Safety, vaccine virus shedding and immunogenicity of trivalent, cold-adapted, live attenuated influenza vaccine administered to human immunodeficiency virus-infected and noninfected children

Summary of the NACI systematic review and recommendation on the use of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) in HIV-infected individuals

Background

Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all individuals six months of age and older, including those with HIV infection. Prior to this statement, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) stated that live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) was contraindicated for all individuals with HIV infection. The objective of this article is to update NACI's guidance on the use of LAIV for HIV-infected individuals.

Methods

A systematic literature review of the use of LAIV in individuals with HIV was undertaken. The Canadian Adverse Events Following Immunization Surveillance System was searched for reports of adverse events following vaccination with LAIV in HIV-infected individuals. NACI approved the revised recommendations.

Results

NACI concluded that LAIV is immunogenic in children with HIV, and available data suggest that it is safe, although data were insufficient to detect possible uncommon adverse effects. LAIV may be considered as an option for vaccination of children 2-17 years old who meet the following criteria: 1) receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy for at least four months; 2) CD4 count of 500/µL or greater if age 2-5 years, or of 200/µL or greater if age 6-17 years; and 3) HIV plasma RNA less than 10,000 copies/mL. LAIV remains contraindicated for adults with HIV because of insufficient data. Intramuscular influenza vaccination is considered the standard for children living with HIV by NACI and the Canadian Paediatric & Perinatal HIV/AIDS Research Group, particularly for those without HIV viral load suppression (i.e. plasma HIV RNA is 40 copies/mL or greater). However, if intramuscular (IM) vaccination is not accepted by the patient or substitute decision-maker, LAIV would be reasonable for children meeting the criteria listed above.

Conclusion

LAIV may be considered as an option for annual vaccination of selected children with HIV.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

DESIGN

Non-interventional cohort study.

SETTING

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

PARTICIPANTS

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

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EUPAS18527.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy children

BACKGROUND

The consequences of influenza in children and adults are mainly absenteeism from school and work. However, the risk of complications is greatest in children and people over 65 years of age. This is an update of a review published in 2011. 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 because of their lack of influence on the review conclusions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (efficacy, effectiveness, and harm) of vaccines against influenza in healthy children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 12), which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1966 to 31 December 2016), Embase (1974 to 31 December 2016), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; 1 July 2017), and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 July 2017).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing influenza vaccines with placebo or no intervention in naturally occurring influenza in healthy children under 16 years. Previous versions of this review included 19 cohort and 11 case-control studies. We are no longer updating the searches for these study designs but have retained the observational studies for historical purposes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence for the key outcomes of influenza, influenza-like illness (ILI), complications (hospitalisation, ear infection), and adverse events. Due to variation in control group risks for influenza and ILI, absolute effects are reported as the median control group risk, and numbers needed to vaccinate (NNVs) are reported accordingly. For other outcomes aggregate control group risks are used.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 clinical trials (> 200,000 children). Most of the studies were conducted in children over the age of two and compared live attenuated or inactivated vaccines with placebo or no vaccine. Studies were conducted over single influenza seasons in the USA, Western Europe, Russia, and Bangladesh between 1984 and 2013. Restricting analyses to studies at low risk of bias showed that influenza and otitis media were the only outcomes where the impact of bias was negligible. Variability in study design and reporting impeded meta-analysis of harms outcomes.Live attenuated vaccinesCompared with placebo or do nothing, live attenuated influenza vaccines probably reduce the risk of influenza infection in children aged 3 to 16 years from 18% to 4% (risk ratio (RR) 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 0.41; 7718 children; moderate-certainty evidence), and they may reduce ILI by a smaller degree, from 17% to 12% (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.80; 124,606 children; low-certainty evidence). Seven children would need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza, and 20 children would need to be vaccinated to prevent one child experiencing an ILI. Acute otitis media is probably similar following vaccine or placebo during seasonal influenza, but this result comes from a single study with particularly high rates of acute otitis media (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.01; moderate-certainty evidence). There was insufficient information available to determine the effect of vaccines on school absenteeism due to very low-certainty evidence from one study. Vaccinating children may lead to fewer parents taking time off work, although the CI includes no effect (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.03; low-certainty evidence). Data on the most serious consequences of influenza complications leading to hospitalisation were not available. Data from four studies measuring fever following vaccination varied considerably, from 0.16% to 15% in children who had live vaccines, while in the placebo groups the proportions ranged from 0.71% to 22% (very low-certainty evidence). Data on nausea were not reported.Inactivated vaccinesCompared with placebo or no vaccination, inactivated vaccines reduce the risk of influenza in children aged 2 to 16 years from 30% to 11% (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.48; 1628 children; high-certainty evidence), and they probably reduce ILI from 28% to 20% (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.79; 19,044 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Five children would need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza, and 12 children would need to be vaccinated to avoid one case of ILI. The risk of otitis media is probably similar between vaccinated children and unvaccinated children (31% versus 27%), although the CI does not exclude a meaningful increase in otitis media following vaccination (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.40; 884 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was insufficient information available to determine the effect of vaccines on school absenteeism due to very low-certainty evidence from one study. We identified no data on parental working time lost, hospitalisation, fever, or nausea.We found limited evidence on secondary cases, requirement for treatment of lower respiratory tract disease, and drug prescriptions. One brand of monovalent pandemic vaccine was associated with a sudden loss of muscle tone triggered by the experience of an intense emotion (cataplexy) and a sleep disorder (narcolepsy) in children. Evidence of serious harms (such as febrile fits) was sparse.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In children aged between 3 and 16 years, live influenza vaccines probably reduce influenza (moderate-certainty evidence) and may reduce ILI (low-certainty evidence) over a single influenza season. In this population inactivated vaccines also reduce influenza (high-certainty evidence) and may reduce ILI (low-certainty evidence). For both vaccine types, the absolute reduction in influenza and ILI varied considerably across the study populations, making it difficult to predict how these findings translate to different settings. We found very few randomised controlled trials in children under two years of age. Adverse event data were not well described in the available studies. Standardised approaches to the definition, ascertainment, and reporting of adverse events are needed. Identification of all global cases of potential harms is beyond the scope of this review.

