with additional trend analyses were performed to evaluate the association between vaccine type and outcomes.

RESULTS

254 hemodialysis patients were vaccinated against influenza with HD-IIV3 (n = 141), SD-IIV4 (n = 36), or RIV4 (n = 77). A robust initial seroresponse to influenza A strains was observed after all 3 vaccines. Geometric mean titer and seroprotection (HI titer ≥1:160) rates against influenza A strains were higher and more sustained with HD-IIV3 than SD-IIV4 or RIV4. More than 80% of patients vaccinated with HD-IIV3 were seroprotected (HI titer ≥1:160) at month 4 (P < 0.001), whereas, among patients vaccinated with SD-IIV4 or RIV4, seroprotection rates were similar to those at baseline. Seroprotection rates were lower against B strains for all vaccines.

LIMITATIONS

Because of the use of observational data, bias from unmeasured confounders may exist. Some age subgroups were small in number. Clinical outcome data were not available.

CONCLUSIONS

Hemodialysis patients exhibited high seroprotection rates after all 3 influenza vaccines. The seroresponse waned more slowly with HD-IIV3 compared with SD-IIV4 and RIV4 vaccines.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2022-23 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2021–22 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) concerning the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States

(MMWR Recomm Rep 2021;70[No. RR-5]:1–24). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used.With the exception of vaccination for adults aged ≥65 years, ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. All seasonal influenza vaccines expected to be available in the United States for the 2022–23 season are quadrivalent, containing hemagglutinin (HA) derived from one influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, one influenza A(H3N2) virus, one influenza B/Victoria lineage virus, and one influenza B/Yamagata lineage virus. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) are expected to be available. Trivalent influenza vaccines are no longer available, but data that involve these vaccines are included for reference.

Influenza vaccines might be available as early as July or August, but for most persons who need only 1 dose of influenza vaccine for the season, vaccination should ideally be offered during September or October. However, vaccination should continue after October and throughout the season as long as influenza viruses are circulating and unexpired vaccine is available. For most adults (particularly adults aged ≥65 years) and for pregnant persons in the first or second trimester, vaccination during July and August should be avoided unless there is concern that vaccination later in the season might not be possible. Certain children aged 6 months through 8 years need 2 doses; these children should receive the first dose as soon as possible after vaccine is available, including during July and August. Vaccination during July and August can be considered for children of any age who need only 1 dose for the season and for pregnant persons who are in the third trimester if vaccine is available during those months

Updates described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP that were held on October 20, 2021; January 12, 2022; February 23, 2022; and June 22, 2022. Primary updates to this report include the following three topics: 1) the composition of 2022–23 U.S. seasonal influenza vaccines; 2) updates to the description of influenza vaccines expected to be available for the 2022–23 season, including one influenza vaccine labeling change that occurred after the publication of the 2021–22 ACIP influenza recommendations; and 3) updates to the recommendations concerning vaccination of adults aged ≥65 years. First, the composition of 2022–23 U.S. influenza vaccines includes updates to the influenza A(H3N2) and influenza B/Victoria lineage components. U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines will contain HA derived from an influenza A/Victoria/2570/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/588/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture–based or recombinant vaccines); an influenza A/Darwin/9/2021 (H3N2)-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Darwin/6/2021 (H3N2)-like virus (for cell culture–based or recombinant vaccines); an influenza B/Austria/1359417/2021 (Victoria lineage)-like virus; and an influenza B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage)-like virus. Second, the approved age indication for the cell culture–based inactivated influenza vaccine, Flucelvax Quadrivalent (ccIIV4), was changed in October 2021 from ≥2 years to ≥6 months. Third, recommendations for vaccination of adults aged ≥65 years have been modified. ACIP recommends that adults aged ≥65 years preferentially receive any one of the following higher dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccines: quadrivalent high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV4), quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), or quadrivalent adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV4). If none of these three vaccines is available at an opportunity for vaccine administration, then any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine should be used

This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2022–23 influenza season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used according to Food and Drug Administration–licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC’s influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

