A dose-ranging study in older adults to compare the safety and immunogenicity profiles of MF59®-adjuvanted and non-adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccines following intradermal and intramuscular administration

Trivalent and quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine in adults aged 60 and older: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of influenza vaccines of any valency for adults 60 years and older.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). MEDLINE, EMBASE, JBI Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Database, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Evidence -Based Medicine database were searched from inception to 20 June 20, 2022. Two reviewers screened, abstracted, and appraised articles (Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) 2.0 tool) independently. We assessed certainty of findings using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approaches. We performed random-effects meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA), and estimated odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for count outcomes along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and prediction intervals.

PARTICIPANTS

Older adults (≥60 years old) receiving an influenza vaccine licensed in Canada or the USA (vs placebo, no vaccine, or any other licensed vaccine), at any dose.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Laboratory-confirmed influenza (LCI) and influenza-like illness (ILI). Secondary outcomes were the number of vascular adverse events, hospitalisation for acute respiratory infection (ARI) and ILI, inpatient hospitalisation, emergency room (ER) visit for ILI, outpatient visit, and mortality, among others.

RESULTS

We included 41 RCTs and 15 companion reports comprising 8 vaccine types and 206 032 participants. Vaccines may prevent LCI compared with placebo, with high-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3-HD) (NMA: 9 RCTs, 52 202 participants, OR 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.11 to 0.51), low certainty of evidence) and recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV) (OR 0.25, 95%CI (0.08 to 0.73), low certainty of evidence) among the most efficacious vaccines. Standard dose trivalent IIV3 (IIV3-SD) may prevent ILI compared with placebo, but the result was imprecise (meta-analysis: 2 RCTs, 854 participants, OR 0.39, 95%CI (0.15 to 1.02), low certainty of evidence). Any HD was associated with prevention of ILI compared with placebo (NMA: 9 RCTs, 65 658 participants, OR 0.38, 95%CI (0.15 to 0.93)). Adjuvanted quadrivalent IIV (IIV4-Adj) may be associated with the least vascular adverse events, but the results were very uncertain (NMA: eight 8 RCTs, 57 677 participants, IRR 0.18, 95%CI (0.07 to 0.43), very low certainty of evidence). RIV on all-cause mortality may be comparable to placebo (NMA: 20 RCTs, 140 577 participants, OR 1.01, 95%CI (0.23 to 4.49), low certainty of evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review demonstrated efficacy associated with IIV3-HD and RIV vaccines in protecting older persons against LCI. RIV vaccine may reduce all-cause mortality when compared with other vaccines, but the evidence is uncertain. Differences in efficacy between influenza vaccines remain uncertain with very low to moderate certainty of evidence.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020177357.

mRNA Cancer Vaccines: Construction and Boosting Strategies

In late 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a lipid-based mRNA vaccine for the prevention of COVID-19, which has pushed this field to be more closely studied and motivated researchers to delve deeper into mRNA therapeutics. To date, the research on mRNA cancer vaccines has been developed rapidly, and substantial hopeful therapeutic results have been achieved against various solid tumors in clinical trials. In this review, we first introduce three main components of mRNA cancer vaccines, including mRNA antigens, adjuvants, and delivery vectors. Engineering these components can optimize the therapeutic effects of mRNA cancer vaccines. For instance, appropriate modification of mRNA structure can alleviate the poor stability and innate immunogenicity of mRNA, and the use of mRNA delivery vectors can address the issues of low delivery efficiency in vivo. Second, we emphatically discuss some strategies to further improve the efficacy of mRNA cancer vaccines, namely modulating the immunosuppressive tumor environment, optimizing administration routes, achieving targeting delivery to intended tissues or organs, and employing combination therapy. These strategies can strengthen the tumor inhibitory ability of mRNA cancer vaccines and increase the possibility of tumor elimination. Finally, we point out some challenges in the clinical practice of mRNA cancer vaccines and offer our perspectives on future developments in this rapidly evolving field. It is anticipated that mRNA cancer vaccines will be rapidly developed for clinical cancer therapy in the near future.