Vaccinations for the HIV-Infected Adult: A Review of the Current Recommendations, Part I

Vaccination is a critical component for ensuring the health of those living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) by protection against vaccine-preventable diseases. Since HIV-infected persons may have reduced immune responses and shorter durations of protection post-vaccination, HIV-specific guidelines have been published by global and national advisory organizations to address these potential concerns. This article provides a comprehensive review of the current guidelines and evidence-based data for vaccinating HIV-infected adults, including guidance on modified vaccine dosing and testing strategies, as well as safety considerations, to enhance protection among this vulnerable population. In the current article, part I of the two-part series, inactivated vaccines with broad indications as well as vaccines for specific risk and age groups will be discussed.

Live versus attenuated influenza vaccine uptake and post-vaccination influenza-like illness outcomes in HIV-infected US Air Force members

BACKGROUND

Although clinical data is limited, guidelines recommend avoiding live attenuated intranasal influenza vaccine (LAIV) in HIV-infected persons.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate non-guideline LAIV use and resulting adverse effects in an HIV-infected population.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of influenza vaccination in US Air Force (USAF) members with HIV infection immunized between 2005 and 2015 was performed. Influenza vaccination history after HIV diagnosis was evaluated, including receipt of LAIV or inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV). The proportion with influenza-like illness (ILI) diagnoses within 30days after vaccination with IIV or LAIV was assessed by ICD-9 codes.

RESULTS

437 patients met inclusion criteria, with 121 (27.7%) receiving at least one dose of LAIV and 316 (72.3%) receiving only IIV during follow-up. The mean number of LAIV doses received was 1.5±0.89 (range, 1-4) and the majority (n=50, 82%) received their first LAIV vaccination within the first year after HIV diagnosis. Patients were predominantly males and the LAIV group had a lower mean age at HIV diagnosis (27.5±6.6) compared to the IIV group (30±7.8; p <0.001). Overall, IIV was associated with ILI diagnosis within 30days of vaccination (X² 4.58; p=0.032), with 16 cases (94.1%) occurring in those who received IIV compared to 1 case (5.9%) in those who received LAIV.

CONCLUSION

Although over a quarter of USAF members received LAIV after HIV diagnosis, LAIV administration did not show an increased frequency of post-vaccine ILI diagnoses. Further education is needed to ensure that USAF members with HIV infection are vaccinated according to guideline recommendations, particularly newly diagnosed patients.

Serological response to trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in HIV-infected adults in Singapore

A cohort of 81 HIV-infected participants received seasonal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) and their humoral responses were monitored using hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Three weeks after the vaccination, the percentage of the cohort that had an HAI titer of >1:40 was 35% (for H1N1), 43% (for H3N2) and 19% (for influenza B). An increase in HAI titer can be achieved by an increase in magnitude of the antibody responses, which can be measured by an increase in ELISA titer; as well as a quality improvement of the antibody responses through increased avidity to the virus. For some individuals, an increase in avidity alone is sufficient to reach the sero-protective titer. Notably, a number of volunteers showed an increase in ELISA titer without a rise in HAI titer. A total of 24 participants (30%) did not show any significant increase in both HAI and ELISA tests after vaccination. Apart from a lower peripheral CD4⁺ T cell count, the non responders' peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) also had a higher IL-10 mRNA expression after TIV vaccination ex vivo. Cytokine profiling demonstrated that, apart from a weaker MCP-1 expression in the non-responder group, PBMC from both groups responded comparably to lipopolysaccharide (LPS) stimulation in vitro. Since only 3 participants developed sero-protective titers against all 3 subtypes after vaccination, our study highlights a need to enhance the immunogenicity of the subunit vaccine for this population, potentially through harnessing the innate immunity with an external adjuvant.

