Immunogenicity and safety of intradermal influenza vaccine in immunocompromized patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Immunogenicity of Intradermal Versus Intramuscular BNT162b2 COVID-19 Booster Vaccine in Patients with Immune-Mediated Dermatologic Diseases: A Non-Inferiority Randomized Controlled Trial

The intradermal route has emerged as a dose-sparing alternative during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Despite its efficacy in healthy populations, its immunogenicity has not been tested in immune-mediated dermatologic disease (IMDD) patients. This assessor-blinded, randomized-controlled, non-inferiority trial recruited patients with two representative IMDDs (i.e., psoriasis and autoimmune bullous diseases) to vaccinate with fractionated-dose intradermal (fID) or standard intramuscular (sIM) BNT162b2 vaccines as a fourth booster dose under block randomization stratified by age, sex, and their skin diseases. Post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and interferon-γ responses measured 4 and 12 weeks post-intervention were serological surrogates used for demonstrating treatment effects. Mean differences in log-normalized outcome estimates were calculated with multivariable linear regression adjusting for their baseline values, systemic immunosuppressants used, and prior COVID-19 vaccination history. The non-inferiority margin was set for fID to retain >80% immunogenicity of sIM. With 109 participants included, 53 received fID (all entered an intention-to-treat analysis). The fID demonstrated non-inferiority to sIM in humoral (mean outcome estimates of sIM: 3.3, ΔfID-sIM [mean, 95%CI]: -0.1, -0.3 to 0.0) and cellular (mean outcome estimates of sIM: 3.2, ΔfID-sIM [mean, 95%CI]: 0.1, -0.2 to 0.3) immunogenicity outcomes. Two psoriasis patients from the fID arm (3.8%) developed injection-site Koebner's phenomenon. Fewer fID recipients experienced post-vaccination fever (fID vs. sIM: 1.9% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.027). The overall incidence of disease flare-ups was low without a statistically significant difference between groups. The intradermal BNT162b2 vaccine is a viable booster option for IMDD patients troubled by post-vaccination fever; its role in mitigating the risk of flare-ups remains unclear.

An Open-label Randomized Controlled Parallel-group Pilot Study Comparing the Immunogenicity of a Standard-, Double-, and Booster-dose Regimens of the 2014 Seasonal Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine in Kidney Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

Immunogenicity of influenza vaccine in transplant recipients is suboptimal and alternative vaccination regimens are necessary.

METHODS

We compared the immunogenicity of a standard-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccination (SDTIIV), double-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccination (DDTIIV), and booster-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccination (BDTIIV) of the 2014 seasonal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in kidney transplant recipients. We randomized 176 participants to SDTIIV (59), DDTIIV (59), and BDTIIV regimens (58). Antibody titers were determined by hemagglutination inhibition at enrollment and 21 d postvaccination. Seroprotection rates (SPRs), seroconversion rates (SCRs), and geometric mean ratios (GMRs) were analyzed separately for participants with low (<1:40) and high (≥1:40) prevaccination antibody titers.

RESULTS

Vaccination was confirmed for 172 participants. Immunogenicity analysis was done for 149 participants who provided postvaccination blood samples. In the subgroup with high prevaccination antibody titers, all vaccination regimens induced SPR > 70% to all antigens, but SCR and GMR were below the recommendations. In the subgroup with low prevaccination antibody titers, DDTIIV and BDTIIV regimens induced adequate SCR > 40% and GMR > 2.5 for all antigens, whereas SDTIIV achieved the same outcomes only for influenza B. SPRs were >70% only after DDTIIV (A/H1N1-77.8%) and BDTIIV (A/H3N2-77.8%). BDTIIV regimen independently increased seroprotection to A/H1N1 (PR = 2.58; P = 0.021) and A/H3N2 (PR = 2.21; P = 0.004), whereas DDTIIV independently increased seroprotection to A/H1N1 (PR = 2.59; P = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that DDTIIV and BDTIIV regimens are more immunogenic than SDTIIV, indicating the need for head-to-head multicenter clinical trials to further evaluate their efficacy.

Intradermal Vaccination: A Potential Tool in the Battle Against the COVID-19 Pandemic?

