Correlated studies of a recombinant influenza-virus vaccine. IV. Protection against naturally occurring influenza in military trainees

Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

The consequences of influenza in adults are mainly time off work. Vaccination of pregnant women is recommended internationally. This is an update of a review published in 2014. Future updates of this review will be made only when new trials or vaccines become available. Observational data included in previous versions of the review have been retained for historical reasons but have not been updated due to their lack of influence on the review conclusions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (efficacy, effectiveness, and harm) of vaccines against influenza in healthy adults, including pregnant women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 12), MEDLINE (January 1966 to 31 December 2016), Embase (1990 to 31 December 2016), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; 1 July 2017), and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 July 2017), as well as checking the bibliographies of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing influenza vaccines with placebo or no intervention in naturally occurring influenza in healthy individuals aged 16 to 65 years. Previous versions of this review included observational comparative studies assessing serious and rare harms cohort and case-control studies. Due to the uncertain quality of observational (i.e. non-randomised) studies and their lack of influence on the review conclusions, we decided to update only randomised evidence. The searches for observational comparative studies are no longer updated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We rated certainty of evidence for key outcomes (influenza, influenza-like illness (ILI), hospitalisation, and adverse effects) using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 52 clinical trials of over 80,000 people assessing the safety and effectiveness of influenza vaccines. We have presented findings from 25 studies comparing inactivated parenteral influenza vaccine against placebo or do-nothing control groups as the most relevant to decision-making. The studies were conducted over single influenza seasons in North America, South America, and Europe between 1969 and 2009. We did not consider studies at high risk of bias to influence the results of our outcomes except for hospitalisation.Inactivated influenza vaccines probably reduce influenza in healthy adults from 2.3% without vaccination to 0.9% (risk ratio (RR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.47; 71,221 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and they probably reduce ILI from 21.5% to 18.1% (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95; 25,795 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; 71 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent one of them experiencing influenza, and 29 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent one of them experiencing an ILI). The difference between the two number needed to vaccinate (NNV) values depends on the different incidence of ILI and confirmed influenza among the study populations. Vaccination may lead to a small reduction in the risk of hospitalisation in healthy adults, from 14.7% to 14.1%, but the CI is wide and does not rule out a large benefit (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.08; 11,924 participants; low-certainty evidence). Vaccines may lead to little or no small reduction in days off work (-0.04 days, 95% CI -0.14 days to 0.06; low-certainty evidence). Inactivated vaccines cause an increase in fever from 1.5% to 2.3%.We identified one RCT and one controlled clinical trial assessing the effects of vaccination in pregnant women. The efficacy of inactivated vaccine containing pH1N1 against influenza was 50% (95% CI 14% to 71%) in mothers (NNV 55), and 49% (95% CI 12% to 70%) in infants up to 24 weeks (NNV 56). No data were available on efficacy against seasonal influenza during pregnancy. Evidence from observational studies showed effectiveness of influenza vaccines against ILI in pregnant women to be 24% (95% CI 11% to 36%, NNV 94), and against influenza in newborns from vaccinated women to be 41% (95% CI 6% to 63%, NNV 27).Live aerosol vaccines have an overall effectiveness corresponding to an NNV of 46. The performance of one- or two-dose whole-virion 1968 to 1969 pandemic vaccines was higher (NNV 16) against ILI and (NNV 35) against influenza. There was limited impact on hospitalisations in the 1968 to 1969 pandemic (NNV 94). The administration of both seasonal and 2009 pandemic vaccines during pregnancy had no significant effect on abortion or neonatal death, but this was based on observational data sets.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Healthy adults who receive inactivated parenteral influenza vaccine rather than no vaccine probably experience less influenza, from just over 2% to just under 1% (moderate-certainty evidence). They also probably experience less ILI following vaccination, but the degree of benefit when expressed in absolute terms varied across different settings. Variation in protection against ILI may be due in part to inconsistent symptom classification. Certainty of evidence for the small reductions in hospitalisations and time off work is low. Protection against influenza and ILI in mothers and newborns was smaller than the effects seen in other populations considered in this review.Vaccines increase the risk of a number of adverse events, including a small increase in fever, but rates of nausea and vomiting are uncertain. The protective effect of vaccination in pregnant women and newborns is also very modest. We did not find any evidence of an association between influenza vaccination and serious adverse events in the comparative studies considered in this review. Fifteen included RCTs were industry funded (29%).

Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Different types of influenza vaccines are currently produced worldwide. Vaccination of pregnant women is recommended internationally, while healthy adults are targeted in North America.

OBJECTIVES

To identify, retrieve and assess all studies evaluating the effects (efficacy, effectiveness and harm) of vaccines against influenza in healthy adults, including pregnant women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 2), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2013) and EMBASE (1990 to May 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing influenza vaccines with placebo or no intervention in naturally occurring influenza in healthy individuals aged 16 to 65 years. We also included comparative studies assessing serious and rare harms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 90 reports containing 116 data sets; among these 69 were clinical trials of over 70,000 people, 27 were comparative cohort studies (about eight million people) and 20 were case-control studies (nearly 25,000 people). We retrieved 23 reports of the effectiveness and safety of vaccine administration in pregnant women (about 1.6 million mother-child couples).The overall effectiveness of parenteral inactivated vaccine against influenza-like illness (ILI) is limited, corresponding to a number needed to vaccinate (NNV) of 40 (95% confidence interval (CI) 26 to 128). The overall efficacy of inactivated vaccines in preventing confirmed influenza has a NNV of 71 (95% CI 64 to 80). The difference between these two values depends on the different incidence of ILI and confirmed influenza among the study populations: 15.6% of unvaccinated participants versus 9.9% of vaccinated participants developed ILI symptoms, whilst only 2.4% and 1.1%, respectively, developed laboratory-confirmed influenza.No RCTs assessing vaccination in pregnant women were found. The only evidence available comes from observational studies with modest methodological quality. On this basis, vaccination shows very limited effects: NNV 92 (95% CI 63 to 201) against ILI in pregnant women and NNV 27 (95% CI 18 to 185) against laboratory-confirmed influenza in newborns from vaccinated women.Live aerosol vaccines have an overall effectiveness corresponding to a NNV 46 (95% CI 29 to 115).The performance of one-dose or two-dose whole virion pandemic vaccines was higher, showing a NNV of 16 (95% CI 14 to 20) against ILI and a NNV of 35 (95% CI 33 to 47) against influenza, while a limited impact on hospitalisation was found (NNV 94, 95% CI 70 to 1022).Vaccination had a modest effect on time off work and had no effect on hospital admissions or complication rates. Inactivated vaccines caused local harms. No evidence of association with serious adverse events was found, but the harms evidence base was limited.The overall risk of bias in the included trials is unclear because it was not possible to assess the real impact of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccines have a very modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost in the general population, including pregnant women. No evidence of association between influenza vaccination and serious adverse events was found in the comparative studies considered in the review. This review includes 90 studies, 24 of which (26.7%) were funded totally or partially by industry. Out of the 48 RCTs, 17 were industry-funded (35.4%).

Comparing influenza vaccine efficacy against mismatched and matched strains: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccines are most effective when the antigens in the vaccine match those of circulating strains. However, antigens contained in the vaccines do not always match circulating strains. In the present work we aimed to examine the vaccine efficacy (VE) afforded by influenza vaccines when they are not well matched to circulating strains.

METHODS

We identified randomized clinical trials (RCTs) through MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and references of included RCTs. RCTs reporting laboratory-confirmed influenza among healthy participants vaccinated with antigens of matching and non-matching influenza strains were included. Two independent reviewers screened citations/full-text articles, abstracted data, and appraised risk of bias. Conflicts were resolved by discussion. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted. VE was calculated using the following formula: (1 - relative risk × 100%).