Microarray patches: scratching the surface of vaccine delivery

INTRODUCTION

Microneedles are emerging as a promising technology for vaccine delivery, with numerous advantages over traditional needle and syringe methods. Preclinical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of MAPs in inducing robust immune responses over traditional needle and syringe methods, with extensive studies using vaccines targeted against different pathogens in various animal models. Critically, the clinical trials have demonstrated safety, immunogenicity, and patient acceptance for MAP-based vaccines against influenza, measles, rubella, and SARS-CoV-2.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a comprehensive overview of the different types of microarray patches (MAPs) and analyses of their applications in preclinical and clinical vaccine delivery settings. This review also covers additional considerations for microneedle-based vaccination, including adjuvants that are compatible with MAPs, patient safety and factors for global vaccination campaigns.

EXPERT OPINION

MAP vaccine delivery can potentially be a game-changer for vaccine distribution and coverage in both high-income and low- and middle-income countries. For MAPs to reach this full potential, many critical hurdles must be overcome, such as large-scale production, regulatory compliance, and adoption by global health authorities. However, given the considerable strides made in recent years by MAP developers, it may be possible to see the first MAP-based vaccines in use within the next 5 years.

Nanomaterials to combat SARS-CoV-2: Strategies to prevent, diagnose and treat COVID-19

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which severely affect the respiratory system and several organs and tissues, and may lead to death, have shown how science can respond when challenged by a global emergency, offering as a response a myriad of rapid technological developments. Development of vaccines at lightning speed is one of them. SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks have stressed healthcare systems, questioning patients care by using standard non-adapted therapies and diagnostic tools. In this scenario, nanotechnology has offered new tools, techniques and opportunities for prevention, for rapid, accurate and sensitive diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19. In this review, we focus on the nanotechnological applications and nano-based materials (i.e., personal protective equipment) to combat SARS-CoV-2 transmission, infection, organ damage and for the development of new tools for virosurveillance, diagnose and immune protection by mRNA and other nano-based vaccines. All the nano-based developed tools have allowed a historical, unprecedented, real time epidemiological surveillance and diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, at community and international levels. The nano-based technology has help to predict and detect how this Sarbecovirus is mutating and the severity of the associated COVID-19 disease, thereby assisting the administration and public health services to make decisions and measures for preparedness against the emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2 and severe or lethal COVID-19.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of MF59® adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age

The most effective means of preventing seasonal influenza is through vaccination. In this systematic review, we investigated the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of MF59^® adjuvanted trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccines to prevent laboratory-confirmed influenza. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) were eligible for inclusion. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 48 studies on MF59^® adjuvanted vaccines met our inclusion criteria. No efficacy trials were identified. In terms of vaccine effectiveness (VE), MF59^® adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines were effective in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza in older adults (aged ≥65 years) compared with no vaccination (VE = 45%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 23%-61%, 5 NRSIs across 3 influenza seasons). By subtype, significant effect was found for influenza A(H1N1) (VE = 61%, 95% CI 44%-73%) and B (VE = 29%, 95% CI 5%-46%), but not for A(H3N2). In terms of relative VE, there was no significant difference comparing MF59^® adjuvanted trivalent vaccines with either non-adjuvanted trivalent or quadrivalent vaccines. Compared with traditional trivalent influenza vaccines, MF59^® adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines were associated with a greater number of local adverse events (RR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.50-2.39) and systemic reactions (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.02-1.38). In conclusion, MF59^® adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines were found to be more effective than 'no vaccination'. Based on limited data, there was no significant difference comparing the effectiveness of MF59^® adjuvanted vaccines with their non-adjuvanted counterparts.

Intradermal injection of lidocaine with a microneedle device to provide rapid local anaesthesia for peripheral intravenous cannulation: A randomised open-label placebo-controlled clinical trial

Background

Peripheral venous cannulation is one of the most common procedures in medicine. It is associated with noticeable pain and apprehension, although in most cases it is performed without any anesthesia due to lack of a painless, cost-effective option, which would provide rapid local anesthesia with subsequent significant reduction in the experienced pain. We conducted an open-label placebo-controlled clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a 2% lidocaine injection using the commercially available microneedle device MinronJet600 (NanoPass Technologies Ltd, Israel) to achieve rapid local anesthesia prior to peripheral venous cannulation.

