HA1 (Hemagglutinin) quantitation for influenza A H1N1 and H3N2 high yield reassortant vaccine candidate seed viruses by RP-UPLC

The only effective measure to decrease morbidity and mortality caused by the influenza virus in the human population is worldwide vaccination. Vaccination produces neutralizing antibodies that target the HA1 subunit of the HA (hemagglutinin) protein and are strain specific. The effectiveness of new influenza vaccines are linked to two factors, the correct prediction of the circulating strains in the population in a particular season and the concentration of the HA1 protein in the vaccine formulation. With the advent of the licensing of quadrivalent vaccines, pharmaceutical manufacturers are under considerable pressure due to time constraints and dedicated resources to deliver 194–198 million doses (2020–2021 U.S. market) of vaccine. Considering the valuable resources needed to produce the influenza vaccine in a timely manner, the efficient quantitation of the HA1 protein (the main component in the influenza vaccine) is required. Currently the only method approved by regulatory agencies for quantitation of the HA antigen in vaccines is the single radial immunodiffusion assay (SRID), an antibody dependent assay that is not time efficient. Time efficient methods that are antibody independent e.g. reverse phase-high performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC) or size exclusion-HPLC (SE-HPLC) are available. An improved method implementing reverse phase-ultra performance liquid chromatography (RP-UPLC) has been developed to quantitate the HA1 protein antigen present in the high yield reassortant vaccine seed viruses from influenza A H1N1 and H3N2 subtypes harvested from inoculated embryonated chicken eggs. This method differentiates between high yield and lower yielding reassortants in order to select the best vaccine candidate seed virus with the highest growth ‘in ovo’. This direct capability to monitor the HA1 concentration of potential reassortant seed viruses and to choose the best yielding HA influenza reassortant when faced with multiple viral seed candidates provides a major advantage on the industrial scale to the influenza vaccine process.     

An inventory-location optimization model for equitable influenza vaccine distribution in developing countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

The addition of other respiratory illnesses such as flu could cripple the healthcare system during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. An annual seasonal influenza vaccine is the best way to help protect against flu. Fears of coronavirus have intensified the shortage of influenza shots in developing countries that hope to vaccinate many populations to reduce stress on their health services. We present an inventory-location mixed-integer linear programming model for equitable influenza vaccine distribution in developing countries during the pandemic. The proposed model utilizes an equitable objective function to distribute vaccines to critical healthcare providers and first responders, elderly, pregnant women, and those with underlying health conditions. We present a case study in a developing country to exhibit efficacy and demonstrate the optimization model’s applicability.     

Comparison of influenza antibody titers among women who were vaccinated in the 2nd and the 3rd trimesters of pregnancy

BackgroundWe compared cord blood antibody titers in unvaccinated pregnant women to those vaccinated with seasonal influenza vaccine during the 2^nd and the 3^rd trimesters.MethodsPregnant women had cord blood collected at delivery for hemagglutination inhibition assay against vaccine reference viruses: A/California/07/2009 (H1N1)pdm09, A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), and B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage). Geometric mean titer (GMT) ratios were calculated comparing vaccinated versus unvaccinated pregnant women, and women vaccinated in the 2^nd and the 3^rd trimesters. Proportions of women achieving defined titers were compared using the χ² test.ResultsOf 307 women, 190 (62%) were unvaccinated. Fifty and 67 were vaccinated during the 2^nd and the 3^rd trimesters, respectively. Median enrollment age was 29 years (interquartile range 24–34). Sixteen (5%) women had pre-existing conditions, but none were immunocompromised. GMT ratios comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated women were 5.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.06–6.96) for influenza A/California, 5.39 (95% CI 4.18–6.08) for influenza A/Switzerland, and 5.05 (95% CI 4.43–5.85) for influenza B/Phuket. Similarly, the GMT ratios comparing the 3^rd and the 2^nd trimester vaccinated women were 2.90 (95% CI 2.54–3.39), 2.82 (95% CI 2.56–3.13), and 2.83 (95% CI 2.56–3.14), respectively. The proportions of women with defined titers for the three vaccine reference viruses did not differ between 2^nd and 3^rd trimester vaccinated women (titers ≥40: 68–92% versus 70–93%; ≥110: 32% versus 33–63%; and ≥330: 4–10% versus 3–21%).ConclusionsPregnant women vaccinated against influenza had more placental transfer of influenza antibodies to their infants than unvaccinated women. Placental transfer of antibodies was higher among those vaccinated in the 3^rd trimester than in the 2^nd trimester. There was no difference in the proportions of women achieving antibody titers corresponding to protection against influenza in children. Findings support the current World Health Organization’s recommendation that pregnant women may be vaccinated in either 2^nd or 3^rd trimester of pregnancy.     

