Influenza virus vaccination of patients with chronic lung disease

The Influence of Influenza Virus Infections in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Introduction

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common disease and is preventable and treatable. A previous study showed that influenza virus infections were also associated with the risk of acute exacerbation in patients with COPD, and other studies showed that the influenza virus might increase the risk of stroke. However, studies on the influence of influenza infection among COPD patients are limited. In this study, we review the role of influenza infection in contributing to mortality, pneumonia, respiratory failure, COPD acute exacerbation, and ischemic stroke among COPD patients.

Materials and Methods

We performed a population-based cohort study of COPD patients using data from Taiwan between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2019. We excluded patients with lung cancer, lung transplantation and asthma. We also excluded patients who lacked COPD medication prescriptions and those treated with anti-influenza drugs without flu diagnosis records. Patients with missing or incomplete data were also excluded from the study cohort.

Results

After 1:1 matching by age, sex, COPD duration, diagnosed years and comorbidities, we enrolled 10,855 cases and controls for further analysis. The risks of pneumonia, respiratory failure, COPD acute exacerbation, and ischemic stroke were 1.770 (95% CI=1.638–1.860; P<0.0001), 1.097 (95% CI=1.008–1.194; P=0.0319), 1.338 (95% CI=1.248–1.435; P<0.0001), and 1.134 (95% CI=1.039–1.239, P=0.0051), respectively, in the influenza infection group compared with COPD patients without influenza infection.

Conclusion

Influenza infections are linked to an increased risk of ischemic stroke, pneumonia, respiratory failure, and COPD acute exacerbation among COPD patients. In conclusion, patients with COPD need to be closely monitored after having an influenza infection.

Bacterial and viral infections and related inflammatory responses in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

In chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, bacterial and viral infections play a relevant role in worsening lung function and, therefore, favour disease progression. The inflammatory response to lung infections may become a specific indication of the bacterial and viral infections. We here review data on the bacterial-viral infections and related airways and lung parenchyma inflammation in stable and exacerbated COPD, focussing our attention on the prevalent molecular pathways in these different clinical conditions. The roles of macrophages, autophagy and NETosis are also briefly discussed in the context of lung infections in COPD. Controlling their combined response may restore a balanced lung homeostasis, reducing the risk of lung function decline. KEY MESSAGE Bacteria and viruses can influence the responses of the innate and adaptive immune system in the lung of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. The relationship between viruses and bacterial colonization, and the consequences of the imbalance of these components can modulate the inflammatory state of the COPD lung. The complex actions involving immune trigger cells, which activate innate and cell-mediated inflammatory responses, could be responsible for the clinical consequences of irreversible airflow limitation, lung remodelling and emphysema in COPD patients.

Immunogenicity of trivalent seasonal influenza vaccine in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Objective: Current evidence on the immunogenicity of influenza vaccination in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is limited. To address this need for additional knowledge, we conducted a study on the immunogenicity of trivalent seasonal influenza vaccine (TIV) in COPD patients.Methods: We recruited patients from respiratory outpatient clinics of three hospitals in Tangshan, Hebei province who had stable confirmed COPD, were less than 80 y old, and reported not having had influenza or receiving TIV during the study season prior to enrollment. Patients who had a history of allergy to any TIV component or were classified as having very severe COPD were excluded from the study. Eligible and consenting participants were given one dose of TIV after obtaining a baseline blood sample. A second blood sample was obtained 5 weeks later. We used hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assays to measure antibody responses. We considered seropositive to be an HI titer ≥1:10. We considered seroprotection to be an HI titer ≥1:40 and seroconversion to be either a change from seronegative to a post-vaccination titer of ≥1:40 or a fourfold rise in antibody titer among baseline seropositive subjects. Each subject was followed for 1 month to assess the frequency and type of adverse events.Results: Eighty-eight subjects completed our study; the median age was 64 y; most (62.5%) had moderately severe COPD; 48.9% of the subjects had comorbid conditions in addition to COPD. Post-vaccination seropositive rates for influenza H1N1, H3N2, and B were all 100%; corresponding seroprotection rates were 96.6%, 93.2%, and 98.9%; seroconversion rates were 81.8%, 87.5%, and 75.0%. There were no statistical differences in seroconversion (P = .10) and seroprotection (P = .30) among the three types of influenza virus. Geometric mean titers (1:) of HI antibodies to H1N1, H3N2, and B were 18.8 (95% CI: 14.0-25.1), 12.2 (95% CI: 9.6-15.4), and 31.8 (95% CI: 26.1-38.8) at baseline, and 267.0 (95% CI: 213.8-333.4), 190.3 (95% CI: 151.7-238.6), and 201.1 (95% CI: 166.5-242.8) after vaccination.Conclusion: The immunogenicity of one dose of influenza vaccine was excellent in COPD patients. Our study supports recommending influenza vaccination for COPD patients to provide protection from influenza and its complications.