Methods

One hundred and two subjects were randomly allocated into two groups. In the first group, 100μL of lidocaine hydrochloride (2%) was injected intradermally to subjects using the MicronJet600 device in the left arm (MJ-Lido) and 100μL of saline was injected intradermally using the device in the right arm (MJ-Saline). In the second group, 100μL of lidocaine hydrochloride (2%) was injected using the MicronJet600 device into the left arm (MJ-Lido), with no injection into the right arm of subjects (No pretreatment). In both groups the intradermal injection was performed at the cannulation site prior to insertion of a 18G cannula into a median cubital vein in both arms. As a primary variable, a score of cannulation-induced pain was indicated by subjects using a 100-point visual analog scale immediately after cannulation. As a secondary variable, subjects in Group 2 also indicated their preference to receive the anaesthetic injection with MicronJet600 in the future by using the 5-point Likert scale. Also, as a secondary variable, the duration of skin numbness after lidocaine injection was indicated by performing a superficial pin-prick with a 27G needle at 15, 30 and 45 minutes, at distances of 1, 2 and 3 centimeters from the injection site.

Results

A significant pain reduction (11.0-fold) was achieved due to the lidocaine injection compared to the cannulation without any pretreatment (p< 0.005). After the lidocaine injection the anesthesia was effective up to 2 centimeters from the injection site and remained for up to 30 minutes. Eighty percent of subjects from the second group preferred cannulation after the lidocaine injection over cannulation without any pretreatment. No significant side effects were identified.

Conclusion

Intradermal injection of anaesthetic with Micronjet600 was found to be a safe and effective option for providing rapid local anesthesia for peripheral intravenous cannulation.

Trial regiatration

The clinical trial was registered, before the patient enrollment began, in the Research Registry publicly accessible database (registration identifier: researchregistry4662). Also, the trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (registration identifier: NCT05108714) after its completion.

Microneedles enable the development of skin-targeted vaccines against coronaviruses and influenza viruses

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, many have seriously worried that the plus burden of seasonal influenza that might create a destructive scenario, resulting in overwhelmed healthcare capacities and onwards loss of life. Many efforts to develop a safe and efficacious vaccine to prevent infection by coronavirus and influenza, highlight the importance of vaccination to combat infectious pathogens. While vaccines are traditionally given as injections into the muscle, microneedle (MN) patches designed to precisely deliver cargos into the cutaneous microenvironment, rich in immune cells, provide a noninvasive and self-applicable vaccination approach, reducing overall costs and improving access to vaccines in places with limited supply. The current review aimed to highlight advances in research on the development of MNs-mediated cutaneous vaccine delivery. Concluding remarks and challenges on MNs-based skin immunization are also provided to contribute to the rational development of safe and effective MN-delivered vaccines against these emerging infectious diseases.

Microneedle-Mediated Vaccination: Innovation and Translation

Vaccine administration by subcutaneous or intramuscular injection is the most commonly prescribed route for inoculation, however, it is often associated with some deficiencies such as low compliance, high professionalism, and risk of infection. Therefore, the application of microneedles for vaccine delivery has gained widespread interests in the past few years due to its high compliance, minimal invasiveness, and convenience. This review focuses on recent advances in the development and application of microneedles for vaccination based on different delivery strategies, and introduces the current status of microneedle-mediated vaccination in clinical translation. The prospects for its application including opportunities and challenges are further discussed.

Better, Faster, Stronger: mRNA Vaccines Show Promise for Influenza Vaccination in Older Adults

Older adults have diminished immune responses that lead to increased susceptibility and severity of infectious diseases. Influenza is a leading killer of older adults despite the availability of seasonal influenza vaccination. Influenza vaccines are strain specific, and their efficacy varies greatly year to year based on how well the vaccine virus matches the circulating strains. Additionally, older adults have reduced vaccination responses. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the increased mortality rate in older adults for infectious disease, and brought vaccine development to the forefront. The speed of vaccine development was met with an equally impressive vaccine efficacy. Interestingly, both mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines currently available have shown similar efficacy in both young and older adults. mRNA vaccine production has significantly reduced the production timeline compared to current influenza vaccines, making them particularly attractive for influenza vaccine development. Faster production coupled with improved efficacy would be a tremendous advancement in protecting older adults from influenza morbidity and mortality.