RESULTS

We included 34 RCTs, providing data on 47 influenza seasons and 94,821 participants. The live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) showed significant protection against mismatched (six RCTs, VE 54%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 28% to 71%) and matched (seven RCTs, VE 83%, 95% CI 75% to 88%) influenza strains among children aged 6 to 36 months. Differences were observed between the point estimates for mismatched influenza A (five RCTs, VE 75%, 95% CI 41% to 90%) and mismatched influenza B (five RCTs, VE 42%, 95% CI 22% to 56%) estimates among children aged 6 to 36 months. The trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV) also afforded significant protection against mismatched (nine RCTs, VE 52%, 95% CI 37% to 63%) and matched (eight RCTs, VE 65%, 95% CI 54% to 73%) influenza strains among adults. Numerical differences were observed between the point estimates for mismatched influenza A (five RCTs, VE 64%, 95% CI 23% to 82%) and mismatched influenza B (eight RCTs, VE 52%, 95% CI 19% to 72%) estimates among adults. Statistical heterogeneity was low (I2 <50%) across all meta-analyses, except for the LAIV meta-analyses among children (I2 = 79%).

CONCLUSIONS

The TIV and LAIV vaccines can provide cross protection against non-matching circulating strains. The point estimates for VE were different for matching versus non-matching strains, with overlapping CIs.

Seasonal influenza vaccine efficacy and its determinants in children and non-elderly adults: a systematic review with meta-analyses of controlled trials

CONTEXT

The true level of influenza vaccine efficacy is controversial and many factors may influence its estimation.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the efficacy of vaccination of children and non-elderly adults for the prevention of influenza and to explore the impact of type of vaccine, age, degree of strain matching, influenza type and case ascertainment methods on vaccine efficacy estimates.

DATA SOURCES

Medline and EmBase databases until October 2011. References of relevant articles were also reviewed.

STUDY SELECTION

Controlled trials evaluating seasonal influenza vaccines and presenting incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza illness were eligible. Studies exploring efficacy after experimental challenge, presenting duplicate data, employing group randomization, or focusing on special populations were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION

The vaccine effect on influenza prevention was evaluated by calculating Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RR) and using random-effects models. Vaccine efficacies were calculated for each comparison as (1-RR)×100.

RESULTS

Thirty studies were included in one or more of a total of 101 analyses, comprising 88.468 study participants. There was evidence of heterogeneity in 49% of the analyses. Summary vaccine efficacy was 65% against any strain, 78% against matched strains and 55% against not-matched strains. Both live-attenuated and inactivated vaccines showed similar levels of protection against not-matched strains (60% and 55%, respectively). Live-attenuated vaccines performed better than inactivated vaccines in children (80% versus 48%), whereas inactivated vaccines performed better than live-attenuated vaccines in adults (59% versus 39%). There was a large difference (20%) in efficacy against influenza A (69%) and influenza B (49%) types for not-matched strains. Summary estimates of vaccine efficacy were highest when ascertainment was based on culture confirmation.

CONCLUSION

Influenza vaccines are efficacious, but efficacy estimates depend on many variables including type of vaccine and age of vaccinees, degree of matching of the circulating strains to the vaccine, influenza type, and methods of case ascertainment.

Gene constellation of influenza A virus reassortants with high growth phenotype prepared as seed candidates for vaccine production

Background

Influenza A virus vaccines undergo yearly reformulations due to the antigenic variability of the virus caused by antigenic drift and shift. It is critical to the vaccine manufacturing process to obtain influenza A seed virus that is antigenically identical to circulating wild type (wt) virus and grows to high titers in embryonated chicken eggs. Inactivated influenza A seasonal vaccines are generated by classical reassortment. The classical method takes advantage of the ability of the influenza virus to reassort based on the segmented nature of its genome. In ovo co-inoculation of a high growth or yield (hy) donor virus and a low yield wt virus with antibody selection against the donor surface antigens results in progeny viruses that grow to high titers in ovo with wt origin hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) glycoproteins. In this report we determined the parental origin of the remaining six genes encoding the internal proteins that contribute to the hy phenotype in ovo.