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

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

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

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

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines

This report updates the 2015-16 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines (Grohskopf LA, Sokolow LZ, Olsen SJ, Bresee JS, Broder KR, Karron RA. Prevention and control of influenza with vaccines: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2015-16 influenza season. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2015;64:818-25). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For the 2016-17 influenza season, inactivated influenza vaccines (IIVs) will be available in both trivalent (IIV3) and quadrivalent (IIV4) formulations. Recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV) will be available in a trivalent formulation (RIV3). In light of concerns regarding low effectiveness against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 in the United States during the 2013-14 and 2015-16 seasons, for the 2016-17 season, ACIP makes the interim recommendation that live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) should not be used. Vaccine virus strains included in the 2016-17 U.S. trivalent influenza vaccines will be an A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)-like virus, an A/Hong Kong/4801/2014 (H3N2)-like virus, and a B/Brisbane/60/2008-like virus (Victoria lineage). Quadrivalent vaccines will include an additional influenza B virus strain, a B/Phuket/3073/2013-like virus (Yamagata lineage).Recommendations for use of different vaccine types and specific populations are discussed. A licensed, age-appropriate vaccine should be used. No preferential recommendation is made for one influenza vaccine product over another for persons for whom more than one licensed, recommended product is otherwise appropriate. This information is intended for vaccination providers, immunization program personnel, and public health personnel. Information in this report reflects discussions during public meetings of ACIP held on October 21, 2015; February 24, 2016; and June 22, 2016. These recommendations apply to all licensed influenza vaccines used within Food and Drug Administration-licensed indications, including those licensed after the publication date of this report. Updates and other information are available at CDC's influenza website (http://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check CDC's influenza website periodically for additional information.

Duration of Virus Shedding After Trivalent Intranasal Live Attenuated Influenza Vaccination in Adults

Objective:

To characterize the probability and duration of viral shedding among adults given trivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine (LATV).

Design:

Prospective surveillance study.

Methods:

Nasal wash samples were collected from adult volunteers at baseline and on days 3, 7, and 10 and between days 17 and 21 following intranasal LAIV vaccination. The presence, titer, and identification of each specific strain of influenza virus shed were determined by standard methodology.

Results:

Twenty subjects received LATV. No samples were positive for influenza virus at baseline. After LAIV vaccination, influenza virus was recovered from 10 of 20 vaccinees on day 3, from 1 of 18 vaccinees on day 7, and from none of the samples on days 10 or 17 through 21. Vaccinees who shed vaccine virus were significantly younger than those who did not (mean age, 26.4 vs 38.6 years;P< .01). Although the presence of specific mucosal immunoglobulin A to influenza B was associated with significantly less shedding of influenza B after vaccination (P= .02), associations of shedding with other measures of immunity were not detected.

Conclusion:

The duration of shedding of vaccine virus after LAIV in adults is limited and may be associated with an individual's prior influenza vaccination history.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

DESIGN

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Vaccination in HIV-infected adults

Vaccines are critical components for protecting HIV-infected adults from an increasing number of preventable diseases. However, missed opportunities for vaccination among HIV-infected persons persist, likely due to concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, as well as the changing nature of vaccine guidelines. In addition, the optimal timing of vaccination among HIV-infected adults in regards to HIV stage and receipt of antiretroviral therapy remain important questions. This article provides a review of the current recommendations regarding vaccines among HIV-infected adults and a comprehensive summary of the evidence-based literature of the benefits and risks of vaccines among this vulnerable population.

Seasonal influenza vaccination and technologies

Seasonal influenza is a serious respiratory illness that causes annual worldwide epidemics resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Influenza pandemics occur about every 40 yrs, and may carry a greater burden of illness and death than seasonal influenza. Both seasonal influenza and pandemic influenza have profound economic consequences. The combination of current vaccine efficacy and viral antigenic drifts and shifts necessitates annual vaccination. New manufacturing technologies in influenza vaccine development employ cell culture and recombinant techniques. Both allow more rapid vaccine creation and production. In the past 5 years, brisk, highly creative activity in influenza vaccine research and development has begun. New vaccine technologies and vaccination strategies are addressing the need for viable alternatives to egg production methods and improved efficacy. At present, stubborn problems of sub-optimal efficacy and the need for annual immunization persist. There is an obvious need for more efficacious vaccines and improved vaccination strategies to make immunization easier for providers and patients. Mitigating this serious annual health threat remains an important public health priority.

2013 IDSA clinical practice guideline for vaccination of the immunocompromised host

An international panel of experts prepared an evidenced-based guideline for vaccination of immunocompromised adults and children. These guidelines are intended for use by primary care and subspecialty providers who care for immunocompromised patients. Evidence was often limited. Areas that warrant future investigation are highlighted.

Safety and immune responses following administration of H1N1 live attenuated influenza vaccine in Thais

BACKGROUND

Emergence and rapid spread of influenza H1N1 virus prompted health authorities to develop a safe and effective influenza vaccine for domestic use. The Thai Government Pharmaceutical Organization (GPO) with technical support from Russia through WHO had prepared a pandemic live attenuated vaccine (PLAIV) using ca-ts attenuated candidate strain A/17/CA/2009/38 (H1N1) for Thais.

METHODS

Each participant received two doses of intranasal H1N1 vaccine or placebo 21 days apart. All were followed up at 7, 21, 42 and 60 days after first immunization. Blood was drawn for hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay from all participants at days 1, 21, 42, and 60 after first immunization. A subset of 40 participants aged 19-49 years was randomly selected for nasal washing at days 1, 21, 42, and 60 to assess IgA using direct enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) along with serum HAI and microneutralization (MN) assay determination.