No Effect of Acute Eccentric Resistance Exercise on Immune Responses to Influenza Vaccination in Older Adults: A Randomized Control Trial

INTRODUCTION

Older adults are at elevated risk for morbidity and mortality caused by influenza. Vaccination is the primary means of prophylaxis, but protection is often compromised in older adults. As resistance exercise mobilizes immune cells into muscle, it may enhance vaccination response.

PURPOSE

Compare antibody and cell mediated immune responses to influenza vaccination in older adults who performed eccentric resistance exercise immediately prior to vaccination to those who did not exercise.

METHODS

Twenty nine resistance training-naive older adults (20 women, 73.9 ± 5.3 years) were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: vaccination in the same arm that exercised (Ex-S), vaccination in the opposite arm that exercised (Ex-Op), and seated rest (No-Ex). Exercise consisted of 10 sets of 5 eccentric unilateral repetitions at 80% of the pre-determined concentric one repetition maximum. Lateral raises were alternated with bicep curls. No-Ex sat quietly for 25 min. Following exercise or rest, all received the 2018 quadrivalent influenza vaccine (Seqirus Afluria) in the non-dominant deltoid. Antibody titers against each influenza vaccine strain were determined by hemagglutinin inhibition assays at baseline, 6-, and 24-weeks post-vaccination. Influenza-specific T cells were quantified after stimulation with the vaccine by intracellular cytokine staining.

RESULTS

No significant group x time effects were found in antibody responses to any strain (interaction for A/H1N1: p = 0.682; A/H3N2: p = 0.644; B/Colorado/06/2017: p = 0.262; B/Phuket/3073/2013: p = 0.851). Groups did not differ in fold-increase of antibody titers 6- and 24-weeks post-vaccination. Influenza-specific T-cells did not differ between groups at any time (comparison at baseline: p = 0.985; 6-weeks: p = 0.889; 24 weeks: p = 0.857). One subject (Ex-S) reported flu-like symptoms 18 weeks post-vaccination.

CONCLUSION

Acute arm eccentric exercise did not influence antibody titers or cell mediated immune responses to the influenza vaccine delivered post-exercise in older adults. More strenuous exercise may be required for exercise to act as an adjuvant. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03736759.

Microarray patches enable the development of skin-targeted vaccines against COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic is a serious threat to global health and the global economy. The ongoing race to develop a safe and efficacious vaccine to prevent infection by SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent for COVID-19, highlights the importance of vaccination to combat infectious pathogens. The highly accessible cutaneous microenvironment is an ideal target for vaccination since the skin harbors a high density of antigen-presenting cells and immune accessory cells with broad innate immune functions. Microarray patches (MAPs) are an attractive intracutaneous biocargo delivery system that enables safe, reproducible, and controlled administration of vaccine components (antigens, with or without adjuvants) to defined skin microenvironments. This review describes the structure of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and relevant antigenic targets for vaccination, summarizes key concepts of skin immunobiology in the context of prophylactic immunization, and presents an overview of MAP-mediated cutaneous vaccine delivery. Concluding remarks on MAP-based skin immunization are provided to contribute to the rational development of safe and effective MAP-delivered vaccines against emerging infectious diseases, including COVID-19.

An Overview of Nanocarrier-Based Adjuvants for Vaccine Delivery

The development of vaccines is one of the most significant medical accomplishments which has helped to eradicate a large number of diseases. It has undergone an evolutionary process from live attenuated pathogen vaccine to killed whole organisms or inactivated toxins (toxoids), each of them having its own advantages and disadvantages. The crucial parameters in vaccination are the generation of memory response and protection against infection, while an important aspect is the effective delivery of antigen in an intelligent manner to evoke a robust immune response. In this regard, nanotechnology is greatly contributing to developing efficient vaccine adjuvants and delivery systems. These can protect the encapsulated antigen from the host’s in-vivo environment and releasing it in a sustained manner to induce a long-lasting immunostimulatory effect. In view of this, the present review article summarizes nanoscale-based adjuvants and delivery vehicles such as viral vectors, virus-like particles and virosomes; non-viral vectors namely nanoemulsions, lipid nanocarriers, biodegradable and non-degradable nanoparticles, calcium phosphate nanoparticles, colloidally stable nanoparticles, proteosomes; and pattern recognition receptors covering c-type lectin receptors and toll-like receptors.