This narrative review is the final output of an initiative of the SIM (Italian Society of Mesotherapy). A narrative review of scientific literature on the efficacy of fractional intradermal vaccination in comparison with full doses has been conducted for the following pathogens: influenza virus, rabies virus, poliovirus (PV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis A virus (HAV), diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis bacterias (DTP), human papillomavirus (HPV), Japanese encephalitis virus (JE), meningococcus, varicella zoster virus (VZV) and yellow fever virus. The findings suggest that the use of the intradermal route represents a valid strategy in terms of efficacy and efficiency for influenza, rabies and HBV vaccines. Some systematic reviews on influenza vaccines suggest the absence of a substantial difference between immunogenicity induced by a fractional ID dose of up to 20% and the IM dose in healthy adults, elderly, immunocompromised patients and children. Clinical studies of remaining vaccines against other pathogens (HAV, DTP bacterias, JE, meningococcal disease, VZV, and yellow fever virus) are scarce, but promising. In the context of a COVID-19 vaccine shortage, countries should investigate if a fractional dosing scheme may help to save doses and achieve herd immunity quickly. SIM urges the scientific community and health authorities to investigate the potentiality of fractionate intradermal administration in anti-COVID-19 vaccination.

Point your SmartPhone at the code above. If you have a QR code reader the video abstract will appear. Or use:

https://youtu.be/xyVoP0mH6sQ

Immunogenicity and Safety of Reduced-Dose Intradermal vs Intramuscular Influenza Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Low-dose intradermal influenza vaccines could be a suitable alternative to full intramuscular dose during vaccine shortages.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the immunogenicity and safety of the influenza vaccine at reduced or full intradermal doses with full intramuscular doses to inform policy design in the event of vaccine shortages.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for studies published from 2010 until June 5, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

All comparative studies across all ages assessing the immunogenicity or safety of intradermal and intramuscular influenza vaccinations were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted by a single reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. Discrepancies between reviewers were resolved through consensus. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes included geometric mean titer, seroconversion, seroprotection, and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 30 relevant studies were included; 29 studies were randomized clinical trials with 13 759 total participants, and 1 study was a cohort study of 164 021 participants. There was no statistically significant difference in seroconversion rates between the 3-µg, 6-µg, 7.5-µg, and 9-µg intradermal vaccine doses and the 15-µg intramuscular vaccine dose for each of the H1N1, H3N2, and B strains, but rates were significantly higher with the 15-µg intradermal dose compared with the 15-µg intramuscular dose for the H1N1 strain (rate ratio [RR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.01-1.20) and B strain (RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.13-1.73). Seroprotection rates for the 9-µg and 15-µg intradermal doses did not vary significantly compared with the 15-µg intramuscular dose for all the 3 strains, except for the 15-µg intradermal dose for the H1N1 strain, for which rates were significantly higher (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09). Local adverse events were significantly higher with intradermal doses than with the 15-µg intramuscular dose, particularly erythema (3-µg dose: RR, 9.62; 95% CI, 1.07-86.56; 6-µg dose: RR, 23.79; 95% CI, 14.42-39.23; 9-µg dose: RR, 4.56; 95% CI, 3.05-6.82; 15-µg dose: RR, 3.68; 95% CI, 3.19-4.25) and swelling (3-µg dose: RR, 20.16; 95% CI, 4.68-86.82; 9-µg dose: RR, 5.23; 95% CI, 3.58-7.62; 15-µg dose: RR, 3.47 ; 95% CI, 2.21-5.45). Fever and chills were significantly more common with the 9-µg intradermal dose than the 15-µg intramuscular dose (fever: RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.03-1.80; chills: RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) while all other systemic adverse events were not statistically significant for all other doses.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that reduced-dose intradermal influenza vaccination could be a reasonable alternative to standard dose intramuscular vaccination.

Fractional dose of intradermal compared to intramuscular and subcutaneous vaccination - A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Vaccine supply shortages are of global concern. We hypothesise that intradermal (ID) immunisation as an alternative to standard routes might augment vaccine supply utilisation without loss of vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis searching Medline, Embase and Web of Science databases. Studies were included if: licensed, currently available vaccines were used; fractional dose of ID was compared to IM or SC immunisation; primary immunisation schedules were evaluated; immunogenicity, safety data and/or cost were reported. We calculated risk differences (RD). Studies were included in meta-analysis if: a pre-defined immune correlate of protection was assessed; WHO-recommend schedules and antigen doses were used in the control group; the same schedule was applied to both ID and control groups (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020151725).

RESULTS

The primary search yielded 5,873 articles, of which 156 articles were included; covering 12 vaccines. Non-inferiority of immunogenicity with 20-60% of antigen used with ID vaccines was demonstrated for influenza (H1N1: RD -0·01; 95% CI -0·02, 0·01; I2 = 55%, H2N3: RD 0·00; 95% CI -0·01, 0·01; I2 = 0%, B: RD -0·00; 95% CI -0·02, 0·01; I2 = 72%), rabies (RD 0·00; 95% CI -0·02, 0·02; I2 = 0%), and hepatitis B vaccines (RD -0·01; 95% CI -0·04, 0·02; I2 = 20%). Clinical trials on the remaining vaccines yielded promising results, but are scarce.