Effects of influenza vaccination on clinical outcomes of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Influenza is a threat to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), influenza vaccination help to reduce incidence of influenza infection, however, whether it is beneficial to COPD patients in clinical outcomes lacks for evidence due to limited studies and participations.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and China Science and Technology Journal Database (CSTJ) to retrieve eligible studies regardless of study design published before August 2020, and conducted meta-analysis with odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD). The quality of included studies and pooled evidences were assessed. Narrative summaries were provided where data were insufficient for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

2831 COPD patients were included, the pooled results showed that influenza vaccination reduced the exacerbations (P = 0.0001) and trends of hospitalizations (P = 0.09) in COPD patients. Further subgroup analysis showed that the reduction of exacerbations and hospitalizations were significant in patients with FEV₁<50 % predicted (P = 0.01 and P < 0.0001 respectively), but not in those with FEV₁≥50 % predicted (P = 0.23 and P = 0.76 respectively). No significant effect of influenza vaccination on all-cause mortality was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support a protective role of influenza vaccination in COPD patients, a yearly influenza vaccination should be strongly recommended for all COPD patients, especially those with severe airflow limitation, to reduce possible influenza infection, and thus associated exacerbations and hospitalizations.

Respiratory viral infection: a potential "missing link" in the pathogenesis of COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is currently the third most common cause of global mortality. Acute exacerbations of COPD frequently necessitate hospital admission to enable more intensive therapy, incurring significant healthcare costs. COPD exacerbations are also associated with accelerated lung function decline and increased risk of mortality. Until recently, bacterial pathogens were believed to be responsible for the majority of disease exacerbations. However, with the advent of culture-independent molecular diagnostic techniques it is now estimated that viruses are detected during half of all COPD exacerbations and are associated with poorer clinical outcomes. Human rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus and influenza are the most commonly detected viruses during exacerbation. The role of persistent viral infection (adenovirus) has also been postulated as a potential pathogenic mechanism in COPD. Viral pathogens may play an important role in driving COPD progression by acting as triggers for exacerbation and subsequent lung function decline whilst the role of chronic viral infection remains a plausible hypothesis that requires further evaluation. There are currently no effective antiviral strategies for patients with COPD. Herein, we focus on the current understanding of the cellular and molecular mechanisms of respiratory viral infection in COPD.

Influenza vaccine for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccinations are currently recommended in the care of people with COPD, but these recommendations are based largely on evidence from observational studies, with very few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reported. Influenza infection causes excess morbidity and mortality in people with COPD, but there is also the potential for influenza vaccination to cause adverse effects, or not to be cost effective.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether influenza vaccination in people with COPD reduces respiratory illness, reduces mortality, is associated with excess adverse events, and is cost effective.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, two clinical trials registries, and reference lists of articles. A number of drug companies we contacted also provided references. The latest search was carried out in December 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs that compared live or inactivated virus vaccines with placebo, either alone or with another vaccine, in people with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data. All entries were double-checked. We contacted study authors and drug companies for missing information. We used standard methods expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 RCTs with 6750 participants, but only six of these included people with COPD (2469 participants). The others were conducted on elderly and high-risk individuals, some of whom had chronic lung disease. Interventions compared with placebo were inactivated virus injections and live attenuated intranasal virus vaccines. Some studies compared intra-muscular inactivated vaccine and intranasal live attenuated vaccine with intra-muscular inactivated vaccine and intranasal placebo. Studies were conducted in the UK, USA and Thailand.Inactivated vaccine reduced the total number of exacerbations per vaccinated participant compared with those who received placebo (mean difference (MD) -0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.64 to -0.11; P = 0.006; two RCTs, 180 participants; low quality evidence). This was due to the reduction in 'late' exacerbations, occurring after three or four weeks (MD -0.39, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.18; P = 0.0004; two RCTs, 180 participants; low quality evidence). Both in people with COPD, and in older people (only a minority of whom had COPD), there were significantly more local adverse reactions in people who had received the vaccine, but the effects were generally mild and transient.There was no evidence of an effect of intranasal live attenuated virus when this was added to inactivated intramuscular vaccination.Two studies evaluating mortality for influenza vaccine versus placebo were too small to have detected any effect on mortality. However, a large study (N=2215) noted that there was no difference in mortality when adding live attenuated virus to inactivated virus vaccination, AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: It appeared, from the limited number of RCTs we were able to include, all of which were more than a decade old, that inactivated vaccine reduced exacerbations in people with COPD. The size of effect was similar to that seen in large observational studies, and was due to a reduction in exacerbations occurring three or more weeks after vaccination, and due to influenza. There was a mild increase in transient local adverse effects with vaccination, but no evidence of an increase in early exacerbations. Addition of live attenuated virus to the inactivated vaccine was not shown to confer additional benefit.

Seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with COPD: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Influenza is a frequent cause of exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Exacerbations are associated with worsening of the airflow obstruction, hospitalisation, reduced quality of life, disease progression, death, and ultimately, substantial healthcare-related costs. Despite longstanding recommendations to vaccinate vulnerable high-risk groups against seasonal influenza, including patients with COPD, vaccination rates remain sub-optimal in this population.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to summarise current evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies on the immunogenicity, safety, efficacy, and effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with COPD. The selection of relevant articles was based on a three-step selection procedure according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The search yielded 650 unique hits of which 48 eligible articles were screened in full-text.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles describing 13 different studies were found to be pertinent to this review. Results of four RCTs and one observational study demonstrate that seasonal influenza vaccination is immunogenic in patients with COPD. Two studies assessed the occurrence of COPD exacerbations 14 days after influenza vaccination and found no evidence of an increased risk of exacerbation. Three RCTs showed no significant difference in the occurrence of systemic effects between groups receiving influenza vaccine or placebo. Six out of seven studies on vaccine efficacy or effectiveness indicated long-term benefits of seasonal influenza vaccination, such as reduced number of exacerbations, reduced hospitalisations and outpatient visits, and decreased all-cause and respiratory mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional large and well-designed observational studies would contribute to understanding the impact of disease severity and patient characteristics on the response to influenza vaccination. Overall, the evidence supports a positive benefit-risk ratio for seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with COPD, and supports current vaccination recommendations in this population.

Influenza vaccination for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: understanding immunogenicity, efficacy and effectiveness

Influenza infection is an important cause of global mortality and morbidity with the greatest impact on older people and those with chronic disease. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are particularly vulnerable to influenza, with evidence for increased incidence and severity of infection. In this patient group influenza is associated with exacerbations and pneumonia which result in a significant healthcare burden and premature mortality. Influenza vaccination and in particular the use of the seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) is recommended for patients with COPD. The evidence base for its effects in this population is, however, limited. Available data suggest that immunogenicity is variable in COPD but the underlying mechanisms are not completely understood. The contribution of age, disease severity, comorbidity and treatments to vaccine responses has only been investigated in a limited manner. Existing data suggest that key immune mechanisms governing T- and B-cell responses are adversely affected by these factors. The efficacy of TIV has been studied in a number of small clinical trials which form the basis of a Cochrane review. Here evidence for effect is conflicting depending on individual trial design and inclusions. Overall, TIV offers protection against influenza infection in the trial setting but further studies are required to stratify patients and enable prediction of inadequate responses. Larger-scale clinical studies have largely been observational and have often been conducted in consort with pneumonia vaccination. Overall the mortality benefit of TIV in COPD is suggested by a number studies but the impact on exacerbation prevention is less clear. Influenza vaccination currently plays an important role in disease prevention in COPD. However, we postulate that a more in-depth understanding of mechanisms of response in the context of a highly heterogeneous disease will lead to a more informed approach to vaccination and greater benefit for the individual patient.

Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccination for Individuals with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the leading causes of death globally. In addition to the mortality associated with it, people with COPD experience significant morbidity, making this set of conditions a major public health concern. Infections caused by influenza virus are a preventable cause of morbidity and vaccination has been shown to be effective. The evidence of their benefit in persons with COPD mainly comes from high-income countries where influenza vaccination is used in routine practice, but little is known about the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and scalability of vaccination in low- and middle-income countries. We therefore systematically reviewed and present evidence related to vaccination against influenza in persons with COPD with a special focus on studies from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Available data from 19 studies suggest that the use of influenza vaccine in persons with COPD is beneficial, cost-effective, and may be relevant for low- and middle-income countries. Wider implementation of this intervention needs to take into account the health care delivery systems of LMICs and use of prevalent viral strains in vaccines to be most cost effective.