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.

Comparative Postmarket Safety Profile of Adjuvanted and High-Dose Influenza Vaccines in Individuals 65 Years or Older

IMPORTANCE

Every year, influenza vaccines are administered to millions of people worldwide to reduce morbidity and mortality from influenza. As new vaccine formulations are increasingly used, monitoring and comparing safety, in addition to vaccine effectiveness, in target populations are essential.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the postmarketing safety profile of 2018 Southern Hemisphere influenza vaccines, particularly 2 new enhanced trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines: an adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3) and high-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3), among Australian individuals 65 years or older.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study used solicited short message service-based self-reported survey data on adverse events occurring within 3 to 5 days after receipt of an influenza vaccination. Participants included individuals 65 years or older who received routinely recommended influenza vaccines at 1 of 265 sentinel immunization sites, including primary care, hospital, and community-based clinics, participating in Australia's AusVaxSafety active vaccine safety surveillance system from April 1 to August 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from September 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019.

EXPOSURE

Any licensed 2018 influenza vaccine administered in clinical practice.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Rates (overall, by brand, and by concomitant vaccine receipt) of adverse events, including medical attendance as a proxy for serious adverse events.

RESULTS

Of 72 013 individuals 65 years or older who received an influenza vaccine in 2018, 50 134 individuals (69.6%) responded to the initial survey regarding adverse events experienced after vaccination (median [interquartile range] age, 71 [68-76] years; 27 056 [54.0%] women). Most individuals received an enhanced trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine, including 28 003 individuals (55.9%) who received aIIV3 and 19 306 individuals (38.5%) who received HD-IIV3; 2208 individuals (4.4%) received a quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Individuals who received HD-IIV3 reported significantly higher rates of any adverse event compared with individuals who received aIIV3 (1716 individuals [8.9%] vs 1796 individuals [6.4%]; P < .001) as well as specific adverse events, including fever (195 individuals [1.1%] vs 164 individuals [0.6%]; P < .001), injection site pain (383 individuals [2.1%] vs 350 individuals [1.3%]; P < .001), and injection site swelling or redness (256 individuals [1.4%] vs 248 individuals [0.9%]; P < .001). Adverse event rates reported by those receiving any quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine were similar to rates reported by those receiving aIIV3. Rates of medical care seeking for adverse events associated with aIIV3 and HD-IIV3 were low and comparable (80 individuals [0.3%] vs 56 individuals [0.3%]; P = .91).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this large-scale participant-based postmarketing assessment of the safety of 2 new enhanced influenza vaccines used in individuals 65 years or older provide reassuring near-real-time and cumulative data to inform and support confidence in ongoing vaccine use.

Comparison of immunogenicity between intradermal and intramuscular injections of repeated annual identical influenza virus strains post-pandemic (2011-2012) in COPD patients

We compared the antibody responses and persistence of the reduced-dose, 9 µg hemagglutinin (HA)/strain intradermal (ID) injection via the Mantoux technique and the 15 μg HA/strain intramuscular (IM) injection of the repeated annual identical trivalent, inactivated, split-virion vaccine 2011-2012 in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Eighty patients were randomized to ID (n = 41) and IM (n = 39) groups. Four weeks post-vaccination, the antibody responses of the two groups were similar; those for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and influenza A(H3N2)-but not influenza B-met the criteria of the Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP). The antibody responses for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 rapidly declined in both groups, especially with the ID injection, whereas those for influenza A(H3N2) maintained above the CPMP criteria throughout 12 months post-vaccination. The geometric mean titres for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 persisted above the protective threshold (≥ 40) until 6 months post-vaccination in both the ID and IM groups. The seroprotection rates of the ID and IM groups were above 60% until 3 months and 6 months post-vaccination, respectively. In conclusion, the 9 μg HA/strain ID injection of vaccine 2011-2012 elicited antibody responses similar to the standard dose of 15 μg of the HA/strain IM injection at 4 weeks post-vaccination. However, the antibody responses for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 rapidly declined, especially in the case of the ID injection, whereas they were comparable for influenza A(H3N2). Additional strategies for increasing vaccine durability should be considered, especially for new pandemic strains affecting elderly COPD patients.

