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

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.

Safety and Immunogenicity of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Prefusion F Protein Vaccine when Co-administered with Adjuvanted Seasonal Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine in Older Adults: A Phase 3 Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

We evaluated co-administration of adjuvanted seasonal quadrivalent influenza vaccine (FLU-aQIV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) prefusion F protein-based vaccine (RSVPreF3 OA) in ≥65-year-olds.

METHODS

This phase 3, open-label trial randomized ≥65-year-olds to receive FLU-aQIV and RSVPreF3 OA concomitantly (Co-Ad) or sequentially, 1 month apart (Control). Primary objectives were to demonstrate the non-inferiority of FLU-aQIV and RSVPreF3 OA co-administration versus sequential administration in terms of hemagglutination inhibition (HI) titers for each FLU-aQIV strain and RSV-A and RSV-B neutralization titers, 1 month post-vaccination. Reactogenicity and safety were also assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 1045 participants were vaccinated (Co-Ad: 523; Control: 522). Non-inferiority of FLU-aQIV and RSVPreF3 OA co-administration versus sequential administration was demonstrated in terms of HI titers for the A/Victoria(H1N1), B/Victoria, and B/Yamagata influenza strains and RSV-A neutralization titers (upper limits [ULs] of 95% confidence intervals [CIs] for adjusted geometric mean titer [GMT] ratios [Control/Co-Ad] ≤1.50) but not for A/Darwin(H3N2) HI titers (95% CI UL = 1.53). The immune response to A/Darwin(H3N2) was further assessed post-hoc using a microneutralization assay; the post-vaccination adjusted GMT ratio (Control/Co-Ad) was 1.23 (95% CI: 1.06-1.42, ie, UL ≤1.50), suggesting an adequate immune response to A/Darwin(H3N2) following co-administration. RSV-B neutralization titers were comparable between groups (95% CI UL for adjusted GMT ratio ≤1.50). Solicited adverse events were mostly mild or moderate and transient; unsolicited and serious adverse event rates were balanced between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvanted FLU-aQIV and RSVPreF3 OA had acceptable reactogenicity/safety profiles when co-administered in ≥65-year-olds, without clinically relevant interference with the immune responses to either vaccine.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT05568797.

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.

Evidence base for yearly respiratory virus vaccines: Current status and proposed improved strategies

Annual vaccination is widely recommended for influenza and SARS-CoV-2. In this essay, we analyse and question the prevailing policymaking approach to these respiratory virus vaccines, especially in the United States. Every year, licensed influenza vaccines are reformulated to include specific strains expected to dominate in the season ahead. Updated vaccines are rapidly manufactured and approved without further regulatory requirement of clinical data. Novel vaccines (i.e. new products) typically undergo clinical trials, though generally powered for clinically unimportant outcomes (e.g. lab-confirmed infections, regardless of symptomatology or antibody levels). Eventually, the current and future efficacy of influenza and COVID-19 vaccines against hospitalization or death carries considerable uncertainty. The emergence of highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants and waning vaccine-induced immunity led to plummeting vaccine effectiveness, at least against symptomatic infection, and booster doses have since been widely recommended. No further randomized trials were performed for clinically important outcomes for licensed updated boosters. In both cases, annual vaccine effectiveness estimates are generated by observational research, but observational studies are particularly susceptible to confounding and bias. Well-conducted experimental studies, particularly randomized trials, are necessary to address persistent uncertainties about influenza and COVID-19 vaccines. We propose a new research framework which would render results relevant to the current or future respiratory viral seasons. We demonstrate that experimental studies are feasible by adopting a more pragmatic approach and provide strategies on how to do so. When it comes to implementing policies that seriously impact people's lives, require substantial public resources and/or rely on widespread public acceptance, high evidence standards are desirable.