The dark side of Tregs during aging

In the last century, we have seen a dramatic rise in the number of older persons globally, a trend known as the grey (or silver) tsunami. People live markedly longer than their predecessors worldwide, due to remarkable changes in their lifestyle and in progresses made by modern medicine. However, the older we become, the more susceptible we are to a series of age-related pathologies, including infections, cancers, autoimmune diseases, and multi-morbidities. Therefore, a key challenge for our modern societies is how to cope with this fragile portion of the population, so that everybody could have the opportunity to live a long and healthy life. From a holistic point of view, aging results from the progressive decline of various systems. Among them, the distinctive age-dependent changes in the immune system contribute to the enhanced frailty of the elderly. One of these affects a population of lymphocytes, known as regulatory T cells (Tregs), as accumulating evidence suggest that there is a significant increase in the frequency of these cells in secondary lymphoid organs (SLOs) of aged animals. Although there are still discrepancies in the literature about modifications to their functional properties during aging, mounting evidence suggests a detrimental role for Tregs in the elderly in the context of bacterial and viral infections by suppressing immune responses against non-self-antigens. Interestingly, Tregs seem to also contribute to the reduced effectiveness of immunizations against many pathogens by limiting the production of vaccine-induced protective antibodies. In this review, we will analyze the current state of understandings about the role of Tregs in acute and chronic infections as well as in vaccination response in both humans and mice. Lastly, we provide an overview of current strategies for Treg modulation with potential future applications to improve the effectiveness of vaccines in older individuals.

Quadrivalent Vaccines for the Immunization of Adults against Influenza: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Vaccination is the most effective intervention to prevent influenza. Adults at risk of complications are among the targets of the vaccination campaigns and can be vaccinated with different types of quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIVs). In the light of assessing the relative immunogenicity and efficacy of different QIVs, a systematic review was performed. Randomized controlled trials conducted in adults aged 18-64 years until 30 March 2021 were searched through three databases (Medline, Cochrane Library and Scopus). Twenty-four RCTs were eventually included. After data extraction, a network meta-analysis was not applicable due to the lack of common comparators. However, in the presence of at least two studies, single meta-analyses were performed to evaluate immunogenicity and efficacy; on the contrary, data from single studies were considered. Seroconversion rate for H1N1 was higher for standard QIVs, while for the remaining strains it was higher for low-dose adjuvanted QIVs. For seroprotection rate, the recombinant vaccine recorded the highest values for H3N2, while for the other strains, the cell-based QIVs achieved better results. In general, standard and cell-based QIVs showed an overall good immunogenicity profile. Nevertheless, as a relative comparative analysis was not possible, further research would be deserved.

Safety and immunogenicity of a quadrivalent, inactivated, split-virion influenza vaccine (IIV4-W) in healthy people aged 3-60 years: a phase III randomized clinical noninferiority trial

Background

A quadrivalent split influenza vaccine IIV4-W against both influenza A and B viruses is urgently needed.

Methods

To evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of IIV4-W in people aged 3–60 years, 2400 participants recruited in a double-blind phase III trial and were randomly assigned to the IIV4-W, TIV1 and TIV2 groups. The immunogenicity indicators were measured at 28 days postvaccination and for 180 days for safety follow-up.

Results

Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 162 (20.28%), 116 (14.55%) and 123 (15.41%) participants in the IIV4-W, TIV1 and TIV2 groups, respectively. All these AEs were mild and self-limiting, and no serious AEs related to the vaccines were observed. IIV4-W elicited a non-inferior immune response for matched strains (the lower limit of 95% CI for GMT ratio >0.67, for SCR and SPR difference >-10%) and superior immune response for the additional B strains (the lower limit of 95% CI for GMT ratio >1.5, for SCR difference >10%) versus TIVs. The lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of the GMT increase fold, the seroconversion rate and the seroprotection rate exceeded 2.5, 40% and 70% for the four strains in IIV4-W respectively.

Conclusions

IIV4-W was noninferior to the TIV-matched strains and was superior to the additional B strain. IIV4-W was safe in the participants and elicited high antibody titers.

National safety surveillance of quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine in Taiwan during NH 20/21

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for influenza vaccine significantly increased in the initial weeks of the 2020-2021 influenza vaccination campaign season in Taiwan. To meet this demand, the Taiwanese government therefore purchased additional influenza vaccines via special import, including 350,000 doses of quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccines (RIV4, Flublok Quadrivalent). Approved in the United States since 2016, there were limited numbers of published studies regarding RIV4 outside America. We utilized the national passive surveillance system consisting adverse event (AE) reports following RIV4 immunization to describe its safety profiles in Taiwan.

METHODS

We obtained the database from the Taiwan National Adverse Drugs Reactions Reporting System and collected reports from January 2021 to July 2021, which was at least one month after RIV4 immunization. AE reporting rates were calculated based on the total administered doses.

RESULTS

Eight AEs were reported among 200,287 administered doses, which led to a reporting rate of 3.99 AEs per 100,000 doses administered. The mean age of the reported individuals were 47.53 years, and women (75%) were the predominant gender. Most adverse events started within the first day after immunization, with one reported as starting 4 days after vaccination. Among the 8 cases, 75% (n = 6) were non-serious and the most common symptoms were erythematous skin rashes with pruritus. Two cases were listed as serious based on the criteria of "other clinically significant medical conditions", but neither was judged to have a causal relationship with RIV4 immunization.

CONCLUSION

The Taiwan national passive surveillance data supported the safety profiles of RIV4 in Taiwan population.