RESULTS

A total of 363 subjects aged 12-75 years were randomized into 2 groups (271 vaccinees:92 placebos). Almost all AEs were mild to moderate. Local reactions were stuffy nose (22.3%), runny nose (25.1%), scratchy throat (27.2%) and sore throat (19.3%). Systemic reactions included headache (21.7%), myalgia (13.8%), fatigue (16.8%) and postnasal drip (19.9%). On day 60, HAI seroconversion rates for vaccine:placebo group were 30.3:6.0 for ITT and 29.4:5.1 for PP analysis. Children showed highest seroconversion rate at 44, but it decreased to 39.4 when all 3 assays (HAI, MN assay and ELISA) from subgroup analysis were considered.

CONCLUSION

The vaccine candidate is safe. The use of more than one assay may be needed for evaluation of immune response because live attenuated vaccines could effectively induce different kinds of responses. Different individuals could also mount different kinds of immune response, even to the same antigen.

Comparative analysis of hemagglutination inhibition titers generated using temporally matched serum and plasma samples

Influenza-specific hemaggluitination inhibition (HAI) antibody titer, an indicator of immunity to influenza, is often used to measure exposure to influenza in surveillance and immunogenicity studies. Traditionally, serum has been the specimen of choice for HAI assays, but a desire to reduce the amount of blood collected during studies and the availability of plasma in archived sample collections warrant the evaluation of plasma for HAI titer. Therefore, the relationship between serum and plasma HAI titer values is of great interest. Here, we compare HAI titers determined on temporally matched serum and plasma (citrated and heparinized) using influenza A and B viruses. Bland-Altman plots, McNemar's test, and geometric coefficient of variation were used respectively for evaluating agreement, correlation and variability in the serum-plasma titer results. We observed a high degree of agreement (80.5%–98.8%) and correlation (r = 0.796–0.964) in the serum and matched plasma titer values although plasma titers were generally lower than corresponding serum titers. Calculated seropositive (HAI ≥40) rates were higher using serum titers than with plasma titers, but seroconversion rates were unaffected by sample type. Stronger agreement and decreased variability in titers were seen between serum and citrated plasma than between serum and heparinized plasma. Overall, these data suggest that serum or plasma can be used in serodiagnostic HAI assays, but seropositive rates may be underestimated using plasma HAI titers. The type of anticoagulant present in plasma may affect HAI titer values and warrants further investigation.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy children

BACKGROUND

The consequences of influenza in children and adults are mainly absenteeism from school and work. However, the risk of complications is greatest in children and people over 65 years of age.

OBJECTIVES

To appraise all comparative studies evaluating the effects of influenza vaccines in healthy children, assess vaccine efficacy (prevention of confirmed influenza) and effectiveness (prevention of influenza-like illness (ILI)) and document adverse events associated with influenza vaccines.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 3) which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, OLD MEDLINE (1950 to 1965), MEDLINE (1966 to November 2011), EMBASE (1974 to November 2011), Biological Abstracts (1969 to September 2007), and Science Citation Index (1974 to September 2007).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort and case-control studies of any influenza vaccine in healthy children under 16 years of age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 75 studies with about 300,000 observations. We included 17 RCTs, 19 cohort studies and 11 case-control studies in the analysis of vaccine efficacy and effectiveness. Evidence from RCTs shows that six children under the age of six need to be vaccinated with live attenuated vaccine to prevent one case of influenza (infection and symptoms). We could find no usable data for those aged two years or younger.Inactivated vaccines in children aged two years or younger are not significantly more efficacious than placebo. Twenty-eight children over the age of six need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza (infection and symptoms). Eight need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza-like-illness (ILI). We could find no evidence of effect on secondary cases, lower respiratory tract disease, drug prescriptions, otitis media and its consequences and socioeconomic impact. We found weak single-study evidence of effect on school absenteeism by children and caring parents from work. Variability in study design and presentation of data was such that a meta-analysis of safety outcome data was not feasible. Extensive evidence of reporting bias of safety outcomes from trials of live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIVs) impeded meaningful analysis. One specific brand of monovalent pandemic vaccine is associated with cataplexy and narcolepsy in children and there is sparse evidence of serious harms (such as febrile convulsions) in specific situations.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccines are efficacious in preventing cases of influenza in children older than two years of age, but little evidence is available for children younger than two years of age. There was a difference between vaccine efficacy and effectiveness, partly due to differing datasets, settings and viral circulation patterns. No safety comparisons could be carried out, emphasising the need for standardisation of methods and presentation of vaccine safety data in future studies. In specific cases, influenza vaccines were associated with serious harms such as narcolepsy and febrile convulsions. It was surprising to find only one study of inactivated vaccine in children under two years, given current recommendations to vaccinate healthy children from six months of age in the USA, Canada, parts of Europe and Australia. If immunisation in children is to be recommended as a public health policy, large-scale studies assessing important outcomes, and directly comparing vaccine types are urgently required. The degree of scrutiny needed to identify all global cases of potential harms is beyond the resources of this review. This review includes trials funded by industry. 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 favourable 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 the light of this finding.