Intranasal administration of influenza vaccines: current status

AbstractThis review article focuses on intranasal immunisation against influenza,although it also encompasses antigen uptake and processing in the nasopharyngealpassages, host defence from influenza and current influenza vaccination practices.Improvement of current vaccination strategies is clearly required; current proceduresinvolve repeated annual injections that sometimes fail to protect the recipient. It isenvisaged that nonpercutaneous immunisation would be more attractive to potentialvaccinees, thus improving uptake and coverage. As well as satisfying noninvasivecriteria, intranasal influenza immunisation has a number of perceived immunologicaladvantages over current procedures. Perhaps one of the greatest attributes of thisapproach is its potential to evoke the secretion of haemagglutinin-specific IgAantibodies in the upper respiratory tract, the main site of viral infection. Inactivated influenza vaccines have the advantage that they have a long historyof good tolerability as injected immunogens, and in this respect are possibly morelikely to be licensed than attenuated viruses. Inert influenza vaccines are poormucosal immunogens, requiring several administrations, or prior immunologicalpriming, in order to engender significant antibody responses. The use of vaccinedelivery systems or mucosal adjuvants serves to appreciably improve theimmunogenicity of mucosally applied inactivated influenza vaccines. As is the casewhen they are introduced parenterally, inactivated influenza vaccines are relativelypoor stimulators of virus-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte activity following nasalinoculation. Live attenuated intranasal influenza vaccines are at a far moreadvanced stage of clinical readiness (phase III versus phase I). With the use of liveattenuated vaccines, it is possible to stimulate mucosal and cell-mediatedimmunological responses of a similar kind to those elicited by natural influenzainfection. In children, recombinant live attenuated cold-adapted influenza viruses arewell tolerated. Moreover, cold-adapted influenza viruses usually stimulate protectiveimmunity following only a single nasal inoculation. Safety of recombinant liveattenuated cold-adapted influenza viruses has also been demonstrated in high riskindividuals with cystic fibrosis, asthma, cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus.They are not suitable for immunising immunocompromised patients, however, andare poorly efficacious in individuals with pre-existing immunity to strains closelyantigenically matched with the recombinant virus. According to the reviewedliterature, it is apparent that intranasal administration of vaccine as an aerosol issuperior to administration as nose drops. The information reviewed in this papersuggests that nasally administered influenza vaccines could make a substantialimpact on the human and economic cost of influenza.

Comparison of outpatient visits and hospitalisations, in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, before and after influenza vaccination

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of influenza vaccination on acute respiratory illness (ARI) and on acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) during a 2-year study conducted prior to and after influenza vaccination in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-seven male patients with COPD were stratified on the basis of their forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) as having mild, moderate and severe COPD. These patients were evaluated for a total duration of 2 years; 1 year prior to vaccination and for a period of 1 year following influenza vaccination. The vaccine (split virion, inactivated) composed of A/New Caledonia/20/99 (H1N1); A/California/7/2004(H3N2) and B/Shanghai/361/2002 strains all with 15 mug of haemagglutinin in each 0.5 ml dose.

MEASUREMENTS

The number of episodes and severity of ARI and AECOPD, classified as outpatient treatment, hospitalisation and requirement of mechanical ventilation, for a period of 1 year before and 1 year after influenza vaccination were recorded.

RESULTS

The incidence of ARI and AECOPD was 28.6 per 100 person-years prior to vaccination and 9.7 per 100 person-years postvaccination [relative risk (RR) 0.33; p = 0.005). Among the exacerbations because of natural infections prior to vaccination the incidences were 16.12, 42.1 and 33.14 per 100 person-years in the patients with mild, moderate and severe COPD respectively. These were significantly lower following vaccination with the incidences being 6.5, 18.5 and 8.42 per 100 person-years in the same subgroup of patients. Vaccine effectiveness in patients with mild COPD was 60% RR, 0.4 (p = 0.26); in patients with moderate COPD was 60% RR, 0.4 (p = 0.56); and in patients with severe COPD was 75% RR, 0.25 (p = 0.02). The total number of outpatient visits and hospitalisations before vaccination was eight and 14, respectively for a duration of 1 year in the total 87 patients with COPD being studied which decreased significantly to four outpatient visits and four hospitalisations postvaccination (p = 0.02). The overall effectiveness of influenza vaccination was 67%.

CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccination is highly effective in the prevention of ARI. Maximum protection was found to be in patients with severe COPD. Influenza vaccination in patients is associated with fewer outpatient visits and fewer hospitalisations.

Influenza vaccine for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccinations are currently recommended in the care of people with COPD, but these recommendations are based largely on evidence from observational studies with very few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reported. Influenza infection causes excess morbidity and mortality in COPD patients but there is also the potential for influenza vaccination to cause adverse effects or not to be cost effective.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the evidence from RCTs for a treatment effect of influenza vaccination in COPD subjects. Outcomes of interest were exacerbation rates, hospitalisations, mortality, lung function and adverse effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials, and reference lists of articles. References were also provided by a number of drug companies we contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs that compared live or inactivated virus vaccines with placebo, either alone or with another vaccine in persons with COPD. Studies of people with asthma were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers extracted data. All entries were double checked. Study authors and drug companies were contacted for missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven trials were included but only six of these were specifically performed in COPD patients. The others were conducted on elderly and high-risk individuals, some of whom had chronic lung disease. Inactivated vaccine in COPD patients resulted in a significant reduction in the total number of exacerbations per vaccinated subject compared with those who received placebo (weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.37, 95% confidence interval -0.64 to -0.11, P = 0.006). This was due to the reduction in "late" exacerbations occurring after three or four weeks (WMD -0.39, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.18, P = 0.0004). In Howells 1961, the number of patients experiencing late exacerbations was also significantly less (odds ratio 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.45, P = 0.002). Both Howells 1961 and Wongsurakiat 2004 found that inactivated influenza vaccination reduced influenza -related respiratory infections (WMD 0.19, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.48, P = 0.0005). In both COPD patient and in elderly patients (only a minority of whom had COPD), there was a significant increase in the occurrence of local adverse reactions in vaccinees, but the effects were generally mild and transient. There was no evidence of an effect of intranasal live attenuated virus when this was added to inactivated intramuscular vaccination. The studies are too small to have detected any effect on mortality. An updated search conducted in September 2001 did not yield any further studies. A search in 2003 yielded two further reports of the same eligible study Gorse 2003. A search in 2004 yielded two reports of the another eligible study Wongsurakiat 2004. The author informed us of another report of the same study Wongsurakiat 2004/2.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It appears, from the limited number of studies performed, that inactivated vaccine reduces exacerbations in COPD patients. The size of effect was similar to that seen in large observational studies, and was due to a reduction in exacerbations occurring three or more weeks after vaccination, and due to influenza. There is a mild increase in transient local adverse effects with vaccination, but no evidence of an increase in early exacerbations.

Effect of influenza vaccinations on immune response and serum eotaxin level in patients with allergic bronchial asthma

BACKGROUND

One of the most promising markers of allergic inflammation is eotaxin, which has a selective influence on the migration of eosinophils. Its serum content significantly correlates with the intensity of allergic symptoms, so it might be interesting to know whether vaccination has any influence on serum expression of this chemokine.

AIMS

Comparison of the humoral response to influenza vaccine and post-vaccination changes in the serum eotaxin level in patients with allergic bronchial asthma and healthy controls.

METHODS

Forty-two asthmatics and 45 healthy individuals were vaccinated with a single dose of influenza subunit vaccine (Influvac). The serum eotaxin level and the antibody response to haemagglutinin (HI) and neuraminidase (NI) glycoproteins were measured before and after vaccination.

RESULTS

A significant increase of geometric mean titres of HI and NI was observed in both groups. There were no significant differences between the groups in meanfold increase of HI and NI titres, response rate and protective level of HI. After vaccination, a significant decrease of the mean serum eotaxin value was observed in patients with asthma (149.4 +/- 71.0 versus 125.1 +/- 67.0, p= 0.0017), while no similar effect was present in healthy individuals (153.4 +/- 56.9 versus 159.3 +/- 54.4, p= 0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that in patients with allergic bronchial asthma influenza vaccinations assure efficient protective antibody level and modulate the serum level of eotaxin.