CONCLUSIONS

There is potential for inoculum/antigen dose-reduction by using ID immunisation as compared to standard routes of administration for some vaccines (e.g. influenza, rabies). When suitable, vaccine trials should include an ID arm.

Innate gene signature distinguishes humoral versus cytotoxic responses to influenza vaccination

BACKGROUND

Systems vaccinology allows cutting-edge analysis of innate biomarkers of vaccine efficacy. We have been exploring novel strategies to shape the adaptive immune response, by targeting innate immune cells through novel immunization routes.

METHODS

This randomized phase I/II clinical study (n=60 healthy subjects aged 18-45 years old) used transcriptomic analysis to discover early biomarkers of immune response quality after transcutaneous (t.c.), intradermal (i.d.), and intramuscular (i.m.) administration of a trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV season 2012-2013) (1:1:1 ratio). Safety and immunogenicity (hemagglutinin inhibition (HI), microneutralization (MN) antibodies and CD4, CD8 effector T cells) were measured at baseline Day (D)0 and at D21. Blood transcriptome was analyzed at D0 and D1.

RESULTS

TIV-specific CD8+GranzymeB+(GRZ) T cells appeared in more individuals immunized by the t.c. and i.d. routes, while immunization by the i.d. and i.m. routes prompted high levels of HI antibody titers and MN against A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 influenza viral strains. The early innate gene signature anticipated immunological outcome by discriminating two clusters of individuals with either distinct humoral or CD8 cytotoxic responses. Several pathways explained this dichotomy confirmed by nine genes and serum level of CXCL10 were correlated with either TIV-specific cytotoxic CD8+GRZ+ T-cell or antibody responses. A logistic regression analysis demonstrated that these nine genes and serum levels of CXCL10 (D1/D0) best foreseen TIV-specific CD8+GRZ+ T-cell and antibody responses at D21.

CONCLUSION

This study provides new insight into the impact of immunization routes and innate signature in the quality of adaptive immune responses.

Assessment of Forces in Intradermal Injection Devices: Hydrodynamic Versus Human Factors

PURPOSE

The force that has to be exerted on the plunger for administering a given amount of fluid in a given time, has an important influence on comfort for the subject and usability for the administrator in intradermal drug delivery. The purpose of this study is to model those forces that are subject-independent, by linking needle and syringe geometry to the force required for ejecting a given fluid at a given ejection rate.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We extend the well-known Hagen-Poiseuille formula to predict pressure drop induced by a fluid passing through a cylindrical body. The model investigates the relation between the pressure drop in needles and the theoretic Hagen-Poiseuille prediction and is validated in fifteen needles from 26G up to 33G suited for intradermal drug delivery. We also provide a method to assess forces exerted by operators in real world conditions.

RESULTS

The model is highly linear in each individual needle with R-square values ranging from 75% up to 99.9%. Ten out of fifteen needles exhibit R-square values above 99%. A proof-of-concept for force assessment is provided by logging forces in operators in real life conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

The force assessment method and the model can be used to pinpoint needle geometry for intradermal injection devices, tuning comfort for subjects and usability for operators.

Immunogenicity, safety and tolerability of intradermal influenza vaccines

Intradermal influenza vaccination has been studied for more than 80 y. The revived interest in this strategy of vaccination is a result of the innovative technologies in needle design allowing more precise injection and making the device easier to use. Furthermore, clinical trials on these novel devices have demonstrated significant dose sparing effects, improved immunogenicity and very few adverse effects. This review compares intradermal vaccination with various devices with subcutaneous and intramuscular vaccination. We also discussed the role of topical adjuvant before intradermal vaccination.

Influenza vaccines: Evaluation of the safety profile

The safety of vaccines is a critical factor in maintaining public trust in national vaccination programs. Vaccines are recommended for children, adults and elderly subjects and have to meet higher safety standards, since they are administered to healthy subjects, mainly healthy children. Although vaccines are strictly monitored before authorization, the possibility of adverse events and/or rare adverse events cannot be totally eliminated. Two main types of influenza vaccines are currently available: parenteral inactivated influenza vaccines and intranasal live attenuated vaccines. Both display a good safety profile in adults and children. However, they can cause adverse events and/or rare adverse events, some of which are more prevalent in children, while others with a higher prevalence in adults. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of influenza vaccine safety according to target groups, vaccine types and production methods.