Methodology

The genetic analysis was conducted using reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP). The characterization was conducted to determine the parental origin of the gene segments (hy donor virus or wt virus), gene segment ratios and constellations. Fold increase in growth of reassortant viruses compared to respective parent wt viruses was determined by hemagglutination assay titers.

Significance

In this study fifty-seven influenza A vaccine candidate reassortants were analyzed for the presence or absence of correlations between specific gene segment ratios, gene constellations and hy reassortant phenotype. We found two gene ratios, 6∶2 and 5∶3, to be the most prevalent among the hy reassortants analyzed, although other gene ratios also conferred hy in certain reassortants.

An appraisal of the evidence underlying performance measures for community-acquired pneumonia

Numerous organizations use performance measures to monitor the quality of care provided for a variety of clinical conditions. An appraisal of the evidence underlying such performance measures has never been reported. Our objective was to estimate the effects of interventions recommended by performance measures and to determine the quality of evidence from which those estimates derive, using the Joint Commission and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' performance measures for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) as examples. We performed systematic reviews of the literature to identify evidence related to the performance measures for CAP. Metaanalyses were then performed to estimate the absolute and relative effects of the interventions recommended by the performance measures. The Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to determine the quality of evidence. The estimated effects favored the interventions recommended by five of the six performance measures. These included pneumococcal vaccination (incidence of pneumococcal pneumonia: relative risk [RR], 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-0.75), blood cultures, antibiotic administration within 6 hours, use of a guideline-compliant antibiotic regimen, and influenza vaccination (incidence of symptomatic influenza: RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.22-0.40). However, among these performance measures, only influenza vaccination was supported by high-quality evidence. One-step smoking cessation counseling was contradicted by moderate-quality evidence (smoking quit rate: RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.90-1.22). The evidence supporting performance measures is frequently not of high quality and occasionally contradictory.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Different types of influenza vaccines are currently produced worldwide. Healthy adults are presently targeted mainly in North America.

OBJECTIVES

Identify, retrieve and assess all studies evaluating the effects of vaccines against influenza in healthy adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2010, issue 2), MEDLINE (January 1966 to June 2010) and EMBASE (1990 to June 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing influenza vaccines with placebo or no intervention in naturally-occurring influenza in healthy individuals aged 16 to 65 years. We also included comparative studies assessing serious and rare harms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 50 reports. Forty (59 sub-studies) were clinical trials of over 70,000 people. Eight were comparative non-RCTs and assessed serious harms. Two were reports of harms which could not be introduced in the data analysis. In the relatively uncommon circumstance of vaccine matching the viral circulating strain and high circulation, 4% of unvaccinated people versus 1% of vaccinated people developed influenza symptoms (risk difference (RD) 3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2% to 5%). The corresponding figures for poor vaccine matching were 2% and 1% (RD 1, 95% CI 0% to 3%). These differences were not likely to be due to chance. Vaccination had a modest effect on time off work and had no effect on hospital admissions or complication rates. Inactivated vaccines caused local harms and an estimated 1.6 additional cases of Guillain-Barré Syndrome per million vaccinations. The harms evidence base is limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccines have a modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost. There is no evidence that they affect complications, such as pneumonia, or transmission.WARNING: This review includes 15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration). An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size. Studies funded from public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines. The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in light of this finding.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Different types of influenza vaccines are currently produced world-wide. Healthy adults are at present targeted only in North America. Despite the publication of a large number of clinical trials, there is still substantial uncertainty about the clinical effectiveness of influenza vaccines and this has a negative impact on their acceptance and uptake.