Immunization in special populations

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

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

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

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

A postmarketing evaluation of the frequency of use and safety of live attenuated influenza vaccine use in nonrecommended children younger than 5 years

The 2007 US approval for use of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) in children aged 24-59 months included precautions against use in (1) children <24 months and children aged 24-59 months with (2) asthma, (3) recurrent wheezing, and (4) altered immunocompetence. A postmarketing commitment was initiated to monitor LAIV use and the frequency of select safety outcomes in these cohorts. Vaccination rates and the frequency of hospitalizations or emergency department visits within 42 days after LAIV and trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) administration were estimated from 2007 to 2009 claims data from a health insurance database. Rates of LAIV use per 10,000 child-days among cohorts 1, 2, and 4 were low relative to rates among the LAIV-recommended population (2007-2008; 0.03-0.78 vs. 1.32, 2008-2009; 0.08-3.26 vs. 5.94). However, rates of LAIV use per 10,000 child-days in cohort 3 were similar to rates among the LAIV-recommended population (2007-2008; 1.55 vs. 1.32, 2008-2009; 5.01 vs. 5.94). The rate of emergency department visits/hospitalizations within 42 days of vaccination with LAIV was the same as or less than the rate within 42 days of vaccination with TIV. Less restricted LAIV use in children with past wheezing may be related to the broad definition of recurrent wheezing used in national guidelines and the current study. In the small number of nonrecommended children receiving LAIV, no safety signals were identified.

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

BACKGROUND

The safety of intranasal live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) in immunocompromised children with cancer is unknown. The objective of this study was to describe the safety and immunogenicity of LAIV in mild to moderately immunocompromised children with cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of LAIV versus placebo in children aged 5-17 years with cancer. LAIV (frozen formulation) or allantoic fluid/buffer was administered intranasally. Reactogenicity, adverse events, blood for immune assays, and nasal swabs for viral shedding were obtained during 5 visits over the first 42 days postvaccination; information concerning serious adverse events (SAEs) was collected for 180 days.

RESULTS

20 subjects were enrolled (LAIV, n=10; placebo, n=10) with a mean age of 12.2 years. Ten subjects had hematologic malignancy (LAIV, n=4; placebo, n=6); 10 subjects had solid tumors (LAIV, n=6; placebo, n=4). One subject was excluded from immunogenicity analysis for not receiving a full dose of LAIV. LAIV resulted in an increased incidence of runny nose/nasal congestion occurring in all LAIV recipients; no related SAEs were observed. Four of 10 LAIV recipients shed vaccine virus, with none exceeding 7-10 days duration. LAIV demonstrated modest immunogenicity by hemagglutination inhibition (≥ 4 fold rise for any strain, 33%) and microneutralization assays (≥ 4 fold rise for any strain, 44%).

CONCLUSION

In this small pilot study conducted in mild to moderately immunocompromised children with cancer, runny nose/nasal congestion was increased in LAIV recipients, no related SAEs occurred, and prolonged viral shedding was not detected. Moderate immunogenicity was demonstrated in this small group of individuals.

Influenza vaccines: from surveillance through production to protection

Influenza is an important contributor to population and individual morbidity and mortality. The current influenza pandemic with novel H1N1 has highlighted the need for health care professionals to better understand the processes involved in creating influenza vaccines, both for pandemic as well as for seasonal influenza. This review presents an overview of influenza-related topics to help meet this need and includes a discussion of the burden of disease, virology, epidemiology, viral surveillance, and vaccine strain selection. We then present an overview of influenza vaccine-related topics, including vaccine production, vaccine efficacy and effectiveness, influenza vaccine misperceptions, and populations that are recommended to receive vaccination. English-language articles in PubMed published between January 1, 1970, and October 7, 2009, were searched using key words human influenza, influenza vaccines, influenza A, and influenza B.

How I treat influenza in patients with hematologic malignancies

The 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic has heightened the interest of clinicians for options in the prevention and management of influenza virus infection in immunocompromised patients. Even before the emergence of the novel 2009 H1N1 strain, influenza disease was a serious complication in patients with hematologic malignancies receiving chemotherapy or undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation. Here we review the clinical manifestations of seasonal and 2009 H1N1 influenza and discuss current diagnosis, antiviral treatment, and prophylaxis options. We also summarize infection control and vaccination strategies for patients, family members, and caregivers.