mRNA vaccines against H10N8 and H7N9 influenza viruses of pandemic potential are immunogenic and well tolerated in healthy adults in phase 1 randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

We evaluated safety and immunogenicity of the first mRNA vaccines against potentially pandemic avian H10N8 and H7N9 influenza viruses.

METHODS

Two randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 1 clinical trials enrolled participants between December 2015 and August 2017 at single centers in Germany (H10N8) and USA (H7N9). Healthy adults (ages 18-64 years for H10N8 study; 18-49 years for H7N9 study) participated. Participants received vaccine or placebo in a 2-dose vaccination series 3 weeks apart. H10N8 intramuscular (IM) dose levels of 25, 50, 75, 100, and 400 µg and intradermal dose levels of 25 and 50 µg were evaluated. H7N9 IM 10-, 25-, and 50-µg dose levels were evaluated; 2-dose series 6 months apart was also evaluated. Primary endpoints were safety (adverse events) and tolerability. Secondary immunogenicity outcomes included humoral (hemagglutination inhibition [HAI], microneutralization [MN] assays) and cell-mediated responses (ELISPOT assay).

RESULTS

H10N8 and H7N9 mRNA IM vaccines demonstrated favorable safety and reactogenicity profiles. No vaccine-related serious adverse event was reported. For H10N8 (N = 201), 100-µg IM dose induced HAI titers ≥ 1:40 in 100% and MN titers ≥ 1:20 in 87.0% of participants. The 25-µg intradermal dose induced HAI titers > 1:40 in 64.7% of participants compared to 34.5% of participants receiving the IM dose. For H7N9 (N = 156), IM doses of 10, 25, and 50 µg achieved HAI titers ≥ 1:40 in 36.0%, 96.3%, and 89.7% of participants, respectively. MN titers ≥ 1:20 were achieved by 100% in the 10- and 25-µg groups and 96.6% in the 50-µg group. Seroconversion rates were 78.3% (HAI) and 87.0% (MN) for H10N8 (100 µg IM) and 96.3% (HAI) and 100% (MN) in H7N9 (50 µg). Significant cell-mediated responses were not detected in either study.

CONCLUSIONS

The first mRNA vaccines against H10N8 and H7N9 influenza viruses were well tolerated and elicited robust humoral immune responses. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03076385 and NCT03345043.

Comparative Immunogenicity of Enhanced Seasonal Influenza Vaccines in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A number of enhanced influenza vaccines have been developed for use in older adults, including high-dose, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal vaccines.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review examining the improvements in antibody responses measured by the hemagglutination inhibition assay associated with these enhanced vaccines, compared with each other and with the standard-dose (SD) vaccine using random effects models.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine trials were included. Compared with adults aged ≥60 years receiving SD vaccines, those receiving enhanced vaccines had significantly higher postvaccination titers (for all vaccine strains) and higher proportions with elevated titers ≥40 (for most vaccine strains). High-dose vaccine elicited 82% higher postvaccination titer to A(H3N2) compared with SD vaccine; this was significantly higher than the 52% estimated for MF59-adjuvanted versus SD vaccines (P = .04), which was higher than the 32% estimated for intradermal versus SD vaccines (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, by summarizing current evidence, we found that enhanced vaccines had greater antibody responses than the SD vaccine. Indications of differences among enhanced vaccines highlight the fact that further research is needed to compare new vaccine options, especially during seasons with mismatched circulating strains and for immune outcomes other than hemagglutination inhibition titers as well as vaccine efficacy.