OBJECTIVES

To identify, retrieve and assess all studies evaluating the effects (efficacy, effectiveness and harms) of vaccines against influenza in healthy adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2005) which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group trials register; MEDLINE (January 1966 to January 2006); and EMBASE (1990 to January 2006). We wrote to vaccine manufacturers and first or corresponding authors of studies in the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Any randomised or quasi-randomised studies comparing influenza vaccines in humans with placebo, no intervention. Live, attenuated, or killed vaccines or fractions of them administered by any route, irrespective of antigenic configuration were assessed. Only studies assessing protection from exposure to naturally occurring influenza in healthy individuals aged 16 to 65 years were considered. Comparative non-randomised studies were included if they assessed evidence of the possible association between influenza vaccines and serious harms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-eight reports were included: 38 (57 sub-studies) were clinical trials providing data about effectiveness, efficacy and harms of influenza vaccines and involved 66,248 people; 8 were comparative non-randomised studies and tested the association of the vaccines with serious harms; 2 were reports of harms which could not be introduced in the data analysis. Inactivated parenteral vaccines were 30% effective (95% CI 17% to 41%) against influenza-like illness, and 80% (95% CI 56% to 91%) efficacious against influenza when the vaccine matched the circulating strain and circulation was high, but decreased to 50% (95% CI 27% to 65%) when it did not. Excluding the studies of the 1968 to 1969 pandemic, effectiveness was 15% (95% CI 9% to 22%) and efficacy was 73% (95% CI 53% to 84%). Vaccination had a modest effect on time off work, but there was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on hospital admissions or complication rates. Inactivated vaccines caused local tenderness and soreness and erythema. Spray vaccines had more modest performance. Monovalent whole-virion vaccines matching circulating viruses had high efficacy (VE 93%, 95% CI 69% to 98%) and effectiveness (VE 66%, 95% CI 51% to 77%) against the 1968 to 1969 pandemic.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccines are effective in reducing cases of influenza, especially when the content predicts accurately circulating types and circulation is high. However, they are less effective in reducing cases of influenza-like illness and have a modest impact on working days lost. There is insufficient evidence to assess their impact on complications. Whole-virion monovalent vaccines may perform best in a pandemic.

Prevention of influenza in the general population

BACKGROUND

Although all jurisdictions in Canada offer annual influenza immunization to people at high risk of complications, only Ontario has provided universal annual immunization of healthy adults and children. Use of chemotherapy (amantidine, neuraminidase inhibitors) to prevent influenza varies among provinces. We sought to systematically review the evidence for the prevention of influenza infection in the general population.

METHODS

The interventions reviewed were influenza vaccination and prophylactic use of neuraminidase inhibitors. The health outcomes of interest were rates of laboratory-confirmed influenza infection, clinical definitions of influenza-like illness and work absenteeism. MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant articles published between 1966 and March 2003. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected. Evidence was appraised using the methodology of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.

RESULTS

Eighteen trials involving more than 33,000 healthy adults were identified that met the inclusion criteria; of these, 15 showed that influenza vaccination with either live-attenuated and inactivated vaccines was efficacious. Eleven trials were considered to be of "good" quality, and 7 were considered to be of "fair" quality. The relative risk reduction (RRR) associated with influenza immunization in adults ranged from 0% to 91%. Fifteen RCTs involving more than 45,000 healthy children aged 6 months to 19 years were identified, of which 9 were considered to contain "good" evidence and 6 "fair" evidence. Results from 12 of these trials showed protection against influenza. The RRR ranged from 0% to 93%. There were 6 RCTs of "good" quality showing that neuraminidase inhibitors are effective in preventing influenza infection. Side effects from both influenza vaccination and neuraminidase inhibitor administration were mild.