T cell responses of HIV-infected children after administration of inactivated or live attenuated influenza vaccines

Live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) prevents significantly more cases of influenza in immune-competent children than the trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV). We compared the T cell responses to LAIV or TIV in HIV-infected children. IFN-gamma-ELISPOT for the three vaccine-contained influenza strains, two mismatched strains, and phytohemagglutinin (PHA), was performed at 0, 4, and 24 weeks postimmunization in 175 HIV-infected children randomly assigned to LAIV or TIV. The contribution of CD8 T cells to the influenza-specific response (CD8-ELISPOT) was evaluated by CD8-cell depletion. CD8 T cells accounted for > or =87% of the total influenza-ELISPOT. At baseline, total influenza-ELISPOT and CD8-ELISPOT values were similar or higher in TIV compared with LAIV recipients. Four and 24 weeks after TIV, total influenza-ELISPOT and CD8-ELISPOT results were significantly lower than baseline results (p < or = 0.001). Responses to PHA also tended to decrease at 4 weeks after TIV (p = 0.06), but rebounded to baseline levels at 24 weeks. Four weeks after LAIV, total influenza-ELISPOT responses to vaccine-contained strains A H3N2 and B significantly decreased. Other ELISPOT values at 4 weeks and all values at 24 weeks were similar to the baseline values. At 4 and 24 weeks, TIV compared to LAIV administration resulted in a significantly greater decrease in influenza-specific ELISPOT values for vaccine-contained influenza A strains (p < or = 0.02). Responses to PHA also tended to decrease more in TIV recipients (p = 0.07). HIV-infected children immunized with TIV had significant and persistent decreases in ELISPOT responses to influenza. LAIV administration suppressed ELISPOT responses less. The clinical significance of these findings deserves further study.

Influenza vaccination with a live attenuated vaccine

Influenza is a highly contagious, acute respiratory illness with a long history of outbreaks dating back several centuries. Although immunization is an effective means of protection against influenza, vaccination rates have been suboptimal, especially among certain high-risk groups, including children and health care personnel. This article reviews basic information about influenza and immunization, discusses the relevance of children as vectors of disease, and highlights current information on FluMist, an intranasally administered, live attenuated influenza vaccine, including studies of its use compared with trivalent inactivated vaccine and in children.

Current status of live attenuated influenza vaccine in the United States for seasonal and pandemic influenza

Abstract  A live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) is currently approved in the United States for the prevention of influenza in individuals 2–49 years of age. This article summarizes the available data describing the safety and efficacy of LAIV for the prevention of influenza in both children and adults. LAIV is administered as an intranasal spray and has been shown to provide high levels of efficacy against influenza illness caused by both matched and mismatched strains in children and adults. In studies comparing LAIV and inactivated influenza vaccine in children, LAIV recipients experienced 35–53% fewer cases of culture‐confirmed influenza illness caused by antigenically matched strains. Protection through a second influenza season against antigenically matched strains has also been seen in children. In adults, definitive comparative studies of LAIV and inactivated vaccine have not been conducted and no statistically significant differences in efficacy have been demonstrated. The most common adverse reactions with LAIV include runny nose/nasal congestion in all age groups, fever >100°F in children, and sore throat in adults. Formulations of LAIV against pandemic influenza strains, including H5N1, H9N2, and H7N3, are currently being tested in preclinical and phase I clinical studies.

Shedding of live vaccine virus, comparative safety, and influenza-specific antibody responses after administration of live attenuated and inactivated trivalent influenza vaccines to HIV-infected children

HIV-infected children (N=243), >or=5 to <18 years old, receiving stable antiretroviral therapy, were stratified by immunologic status and randomly assigned to receive intranasal live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) or intramuscular trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV). The safety profile after LAIV or TIV closely resembled the previously reported tolerability to these vaccines in children without HIV infection. Post-vaccination hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) antibody responses and shedding of LAIV virus were also similar, regardless of immunological stratum, to antibody responses and shedding previously reported for children without HIV infection. LAIV should be further evaluated for a role in immunizing HIV-infected children.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy children

BACKGROUND

The consequences of influenza in children and adults are mainly absenteeism from school and work. However, the risk of complications is greatest in children and people over 65 years old.

OBJECTIVES

To appraise all comparative studies evaluating the effects of influenza vaccines in healthy children; assess vaccine efficacy (prevention of confirmed influenza) and effectiveness (prevention of influenza-like illness) and document adverse events associated with influenza vaccines.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2007, issue 3); OLD MEDLINE (1950 to 1965); MEDLINE (1966 to September 2007); EMBASE (1974 to September 2007); Biological Abstracts (1969 to September 2007); and Science Citation Index (1974 to September 2007).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort and case-control studies of any influenza vaccine in healthy children under 16 years of age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-one studies with 294,159 observations were included. Sixteen RCTs and 18 cohort studies were included in the analysis of vaccine efficacy and effectiveness. From RCTs, live vaccines showed an efficacy of 82% (95% confidence interval (CI) 71% to 89%) and an effectiveness of 33% (95% CI 28% to 38%) in children older than two compared with placebo or no intervention. Inactivated vaccines had a lower efficacy of 59% (95% CI 41% to 71%) than live vaccines but similar effectiveness: 36% (95% CI 24% to 46%). In children under two, the efficacy of inactivated vaccine was similar to placebo. Variability in study design and presentation of data was such that a meta-analysis of safety outcome data was not feasible. Extensive evidence of reporting bias of safety outcomes from trials of live attenuated vaccines impeded meaningful analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccines are efficacious in children older than two but little evidence is available for children under two. There was a marked difference between vaccine efficacy and effectiveness. No safety comparisons could be carried out, emphasizing the need for standardisation of methods and presentation of vaccine safety data in future studies. It was surprising to find only one study of inactivated vaccine in children under two years, given current recommendations to vaccinate healthy children from six months old in the USA and Canada. If immunisation in children is to be recommended as a public health policy, large-scale studies assessing important outcomes and directly comparing vaccine types are urgently required.