Alum adjuvant is more effective than MF59 at prompting early germinal center formation in response to peptide-protein conjugates and enhancing efficacy of a vaccine against opioid use disorders

Opioid use disorders (OUD) and fatal overdoses are a national emergency in the United States. Therapeutic vaccines offer a promising strategy to treat OUD and reduce the incidence of overdose. Immunization with opioid-based haptens conjugated to immunogenic carriers elicits opioid-specific antibodies that block opioid distribution to the brain and reduce opioid-induced behavior and toxicity in pre-clinical models. This study tested whether the efficacy of a lead oxycodone conjugate vaccine was improved by formulation in either aluminum hydroxide or the squalene-based oil-in-water emulsion MF59 adjuvant, which was recently FDA-approved for influenza vaccines in subjects 65⁺ years old. In adult BALB/c mice, alum formulation was more effective than MF59 at promoting the early expansion of hapten-specific B cells and the production of oxycodone-specific serum IgG antibodies, as well as blocking oxycodone distribution to the brain and oxycodone-induced motor activity. Alum was also more effective than MF59 at promoting early differentiation of peptide-specific MHCII-restricted CD4⁺ Tfh and GC-Tfh cells in adult C57Bl/6 mice immunized with a model peptide-protein conjugate. In contrast, alum and MF59 were equally effective in promoting hapten-specific B cells and peptide-specific MHCII-restricted CD4⁺ T cell differentiation in older C57Bl/6 mice. These data suggest that alum is a more effective adjuvant than MF59 for conjugate vaccines targeting synthetic small molecule haptens or peptide antigens in adult, but not aged, mice.

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.

Skin Vaccination against Rotavirus Using Microneedles: Proof of Concept in Gnotobiotic Piglets

Live-attenuated oral rotavirus (RV) vaccines have lower efficacy in low income countries, and additionally are associated with a rare but severe adverse event, intussusception. We have been pursuing the development of an inactivated rotavirus vaccine (IRV) using the human rotavirus strain CDC-9 (G1P[8]) through parenteral immunization and previously demonstrated dose sparing and enhanced immunogenicity of intradermal (ID) unadjuvanted IRV using a coated microneedle patch in comparison with intramuscular (IM) administration in mice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the immune response and protection against RV infection and diarrhea conferred by the administration of the ID unadjuvanted IRV using the microneedle device MicronJet600^® in neonatal gnotobiotic (Gn) piglets challenged with virulent Wa G1P[8] human RV. Three doses of 5 μg IRV when administered intradermally and 5 μg IRV formulated with aluminum hydroxide [Al(OH)₃] when administered intramuscularly induced comparable rotavirus-specific antibody titers of IgA, IgG, IgG avidity index and neutralizing activity in sera of neonatal piglets. Both IRV vaccination regimens protected against RV antigen shedding in stools, and reduced the cumulative diarrhea scores in the piglets. This study demonstrated that the ID and IM administrations of IRV are immunogenic and protective against RV-induced diarrhea in neonatal piglets. Our findings highlight the potential value of an adjuvant sparing effect of the IRV ID delivery route.

A phase 1, open-label, randomized study to compare the immunogenicity and safety of different administration routes and doses of virosomal influenza vaccine in elderly

BACKGROUND

Influenza remains a significant problem in elderly despite widespread vaccination coverage. This randomized, phase-I study in elderly compared different strategies of improving vaccine immunogenicity.

METHODS

A total of 370 healthy participants (⩾65years) were randomized equally 1:1:1:1:1:1 to six influenza vaccine treatments (approximately 60-63 participants per treatment arm) at day 1 that consisted of three investigational virosomal vaccine formulations at doses of 7.5, 15, and 45μg HA antigen/strain administered intradermally (ID) by MicronJet600™ microneedle device (NanoPass Technologies) or intramuscularly (IM), and three comparator registered seasonal vaccines; Inflexal V™ (Janssen) and MF59 adjuvanted Fluad™ (Novartis) administered IM and Intanza™ (Sanofi Pasteur) administered ID via Soluvia™ prefilled microinjection system (BD). Serological evaluations were performed at days 22 and 90 and safety followed-up for 6months.