Immune responses to intradermal and intramuscular inactivated influenza vaccine among older age group

BACKGROUD

Influenza viruses cause substantial morbidity, especially in older age groups. Thus, they are amongst high priority groups for routine vaccination. However, vaccine-induced immune responses and effectiveness were reported as relatively low. This study aims to systemically compare the immune responses elicited by intramuscular (IM) and intradermal (ID) injections with inactivated seasonal influenza vaccine among the older age group.

METHODS

A prospective, open-label, randomized study with a total of 221 adults (>60 years) were enrolled and randomized into 2 groups. Group I (n = 111) received an IM inactivated seasonal influenza vaccine while Group II (n = 110) received the same vaccine ID. Demographics and co-morbidity were collected at baseline. Safety data was collected 3 days post-vaccination using diary card. HAI, NAb and NAI titers were assessed prior to vaccination and at 30, 45, and 60 days post-vaccination. Data was analyzed using SPSS 11.5.

RESULTS

Both groups had similar BMI and co-morbidity. For ID and IM groups, significant differences were observed for seroconversion rate measured using HAI against H1N1 and H3N2 (58/111 vs 44/110 and 68/111 vs 54/110, respectively) being higher for those aged 60-65 years. However, no differences in HI antibody against B/Phuket were seen. For ID route, history of hyperlipidemia and hypertension were factors associated with high seroconversion rate towards influenza A (p = .001). The seroconversion rate risk ratio were 1.31 and 1.25 (p < .05) against A/California/07/09(H1N1) and A/Songkha/308/13 (H3N2), respectively. Interestingly, the GMT (95% CI) of baseline NAI antibodies among both groups were high (56.57 and 54.01 in the ID and IM groups, respectively). A 4-fold increase measured by NAI against A/California/07/09 (H1N1) were detected in 16.67% and 20% of participants who received ID or IM vaccination, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The seroconversion rates of HAI, NAb and NAI were modest, especially in those >65 years of age. However, it was higher in the ID group as compared to the IM group.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02101749.

Vaccination recommendations for the adult immunosuppressed patient: A systematic review and comprehensive field synopsis

BACKGROUND

Immunosuppressed patients are at risk of severe viral infections-related complications. National and international vaccination guidelines have been developed to decrease the mortality risk associated with these infections. However, a summary of these guidelines and the value of immunisation in this population is missing.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize specific guidelines regarding vaccination in immunosuppressed patients.

METHODS

We performed a literature search based on last update vaccine guidelines in immunosuppressed adult patients published between 1/1/2005-1/31/2016 in English or French language using PubMed, Cochrane and Embase, as well as relevant medical society websites.

RESULTS

Of the 389 citations identified, 12 guidelines were selected Three additional guidelines were selected by searching on the websites from medical societies of each specialty. 15 guidelines were included, involving 19 medical societies issued from the US (n = 6), international collaboration (n = 3), UK (n = 2), Canada (n = 1), Australia (n = 1), France (n = 1), and Germany (n = 1). These guidelines provide recommendations on vaccination in asplenic patients (n = 5), cancer patients (n = 4), HIV patients (n = 5), hematopoietic stem cell recipients (n = 4), inflammatory bowel diseases patients (n = 5), psoriasis patients (n = 4), primary immunocompromised patients (n = 3), inflammatory rheumatic diseases patients (n = 6), and solid organ transplant recipients (n = 5). All guidelines recommended pneumococcal and injectable influenza vaccines. Other inactivated vaccines were recommended only in high risk patients. Live vaccines were usually contraindicated in patients under immunosuppressive therapy and/or in HIV patients with a CD4 count under 200/mm³.

CONCLUSION

Pneumococcal and injectable influenza are the two essential vaccines recommended in all immunocompromised patients. Other inactivated vaccines are only indicated in high risk patients. Live vaccines are usually contraindicated.

Potential Cost-Effectiveness of an Influenza Vaccination Program Offering Microneedle Patch for Vaccine Delivery in Children

Objective

The influenza vaccine coverage rate of children is low in Hong Kong. Microneedle patches (MNPs) is a technology under development for painless delivery of vaccines. This study aimed to examine the potential clinical outcomes and direct medical costs of an influenza program offering MNP vaccine to children who have declined intramuscular (IM) vaccine in Hong Kong.

Methods

A decision model was designed to compare potential outcomes between IM vaccine program and a program offering MNP vaccine to those declined IM vaccine (IM/MNP program) in a hypothetical cohort of children over one-year time horizon. The model outcomes included direct medical cost, influenza infection rate, mortality rate, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) loss. Model inputs were retrieved from published literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of model results.