Flu myths: dispelling the myths associated with live attenuated influenza vaccine

Live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV), commercially available since 2003, has not gained widespread acceptance among prescribers. This underuse can be traced to several misperceptions and fears regarding LAIV. This review examines both the facts (safety, immunogenicity, and effectiveness) and the most pervasive myths about LAIV. Live attenuated influenza vaccine is a safe, highly immunogenic, and effective vaccine. It is well tolerated; only mild and transient upper respiratory infection symptoms occur with LAIV vs placebo, even in higher-risk patients with asthma or the early stages of human immunodeficiency virus. It is immunogenic, especially in induction of mucosal immunity. In certain populations, LAIV is as effective as, and in some cases more effective than, inactivated influenza in preventing influenza infection. It appears to be more effective in preventing influenza infection than trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine when the vaccine virus strain does not closely match that of the circulating wild-type virus. Many myths and misperceptions about the vaccine exist, foremost among them the myth of genetic reversion. Independent mutation in 4 gene segments would be required for reversion of the vaccine strain of influenza virus to a wild type, an unlikely and as yet unobserved event. Although shedding of vaccine virus is common, transmission of vaccine virus has been documented only in a single person, who remained asymptomatic. In the age groups for which it is indicated, LAIV is a safe and effective vaccine to prevent influenza infection.

Comparative immunogenicities of frozen and refrigerated formulations of live attenuated influenza vaccine in healthy subjects

The frozen version of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; FluMist) was compared with a newly licensed, refrigerated formulation, the cold-adapted influenza vaccine, trivalent (CAIV-T), for their immunogenicity, safety, and tolerability in healthy subjects 5 to 49 years of age. Eligible subjects were randomized 1:1 to receive CAIV-T or frozen LAIV. Subjects 5 to 8 years of age received two doses of vaccine 46 to 60 days apart; subjects 9 to 49 years of age received one dose of vaccine. Equivalent immunogenicities were defined as serum hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) geometric mean titer (GMT) ratios >0.5 and <2.0 for each of the three vaccine-specific strains. A total of 376 subjects 5 to 8 years of age and 566 subjects 9 to 49 years of age were evaluable. Postvaccination HAI GMT ratios were equivalent for CAIV-T and LAIV. The GMT ratios of CAIV-T/LAIV for the H1N1, H3N2, and B strains were 1.24, 1.02, and 1.00, respectively, for the 5- to 8-year-old age group and 1.14, 1.12, and 0.96, respectively, for the 9- to 49-year-old age group. Seroresponse/seroconversion rates (fourfold or greater rise) were similar in both age groups for each of the three vaccine strains. Within 28 days, the most frequent reactogenicity event in the CAIV-T and LAIV groups was runny nose/nasal congestion, which occurred at higher rates after dose 1 (44% and 42%, respectively) than after dose 2 (41% and 29%, respectively) in the 5- to 8-year-old group. Otherwise, the rates of adverse events (AEs) were similar between the treatment groups and the two age cohorts, with no serious AEs related to the study vaccines. The immunogenicities, reactogenicity events, and AEs were comparable for refrigerated CAIV-T and frozen LAIV.

Efficacy and safety of a live attenuated, cold-adapted influenza vaccine, trivalent against culture-confirmed influenza in young children in Asia

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cold-adapted influenza vaccine, trivalent (CAIV-T) against culture-confirmed influenza in children 12 to <36 months of age during 2 consecutive influenza seasons at multiple sites in Asia.

METHODS

In year 1, 3174 children 12 to <36 months of age were randomized to receive 2 doses of CAIV-T (n = 1900) or placebo (n = 1274) intranasally > or =28 days apart. In year 2, 2947 subjects were rerandomized to receive 1 dose of CAIV-T or placebo.

RESULTS

Mean age at enrollment was 23.5 +/- 7.4 months. In year 1, efficacy of CAIV-T compared with placebo was 72.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): 62.8-80.5%] against antigenically similar influenza subtypes, and 70.1% (95% CI: 60.9-77.3%) against any strain. In year 2, revaccination with CAIV-T demonstrated significant efficacy against antigenically similar (84.3%; 95% CI: 70.1-92.4%) and any (64.2%; 95% CI: 44.2-77.3%) influenza strains. In year 1, fever, runny nose/nasal congestion, decreased activity and appetite, and use of fever medication were more frequent with CAIV-T after dose 1. Runny nose/nasal congestion after dose 2 (year 1) and dose 3 (year 2) and use of fever medication after dose 3 (year 2) were the only other events reported significantly more frequently in CAIV-T recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

CAIV-T was well tolerated and effective in preventing culture-confirmed influenza illness over multiple and complex influenza seasons in young children in Asia.