INTERPRETATION

There are numerous RCTs of good quality in large populations that have consistently shown that influenza vaccination, using inactivated or live-attenuated vaccines, is moderately effective in preventing influenza in the general population (healthy adults and children over 6 months of age). There is good evidence that neuraminidase inhibitor prophylaxis in contacts given within 36 to 48 hours of symptom onset of the household index case is effective; appropriate use of this prevention method requires access to rapid diagnostic methods. Decisions about introduction of routine immunization programs must take into account the cost and cost-effectiveness of a universal program and the burden of illness associated with influenza in each jurisdiction.

Rapid confirmation by RFLP of transfer to vaccine candidate reassortment viruses of the principal 'high yield' gene of influenza A viruses

Influenza vaccines must be revised constantly on almost a yearly basis because of the sequential mutations (antigenic drift) that occur as the virus responds to immunologic pressure. New, high yield (hy) reassortant viruses have proved essential to meet production needs for the supply of new vaccines. We have devised a method for simple, rapid and precise identification of the principal influenza A virus RNA segment (RNA 7) associated with hy and transferred from the hy donor virus, A/PR/8/34 (H1N1). The method entails the use of a single restriction enzyme, Bsgl, in analysis by restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) of reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-generated DNA amplicons. The method clearly distinguishes the RNA coding for the M proteins of the donor virus from that of representative and epidemiologically significant human wild type viruses of the past 60 years. In the course of this methodological study further evidence has been found of the variability of the so-called 'invariant' and stable M1 and M2 proteins of the virus. Another finding of potentially basic significance that merits further study is the occurrence of a consistent change at the same amino acid (aa) site of the donated RNA 7 upon its transfer to reassortant viruses.

In pursuit of influenza: Fort Monmouth to Valhalla (and back)

In reviewing 50 years of personal research on influenza, I have journeyed, literally and figuratively, from an army camp epidemic in Fort Monmouth NJ in 1947 to a (literal and figurative) Valhalla, where I now conduct my research. Having entered the field as a physician, I have always sought practical applications of my work, yet in every instance, such applications have led me to seek further answers in basic research as new questions arose. I entered the area of influenza virus genetics by the back door through an interest in the effects of corticosteroid hormones on viral replication, used the genetic approach in analyzing the morphological variation of the virus and, in so doing, exploited the finding of a linkage of high-yield growth to spherical morphology. Today, all influenza vaccine viruses are high-yield genetic reassortants. Subsequent study of reassortant viruses facilitated the identification and isolation of the two major antigens of the virus in antigenic hybrids and showed their differing functions in the induction of immunity. In turn, a new approach to influenza vaccination has been discovered and is presently under clinical investigation.

Identification of PR8 M1 protein in influenza virus high-yield reassortants by M1-specific monoclonal antibodies

A panel of monoclonal antibodies to the M1 protein of A/PR8/34 (H1N1) (PR8) influenza A virus was found to distinguish in ELISA high-yielding reassortant viruses derived from reassortment of PR8 and X-31 (H3N2) viruses with recently prevalent field strains of H1N1 or H3N2 subtype. These findings are concordant with results of genotyping that demonstrated the presence of PR8 RNA 7 or M1 protein in high-yield reassortants by RNA or protein PAGE. All high-yield vaccine candidate reassortants Application of the M1 monoclonal antibody panel facilitates the isolation of high-yield vaccine candidate reassortants bearing the PR8 M1 gene, and should aid in epidemiologic strain tracking as well.

Evaluation of a live, attenuated recombinant influenza vaccine in high school children

A live, attenuated, recombinant influenza vaccine (Alice strain) administered intranasally was evaluated in high school students and compared with intranasal placebo and subcutaneous, inactivated, bivalent influenza vaccine. The Alice strain was antigenic, increasing the geometric mean titer (GMT) from a prestudy level of 30.2 to a postvaccine level of 189.6. The inactivated vaccine increased the GMT from 32.9 to 361.8. There was no increase in the GMT among the placebo recipients. The Alice strain produced little reaction. With an antigenic, safe, acceptable, live, attenuated influenza vaccine available, immunization on a widespread basis should be considered.