Immunomodulating effect of influenza vaccination in the elderly differing in health status

The aim of this study was to analyse whether split influenza vaccine may elicit NK cytotoxic response in the vaccinated elderly people and whether this effect may be maintained over few weeks after vaccination. It was also worth investigating the relation between NK activity in the vaccinated and specific immune protection against influenza and non-specific against other infections. Two groups of volunteers were vaccinated with trivalent split viron influenza vaccine in two consecutive seasons (1999/2000; 2000/2001). The elderly group consisted of 142 people (65-92 years old) in the first season and 110 in the second; while the young (16-44 years old) of 98 and 67 people, respectively. An analysis of NK cytotoxic activity had been done before vaccination, two days, one month and fifth months thereafter. The results revealed that vaccination with the influenza vaccine had an augmenting effect on NK activity, in all groups examined, in both epidemic seasons, visible at two days and 1 month after the vaccination. In the elderly high pre- and post-vaccination NK activity was related to higher titers of anti-hemagglutinin, better health status and lower incidence of all cause respiratory tract infections. At the second vaccination, most of the elderly with chronic medical conditions and high NK activity, who did not attain the protective level of anti-hemagglutinins in the first season, converted into the protected. High pre- and post-vaccination NK activity predisposes elderly people to the protective humoral anti-hemagglutinin response and gives better protection from respiratory tract infections.

Intranasal Cold-Adapted Influenza Virus Vaccine Combined with Inactivated Influenza Virus Vaccines

Although influenza vaccine delivery strategies have improved coverage rates to unprecedented levels nationally among persons aged 65 years and older, influenza remains one of the greatest vaccine-preventable threats to public health among elderly in the US. A new, intranasal live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) was recently approved by the US FDA for use in persons aged 5-49 years, which excludes the elderly population. Limitations of immune response to inactivated influenza vaccine (IAIV) and effectiveness of current influenza vaccination strategies among the elderly suggest that a combined approach using LAIV and/or the IAIV in various permutations might benefit this group. We explore characteristics of the LAIV, data regarding its utility in protecting against influenza in the elderly, and challenges and opportunities regarding potential combined inactivated/live attenuated vaccination strategies for the elderly. Although LAIV appears to hold promise either alone or in combination with IAIV, large well conducted randomised trials are necessary to define further the role of LAIV in preventing influenza morbidity and mortality among the elderly. We also suggest that innovative vaccine coverage strategies designed to optimise prevention and control of influenza and minimise viral transmission in the community must accompany, in parallel, the acquisition of clinical trials data to best combat morbidity and mortality from influenza.

Cold-adapted live influenza vaccine versus inactivated vaccine: systemic vaccine reactions, local and systemic antibody response, and vaccine efficacy. A meta-analysis

Since the 1940s, influenza vaccines are inactivated and purified virus or virus subunit preparations (IIV) administered by the intramuscular route. Since decades, attempts have been made to construct, as an alternative, attenuated live influenza vaccines (LIV) for intranasal administration. Presently, the most successful LIV is derived from the cold-adapted master strains A/Ann Arbor/6/60 (H2N2) and B/Ann Arbor/1/66 (AA-LIV, for Ann-Arbor-derived live influenza vaccine). It has been claimed that AA-LIV is more efficacious than IIV. In order to assess differences between the two vaccines with respect to systemic reactogenicity, antibody response, and efficacy, we performed a meta-analysis on eighteen randomised comparative clinical trials involving a total of 5000 vaccinees of all ages. Pooled odds ratios (AA-LIV versus IIV) were calculated according to the random effects model. The two vaccines were associated with similarly low frequencies of systemic vaccine reactions (pooled odds ratio: 0.96, 95% confidence interval: 0.74-1.24). AA-LIV induced significantly lower levels of serum haemagglutination inhibiting antibody and significantly greater levels of local IgA antibody (influenza virus-specific respiratory IgA assayed by ELISA in nasal wash specimens) than IIV. Yet, although they predominantly stimulate different antibody compartments, the two vaccines were similarly efficacious in preventing culture-positive influenza illness. In all trials assessing clinical efficacy, the odds ratios were not significantly different from one (point of equivalence). The pooled odds ratio for influenza A-H3N2 was 1.50 (95% CI: 0.80-2.82), and for A-H1N1, 1.03 (95% CI: 0.58-1.82). The choice between the two vaccine types should be based on weighing the advantage of the attractive non-invasive mode of administration of AA-LIV, against serious concerns about the biological risks inherent to large-scale use of infectious influenza virus, in particular the hazard of gene reassortment with non-human influenza virus strains.