Live attenuated influenza vaccine in children

Live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) offers a novel approach to influenza vaccination and is approved for healthy individuals 5 to 49 years of age. In placebo-controlled studies in children, LAIV was 73 to 93 percent efficacious, and protection lasted more than 12 months. In head-to-head studies in children, LAIV demonstrated a 35 to 53 percent reduction in influenza attack rates compared with injectable influenza vaccine (TIV) for matched strains. Compared with TIV, LAIV has demonstrated broader serum antibody responses, particularly against mismatched influenza A. The most common adverse events are runny nose and nasal congestion. Increased rates of asthma events were observed in young children. Additional large-scale safety and efficacy studies in young children, including a formal risk-benefit assessment, are ongoing. The results of these analyses will guide potential future use in young children.

Vaccination in patients with HIV infection

Although vaccine-preventable diseases are common in HIV, concerns about vaccine safety and lack of efficacy in this patient population often lead to missed opportunities for vaccination. In this article, we review the literature regarding vaccine risks and benefits and offer recommendations regarding their use and timing in patients with HIV infection.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy children

BACKGROUND

In children and adults the consequences of influenza are mainly absences from school and work, however the risk of complications is greatest in children and people over 65 years old.

OBJECTIVES

To appraise all comparative studies evaluating the effects of influenza vaccines in healthy children; assess vaccine efficacy (prevention of confirmed influenza) and effectiveness (prevention of influenza-like illness) and document adverse events associated with receiving influenza vaccines.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2005); OLD MEDLINE (1966 to 1969); MEDLINE (1969 to December 2004); EMBASE (1974 to December 2004); Biological Abstracts (1969 to December 2004); and Science Citation Index (1974 to December 2004). We wrote to vaccine manufacturers and a number of corresponding authors of studies in the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Any randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort and case-control studies of any influenza vaccine in healthy children under 16 years old.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-one studies involving 263,987 children were included. Seventeen papers were translated from Russian. Fourteen RCTs and 11 cohort studies were included in the analysis of vaccine efficacy and effectiveness. From RCTs, live vaccines showed an efficacy of 79% (95% confidence interval (CI) 48% to 92%) and an effectiveness of 33% (95% CI 28% to 38%) in children older than two years compared with placebo or no intervention. Inactivated vaccines had a lower efficacy of 59% (95% CI 41% to 71%) than live vaccines but similar effectiveness: 36% (95% CI 24% to 46%). In children under two, the efficacy of inactivated vaccine was similar to placebo. Thirty-four reports containing safety outcomes were included, 22 including live vaccines, 8 inactivated vaccines and 4 both types. The most commonly presented short-term outcomes were temperature and local reactions. The variability in design of studies and presentation of data was such that meta-analysis of safety outcome data was not feasible.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccines are efficacious in children older than two years but little evidence is available for children under two. There was a marked difference between vaccine efficacy and effectiveness. That no safety comparisons could be carried out emphasizes the need for standardisation of methods and presentation of vaccine safety data in future studies. It was surprising to find only one study of inactivated vaccine in children under two years, given recent recommendations to vaccinate healthy children from six months old in the USA and Canada. If immunisation in children is to be recommended as public-health policy, large-scale studies assessing important outcomes and directly comparing vaccine types are urgently required.

Immunization of pediatric solid-organ transplantation candidates: immunizations in transplant candidates

Many children who receive solid-organ transplants have not completed their primary immunizations prior to transplantation. This leaves pediatric transplant recipients susceptible to the vaccine preventable illness of childhood, which if acquired post-transplantation are associated with increased rates of complications, hospitalization, graft rejection and mortality. The administration of vaccines to transplant candidates earlier and more rapidly than in the healthy child will improve vaccination rates among transplant recipients while not compromising immunogenicity. The recommended vaccines and vaccine schedule are discussed in detail.

Effect of influenza virus vaccine on the expression of human immunodeficiency virus co-receptor CCR5

BACKGROUND

Administration of influenza vaccine to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected children can lead to increased viral load. CCR5 and CXCR4 are known to play an important role in HIV cell entry and viral replication.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of influenza vaccine on chemokine receptors and on viral load in HIV-infected children.

METHODS

Eight HIV-infected children receiving stable therapy and 11 healthy adults were enrolled. Chemokine expression and immune activation were determined before and 48 hours after influenza vaccination. CCR5 and beta-chemokine gene expression were analyzed using real-time polymerase chain reaction. Viral load was measured at baseline, 48 hours, and 6 to 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Forty-eight hours after influenza vaccination, mean CCR5 expression was significantly decreased on the CD3 (21.1% vs 11.3% in HIV-infected children; P = .02; and 18.3% vs 10.7% in controls; P = .008) and CD4 (13.0% vs 3.6% in the HIV group; P = .04; and 13.6% vs 6.5% in controls; P = .02) lymphocytes. This was observed in conjunction with an increase in HLA-DR expression on T lymphocytes in HIV-infected children (P = .046). No significant changes were observed in HIV viral load, CD3 and CD8 lymphocyte counts, expression of interleukin 2 receptor and CXCR4, or gene expression of CCR5 and beta-chemokines 48 hours after vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Influenza virus vaccine markedly decreased chemokine receptor CCR5 expression on CD4 T lymphocytes. However, this immunomodulatory effect does not seem to affect overall viral replication in HIV-infected children who received highly active antiretroviral therapy.