Relative Effectiveness and Immunogenicity of Quadrivalent Recombinant Influenza Vaccine Versus Egg-Based Inactivated Influenza Vaccine Among Adults Aged 18-64 Years: Results and Experience From a Randomized, Double-Blind Trial

Background

Immunogenicity studies suggest that recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV) may provide better protection against influenza than standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccines (SD IIV). This randomized trial evaluated the relative vaccine effectiveness (VE) and immunogenicity of RIV versus SD IIV in frontline workers and students aged 18-64 years.

Methods

Participants were randomized to receive RIV or SD IIV and followed for reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed influenza during the 2022-2023 influenza season. Sera were collected from a subset of participants before and at 1 and 6 months postvaccination and tested by hemagglutination inhibition for A/H1N1, A/H3N2, B/Yamagata, and B/Victoria and against cell-grown vaccine reference viruses for A/H1N1 and A/H3N2.

Results

Overall, 3988 participants were enrolled and vaccinated (25% of the trial sample size goal); RT-PCR-confirmed influenza occurred in 20 of 1963 RIV recipients and 28 of 1964 SD IIV recipients. Relative VE was 29% (95% confidence interval [CI], -26% to 60%). In the immunogenicity substudy (n = 118), the geometric mean titer ratio (GMTR) comparing RIV to SD IIV at 1 month was 2.3 (95% CI, 1.4-3.7) for cell-grown A/H1N1, 2.1 (95% CI, 1.3-3.4) for cell-grown A/H3N2, 1.1 (95% CI, .7-1.6) for B/Victoria, and 1.4 (95% CI, .9-2.0) for B/Yamagata. At 6 months, GMTRs were >1 against A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B/Yamagata.

Conclusions

Relative VE of RIV compared to SD IIV did not reach statistical significance, but RIV elicited more robust humoral immune responses to 2 of 4 vaccine viruses at 1 month and 3 of 4 viruses at 6 months after vaccination, suggesting possible improved and sustained immune protection from RIV. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT05514002.

A quadrivalent recombinant influenza Hemagglutinin vaccine induced strong protective immune responses in animal models

Globally, influenza poses a substantial threat to public health, serving as a major contributor to both morbidity and mortality. The current vaccines for seasonal influenza are not optimal. A novel recombinant hemagglutinin (rHA) protein-based quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine, SCVC101, has been developed. SCVC101-S contains standard dose protein (15μg of rHA per virus strain) and an oil-in-water adjuvant, CD-A, which enhances the immunogenicity and cross-protection of the vaccine. Preclinical studies in mice, rats, and rhesus macaques demonstrate that SCVC101-S induces robust humoral and cellular immune responses, surpassing those induced by commercially available vaccines. Notably, a single injection with SCVC101-S can induce a strong immune response in macaques, suggesting the potential for a standard-dose vaccination with a recombinant protein influenza vaccine. Furthermore, SCVC101-S induces cross-protection immune responses against heterologous viral strains, indicating broader protection than current vaccines. In conclusion, SCVC101-S has demonstrated safety and efficacy in preclinical settings and warrants further investigation in human clinical trials. Its potential as a valuable addition to the vaccines against seasonal influenza, particularly for the elderly population, is promising.

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.

Socio-economic inequalities in the use of flu vaccination in Europe: a multilevel approach

BACKGROUND

The European-wide statistics show that the use of flu vaccination remains low and the differences between countries are significant, as are those between different population groups within each country. Considerable research has focused on explaining vaccination uptake in relation to socio-economic and demographic characteristics, health promotion and health behavior factors. Nevertheless, few studies have aimed to analyze between-country differences in the use of flu vaccination for the EU population. To address this gap, this study examines the socio-economic inequalities in the use of influenza vaccination for the population aged 15 years and over in all 27 EU Member States and two other non-EU countries (Iceland and Norway).