Prophylaxis and treatment of influenza virus infection

Influenza virus infections remain an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Furthermore, a recurrence of pandemic influenza remains a real possibility. There are now effective ways to both prevent and treat influenza. Prevention of infection is most effectively accomplished by vaccination. Vaccination with the inactivated, intramuscular influenza vaccine has been clearly demonstrated to reduce serious morbidity and mortality associated with influenza infection, especially in groups of patients at high risk (e.g. the elderly). However, the inactivated, intramuscular vaccine does not strongly induce cell-mediated or mucosal immune responses, and protection induced by the vaccine is highly strain specific. Live, attenuated influenza vaccines administered intranasally have been studied in clinical trials and shown to elicit stronger mucosal and cell-mediated immune responses. Live, attenuated vaccines appear to be more effective for inducing protective immunity in children or the elderly than inactivated, intramuscular vaccines. Additionally, novel vaccine methodologies employing conserved components of influenza virus or viral DNA are being developed. Preclinical studies suggest that these approaches may lead to methods of vaccination that could induce immunity against diverse strains or subtypes of influenza. Because of the limitations of vaccination, antiviral therapy continues to play an important role in the control of influenza. Two major classes of antivirals have demonstrated ability to prevent or treat influenza in clinical trials: the adamantanes and the neuraminidase inhibitors. The adamantanes (amantadine and rimantadine) have been in use for many years. They inhibit viral uncoating by blocking the proton channel activity of the influenza A viral M2 protein. Limitations of the adamantanes include lack of activity against influenza B, toxicity (especially in the elderly), and the rapid development of resistance. The neuraminidase inhibitors were designed to interfere with the conserved sialic acid binding site of the viral neuraminidase and act against both influenza A and B with a high degree of specificity when administered by the oral (oseltamivir) or inhaled (zanamivir) route. The neuraminidase inhibitors have relatively low toxicity, and viral resistance to these inhibitors appears to be uncommon. Additional novel antivirals that target other phases of the life cycle of influenza are in preclinical development. For example, recombinant collectins inhibit replication of influenza by binding to the viral haemagglutinin as well as altering phagocyte responses to the virus. Recombinant techniques have been used for generation of antiviral proteins (e.g. modified collectins) or oligonucleotides. Greater understanding of the biology of influenza viruses has already resulted in significant advances in the management of this important pathogen. Further advances in vaccination and antiviral therapy of influenza should remain a high priority.

Immunoglobulin A (IgA) responses and IgE-associated inflammation along the respiratory tract after mucosal but not systemic immunization

The purpose of the present study was to determine the extent of immunologic responses, particularly immunopathologic responses, within the upper and lower respiratory tracts after intranasal immunization using the mucosal adjuvant cholera toxin (CT). BALB/c mice were nasally immunized with influenza virus vaccine combined with CT. The inclusion of the mucosal adjuvant CT clearly enhanced generation of antibody responses in both the nasal passages and lungs. After nasal immunization, antigen-specific immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibody-forming cells dominated antibody responses throughout the respiratory tract. However, IgG responses were significant in lungs but not in nasal passages. Furthermore, parenteral immunization did not enhance humoral immunity in the upper respiratory tract even after a nasal challenge, whereas extrapulmonary lymphoid responses enhanced responses in the lung. After nasal immunization, inflammatory reactions, characterized by mononuclear cell infiltration, developed within the lungs of mice but not in nasal passages. Lowering dosages of CT reduced, but did not eliminate, these adverse reactions without compromising adjuvancy. Serum IgE responses were also enhanced in a dose-dependent manner by inclusion of CT. In summary, there are differences in the generation of humoral immunity between the upper respiratory tract and the lung. As the upper respiratory tract is in a separate compartment of the immune system from that stimulated by parenteral immunization, nasal immunization is an optimal approach to generate immunity throughout the respiratory tract. Despite the promise of nasal immunization, there is also the potential to develop adverse immunopathologic reactions characterized by pulmonary airway inflammation and IgE production.