RESULTS

Intradermal delivery of virosomal vaccine using MicronJet600™ resulted in significantly higher immunogenicity than the equivalent dose of virosomal Inflexal V™ administered intramuscularly across most of the parameters and strains, as well as in some of the readouts and strains as compared with the 45μg dose of virosomal vaccine formulation. Of 370 participants, 300 (81.1%) reported ⩾1 adverse event (AE); more participants reported solicited local AEs (72.2%) than solicited systemic AEs (12.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Intradermal delivery significantly improved influenza vaccine immunogenicity compared with intramuscular delivery. Triple dose (45μg) virosomal vaccine did not demonstrate any benefit on vaccine's immunogenicity over 15μg commercial presentation. All treatments were generally safe and well-tolerated.

Immunogenicity and Safety of Intradermal Influenza Vaccine in the Elderly: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Immunosenescence makes the elderly more susceptible to influenza complications and less responsive to vaccination. An intradermal formulation (IDflu) is one of several strategies being investigated to increase the immunogenicity of influenza vaccines.

OBJECTIVE

The overall goal of the study was to assess the safety and immunogenicity of IDflu compared with the intramuscular route (IMflu) in the elderly.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. Included articles met the following criteria: RCTs; primary studies, not re-analyses or reviews; enrolment of elderly people; comparing the immunogenicity and/or safety of IDflu with IMflu; measuring seroprotection and/or seroconversion rate to assess immunogenicity; measuring local reactions and/or general symptoms and/or other mild local reactions that could affect acceptability of vaccine as safety indicators, according to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) criteria; published through January 2015.

RESULTS

The results of our meta-analysis on seroprotection showed that IDflu is comparable to IMflu for each strain (A/H1N1: risk ratio [RR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-1.07; A/H3N2: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99-1.04; B 1.02, 95% CI 0.98-1.08). The seroconversion rate achieved with IDflu was comparable to that of the control group (A/H1N1: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.97-1.2; A/H3N2: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.96-1.21; B: RR 1.21, 95% CI 1-1.45). Systemic reactogenicity appeared similar in the two groups, while local reactions were significantly more frequent in the IDflu group.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel IDflu appears to have the adequate balance between immunogenicity and safety in the elderly compared with IMflu, and its utilization may be considered among the possible strategies to enhance the control of seasonal influenza outbreaks according to the existing policy recommendations in the elderly.

MF59 Mediates Its B Cell Adjuvanticity by Promoting T Follicular Helper Cells and Thus Germinal Center Responses in Adult and Early Life

The early life influenza disease burden calls for more effective vaccines to protect this vulnerable population. Influenza vaccines including the MF59 oil-in-water adjuvant induce higher, broader, and more persistent Ab responses in adults and particularly in young, through yet undefined mechanisms. In this study, we show that MF59 enhances adult murine IgG responses to influenza hemagglutinin (HA) by promoting a potent T follicular helper cells (TFH) response, which directly controls the magnitude of the germinal center (GC) B cell response. Remarkably, this enhancement of TFH and GC B cells is already fully functional in 3-wk-old infant mice, which were fully protected by HA/MF59 but not HA/PBS immunization against intranasal challenge with the homologous H1N1 (A/California/7/2009) strain. In 1-wk-old neonatal mice, MF59 recruits and activates APCs, efficiently induces CD4(+) effector T cells and primes for enhanced infant responses but induces few fully functional TFH cells, which are mostly follicular regulatory T cells, and poor GC and anti-HA responses. The B cell adjuvanticity of MF59 appears to be mediated by the potent induction of TFH cells which directly controls GC responses both in adult and early life, calling for studies assessing its capacity to enhance the efficacy of influenza immunization in young infants.

Intradermal vaccination using the novel microneedle device MicronJet600: Past, present, and future

Intradermal immunization has become a forefront of vaccine improvement, both scientifically and commercially. Newer technologies are being developed to address the need to reduce the dose required for vaccination and to improve the reliability and ease of injection, which have been major hurdles in expanding the number of approved vaccines using this route of administration. In this review, 7 y of clinical experience with a novel intradermal delivery device, the MicronJet600, which is a registered hollow microneedle that simplifies the delivery of liquid vaccines, are summarized. This device has demonstrated both significant dose-sparing and superior immunogenicity in various vaccine categories, as well as in diverse subject populations and age groups. These studies have shown that intradermal delivery using this device is safe, effective, and preferred by the subjects. Comparison with other intradermal devices and potential new applications for intradermal delivery that could be pursued in the future are also discussed.