METHODS

Using data from the third wave of European Health Interview Survey (EHIS) 2019, we employed a multilevel logistic model with a random intercept for country, which allows controlling simultaneously the variations in individuals' characteristics and macro-contextual factors which could influence the use of flu vaccination. In addition, the analysis considers the population stratified into four age groups, namely adolescents, young adults, adults and elderly, to better capture heterogeneities in flu vaccination uptake.

RESULTS

The main findings confirm the existence of socio-economic inequalities between individuals in different age groups, but also of significant variation between European countries, particularly for older people, in the use of influenza vaccination. In this respect, income and education are strong proxy of socio-economic status associated with flu vaccination uptake. Moreover, these disparities within each population group are also explained by area of residence and occupational status. Particularly for the elderly, the differences between individuals in vaccine utilization are also explained by country-level factors, such as the type of healthcare system adopted in each country, public funding, personal health expenditure burden, or the availability of generalist practitioners.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our findings reveal that vaccination against seasonal influenza remains a critical public health intervention and bring attention to the relevance of conceiving and implementing context-specific strategies to ensure equitable access to vaccines for all EU citizens.

Vaccination of Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To guide the vaccination of adults with solid tumors or hematologic malignancies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and nonrandomized studies on the efficacy and safety of vaccines used by adults with cancer or their household contacts. This review builds on a 2013 guideline by the Infectious Disease Society of America. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2013, to February 16, 2023. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of 102 publications were included in the systematic review: 24 systematic reviews, 14 RCTs, and 64 nonrandomized studies. The largest body of evidence addressed COVID-19 vaccines.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The goal of vaccination is to limit the severity of infection and prevent infection where feasible. Optimizing vaccination status should be considered a key element in the care of patients with cancer. This approach includes the documentation of vaccination status at the time of the first patient visit; timely provision of recommended vaccines; and appropriate revaccination after hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, or B-cell-depleting therapy. Active interaction and coordination among healthcare providers, including primary care practitioners, pharmacists, and nursing team members, are needed. Vaccination of household contacts will enhance protection for patients with cancer. Some vaccination and revaccination plans for patients with cancer may be affected by the underlying immune status and the anticancer therapy received. As a result, vaccine strategies may differ from the vaccine recommendations for the general healthy adult population vaccine.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Influenza and SARS-CoV-2 in Homeless People from Urban Shelters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2023)

Homeless people (HP) are disproportionally affected by respiratory disorders, including pneumococcal and mycobacterial infections. On the contrary, more limited evidence has been previously gathered on influenza and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and very little is known about the occurrence of human respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), a common cause of respiratory tract infections among children and the elderly. The present systematic review was designed to collect available evidence about RSV, influenza and SARS-CoV-2 infections in HP, focusing on those from urban homeless shelters. Three medical databases (PubMed, Embase and Scopus) and the preprint repository medRxiv.org were therefore searched for eligible observational studies published up to 30 December 2023, and the collected cases were pooled in a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistics. Reporting bias was assessed by funnel plots and a regression analysis. Overall, 31 studies were retrieved, and of them, 17 reported on the point prevalence of respiratory pathogens, with pooled estimates of 4.91 cases per 1000 HP (95%CI: 2.46 to 9.80) for RSV, 3.47 per 1000 HP for influenza and 40.21 cases per 1000 HP (95%CI: 14.66 to 105.55) for SARS-CoV-2. Incidence estimates were calculated from 12 studies, and SARS-CoV-2 was characterized by the highest occurrence (9.58 diagnoses per 1000 persons-months, 95%CI: 3.00 to 16.16), followed by influenza (6.07, 95%CI: 0.00 to 15.06) and RSV (1.71, 95%CI: 0.00 to 4.13). Only four studies reported on the outcome of viral infections in HP: the assessed pathogens were associated with a high likelihood of hospitalization, while high rates of recurrence and eventual deaths were reported in cases of RSV infections. In summary, RSV, influenza and SARS-CoV-2 infections were documented in HP from urban shelters, and their potential outcomes stress the importance of specifically tailored preventive strategies.