Results

In base-case analysis, IM/MNP program was more costly per child (USD19.13 versus USD13.69; USD1 = HKD7.8) with lower influenza infection rate (98.9 versus 124.8 per 1,000 children), hospitalization rate (0.83 versus 1.05 per 1,000 children) and influenza-related mortality rate (0.00042 versus 0.00052 per 1,000 children) when compared to IM program. The incremental cost per QALY saved (ICER) of IM/MNP program versus IM program was 27,200 USD/QALY. Using gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of Hong Kong (USD40,594) as threshold of willingness-to-pay (WTP) per QALY, one-way sensitivity analysis found ICER of IM/MNP to exceed WTP when duration of illness in outpatient setting was <5.7 days or cost per MNP vaccine was >1.39-time of IM vaccine cost. In 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, IM/MNP program was the preferred option in 57.28% and 91.68% of the time, using 1x and 3x GDP per capita as WTP threshold, respectively.

Conclusion

Acceptance of IM/MNP program as the preferred program was subject to the WTP threshold, duration of illness in outpatient settings, and cost of MNP vaccine.

Fluzone® intra-dermal (Intanza®/Istivac® Intra-dermal): An updated overview

Influenza is a highly contagious respiratory acute viral disease which imposes a very heavy burden both in terms of epidemiology and costs, in the developed countries as well as in the developing ones. It represents a serious public health concern and vaccination constitutes an important tool to reduce or at least mitigate its burden. Despite the existence of a broad armamentarium against influenza and despite all the efforts and recommendations of international organisms to broaden immunization, influenza vaccination coverage is still far from being optimal. This, taken together with logistic and technical difficulties that can result into vaccine shortage, makes intra-dermal (ID) vaccines, such as Fluzone® ID and Intanza®, particularly attractive. ID vaccines are comparable and, in some cases, superior to intra-muscular/sub-cutaneous vaccines in terms of immunogenicity, safety, reactogenicity, tolerability and cross-protection profiles, as well as in terms of patient preference, acceptance and vaccine selection. Further advances, such as Fluzone® ID with alternative B strains and Quadrivalent Fluzone® ID or the possibility of self-administering the vaccines, make influenza ID vaccines even more valuable.

Intradermal vaccination for infants and children

Intradermal (ID) vaccination induces a more potent immune response and requires lower vaccine doses as compared with standard vaccination routes. To deliver ID vaccines effectively and consistently, an ID delivery device has been developed and is commercially available for adults. The clinical application of ID vaccines for infants and children is much anticipated because children receive several vaccines, on multiple occasions, during infancy and childhood. However, experience with ID vaccines is limited and present evidence is sparse and inconsistent. ID delivery devices are not currently available for infants and children, but recent studies have examined skin thickness in this population and reported that it did not differ in proportion to body size in infants, children, and adults. These results are helpful in developing new ID devices and for preparing new vaccines in infants and children.

Cost-effectiveness of an influenza vaccination program offering intramuscular and intradermal vaccines versus intramuscular vaccine alone for elderly

BACKGROUND

Intradermal (ID) injection is an alternative route for influenza vaccine administration in elderly with potential improvement of vaccine coverage. This study aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of an influenza vaccination program offering ID vaccine to elderly who had declined intramuscular (IM) vaccine from the perspective of Hong Kong public healthcare provider.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was used to simulate outcomes of two programs: IM vaccine alone (IM program), and IM or ID vaccine (IM/ID program) in a hypothetic cohort of elderly aged 65 years. Outcome measures included influenza-related direct medical cost, infection rate, mortality rate, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) loss, and incremental cost per QALY saved (ICER). Model inputs were derived from literature. Sensitivity analyses evaluated the impact of uncertainty of model variables.

RESULTS

In base-case analysis, the IM/ID program was more costly (USD52.82 versus USD47.59 per individual to whom vaccine was offered) with lower influenza infection rate (8.71% versus 9.65%), mortality rate (0.021% versus 0.024%) and QALYs loss (0.00336 versus 0.00372) than the IM program. ICER of IM/ID program was USD14,528 per QALY saved. One-way sensitivity analysis found ICER of IM/ID program to exceed willingness-to-pay threshold (USD39,933) when probability of influenza infection in unvaccinated elderly decreased from 10.6% to 5.4%. In 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations of elderly populations of Hong Kong, the IM/ID program was the preferred option in 94.7% of time.

CONCLUSIONS

An influenza vaccination program offering ID vaccine to elderly who had declined IM vaccine appears to be a highly cost-effective option.