Fatores de risco e medidas profiláticas nas pneumonias adquiridas na comunidade

Este artigo revisa os efeitos do envelhecimento, tabagismo, DPOC, insuficiência cardíaca, colonização da orofaringe, aspiração (micro e macro), alcoolismo, cirrose hepática, deficiência nutricional, imunossupressão e fatores ambientais sobre o risco de adquirir pneumonia na comunidade e sua gravidade. Na segunda parte, é feita revisão sobre a ação profilática das vacinas antiinfluenza e antipneumococo, assim como a ação das drogas antivirais, na profilaxia e tratamento das pneumonias adquiridas na comunidade.

Promises and challenges of live-attenuated intranasal influenza vaccines across the age spectrum: a review

Despite the availability of inactivated influenza vaccines, influenza continues to cause considerable mortality in the elderly, and morbidity in all age groups. Cold-adapted, live-attenuated, intranasally administered influenza vaccines, first developed in the 1960s, have been tested in more than 10,000 volunteers and have been shown to be safe, well-tolerated, and immunogenic. Recent trials suggest that efficacy in children may be superior to that of inactivated vaccines, and efficacy in healthy adults may be similar to that of inactivated vaccines, although there are limited data comparing the two vaccines directly. Advantages of the live-attenuated vaccines include acceptability, ease of administration, and the potential for mass immunization. The possibility of substantially higher vaccination rates across all age groups brings promise for the development of herd immunity and greatly improved control of influenza in the future.

Influenza vaccine for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccinations are currently recommended in the care of people with COPD, but these recommendations are based largely on evidence from observational studies with very few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reported. Influenza infection causes excess morbidity and mortality in COPD patients but there is also the potential for influenza vaccination to cause adverse effects or not to be cost effective.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the evidence from RCTs for a treatment effect of influenza vaccination in COPD subjects. Outcomes of interest were exacerbation rates, hospitalisations, mortality, lung function and adverse effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trials register and reference lists of articles. References were also provided by a number of drug companies we contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs that compared live or inactivated virus vaccines with placebo, either alone or with another vaccine in persons with COPD. Studies of people with asthma were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers extracted data. All entries were double checked. Study authors and drug companies were contacted for missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials were included but only four of these were specifically performed in COPD patients. The others were conducted on elderly and high-risk individuals, some of whom had chronic lung disease. In one study of inactivated vaccine in COPD patients there was a significant reduction in the total number of exacerbations per vaccinated subject compared with those who received placebo (weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval -0.75 to -0.15, p = 0.004). This difference was mainly due to the reduction in exacerbations occurring after 3 weeks (WMD -0.44, (95% CI -0.68 to -0.20, p<0.001). The number of patients experiencing late exacerbations was also significantly less (OR= 0.13, 95%CI 0.04 to 0.45, p=0.002). There was no evidence of an effect of intranasal live attenuated virus when this was added to inactivated intramuscular vaccination. In studies in elderly patients (only a minority of whom had COPD), there was a significant increase in the occurrence of local adverse reactions in vaccinees, but the effects were generally mild and transient.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

It appears, from the limited number of studies performed, that inactivated vaccine may reduce exacerbations in COPD patients. The size of effect was similar to that seen in large observational studies, and was due to a reduction in exacerbations occurring three or more weeks after vaccination. In elderly, high risk patients there was an increase in adverse effects with vaccination, but these are seen early and are usually mild and transient.

Is there a role for a mucosal influenza vaccine in the elderly?

Influenza infection is an acute respiratory disease with a high morbidity and significant mortality, particularly among the elderly and individuals with chronic diseases. The majority of countries now recommend annual influenza vaccination for all people aged 65 years or older, and for those with high risk conditions. Most commercially available influenza vaccines are administered systemically and while these are effective in children and young adults, efficacy levels in elderly individuals have been reported to be much lower. Mucosal vaccines may offer an improved vaccine strategy for protection of the elderly. As the influenza virus causes a respiratory infection, it is potentially more beneficial to administer a vaccine that will boost protection in the mucosal surfaces of the upper and lower respiratory tract. Mucosal influenza vaccines are aimed at stimulating protective immunity in the respiratory tract via oral or intranasal immunisation. This review examines our present knowledge of mucosal immunity and current strategies for mucosal vaccination. It also stresses that the use of serum antibody levels as a 'surrogate marker' for protection against influenza is potentially misleading; serum antibody, for example, may be a quite inappropriate marker to assess a mucosal vaccine. This marker does not reflect other immune responses to vaccination that are crucial for protection.