Long-lasting heterologous antibody responses after sequential vaccination with A/Indonesia/5/2005 and A/Vietnam/1203/2004 pre-pandemic influenza A(H5N1) virus vaccines

BackgroundAvian influenza A(H5N1) viruses have caused sporadic infections in humans and thus they pose a significant global health threat. Among symptomatic patients the case fatality rate has been ca. 50%. H5N1 viruses exist in multiple clades and subclades and several candidate vaccines have been developed to prevent A(H5N1) infection as a principal measure for preventing the disease.MethodsSerum antibodies against various influenza A(H5N1) clade viruses were measured in adults by ELISA-based microneutralization and haemagglutination inhibition tests before and after vaccination with two different A(H5N1) vaccines in 2009 and 2011.ResultsTwo doses of AS03-adjuvanted A/Indonesia/5/2005 vaccine induced good homologous but poor heterologous neutralizing antibody responses against different clade viruses. However, non-adjuvanted A/Vietnam/1203/2004 booster vaccination in 2011 induced very strong and long-lasting homologous and heterologous antibody responses while homologous response remained weak in naïve subjects.ConclusionsSequential vaccination with two different A(H5N1) pre-pandemic vaccines induced long-lasting high level cross-clade immunity against influenza A(H5N1) strains, thus supporting a prime-boost vaccination strategy in pandemic preparedness plans.     

Comparison of local influenza vaccine effectiveness using two methods

BackgroundIn some settings, research methods to determine influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) may not be appropriate because of cost, time constraints, or other factors. Administrative database analysis of viral testing results and vaccination history may be a viable alternative. This study compared VE estimates from outpatient research and administrative databases.MethodsUsing the test-negative, case-control design, data for 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 influenza seasons were collected using: 1) consent, specimen collection, RT-PCR testing and vaccine verification using multiple methods; and 2) an administrative database of outpatients with a clinical respiratory viral panel combined with electronic immunization records. Odds ratios for likelihood of influenza infection by vaccination status were calculated using multivariable logistic regression. VE = (1 ? aOR) × 100.ResultsResearch participants were significantly younger (P < 0.001), more often white (69% vs. 59%; P < 0.001) than non-white and less frequently enrolled through the emergency department (35% vs. 72%; P < 0.001) than administrative database participants. VE was significant against all influenza and influenza A in each season and both seasons combined (37–49%). Point estimate differences between methods were evident, with higher VE in the research database, but insignificant due to low sample sizes. When enrollment sites were separately analyzed, there were significant differences in VE estimates for all influenza (66% research vs. 46% administrative P < 0.001) and influenza A (67% research vs. 49% administrative; P < 0.001) in the emergency department.Conclusions:The selection of the appropriate method for determining influenza vaccine effectiveness depends on many factors, including sample size, subgroups of interest, etc., suggesting that research estimates may be more generalizable. Other advantages of research databases for VE estimates include lack of clinician-related selection bias for testing and less misclassification of vaccination status. The advantages of the administrative databases are potentially shorter time to VE results and lower cost.     

Healthcare Workers’ (HCWs) attitudes towards mandatory influenza vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Influenza is a disease responsible for thousands of deaths every year. Although healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a way of contagion for patients, vaccination coverage among them is low. Mandatory vaccination has been proposed, but controversies remain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the acceptance of mandatory vaccination by HCWs, and to investigate associated characteristics. MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science were used to search for studies assessing the topic. PRISMA statements were followed. Of the 13,457 univocal records found, 52 studies were included in the systematic review and 40 in the meta-analysis. The pooled proportion of HCWs accepting the policy was of 61% (95% CI: 53%- 68%) but with great heterogeneity between continents (from 54% in Europe to 69% in Asia) and in different professionals (from 40% in nurses to 80% in students). Vaccinated HCWs agreed more frequently with mandatory vaccination than non-vaccinated ones. More studies that consider mandatory vaccination acceptance as the main outcome are needed, but the results of this study confirm that in some settings the majority of HCWs favour mandatory vaccination. This, combined with effects that a flu epidemic could have if overlapped to pandemics with similar symptoms, requires renewed considerations on mandatory vaccination.     

“You Have to Die Not to Come to Work”: A Mixed Methods Study of Attitudes and Behaviors regarding Presenteeism,Absenteeism and Influenza Vaccination among Healthcare Personnel with Respiratory Illness in Israel, 2016–2019

IntroductionHealthcare personnel (HCP) have an increased risk of exposure to influenza and other respiratory pathogens. Increased presenteeism, decreased absenteeism, and low uptake of the influenza vaccine can contribute to the spread of influenza among HCP in healthcare settings. We used a mixed methods approach to investigate attitudes and behaviors of HCP in Israel towards influenza vaccination, presenteeism, and absenteeism.MethodsThe study took place over three influenza seasons (2016–2017, 2017–2018, 2018–2019) at the largest hospital in southern Israel. We administered a Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices (KAP) questionnaire and conducted semi-structured interviews with HCP who had been recently ill with respiratory symptoms. The KAP questionnaire included closed-ended questions about attitudes and behaviors regarding influenza, working while sick, and influenza vaccination. The interviews investigated HCP’s perceptions of influenza infection and attitudes about absenteeism, presenteeism, and the influenza vaccine.ResultsWe conducted 74 semi-structured interviews over three influenza seasons. Four HCP were interviewed twice, in separate seasons for different illness episodes. The 70 individuals interviewed included 16 physicians, 45 nurses or technicians, and 9 administrative staff. The median age was 42.5 years (range: 25–60), and most (79%) were female. Half (50%) got vaccinated against influenza before their illness episode. In interviews, most HCP said they come to work while sick (presenteeism) due to a strong personal work ethic and an institutional culture that discourages taking sick leave (absenteeism). HCP expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of the influenza vaccine as well as concern that the influenza vaccine causes severe illness.DiscussionOver three influenza seasons in Israel, HCP cited a number of reasons for working while sick, and doubted the usefulness of influenza vaccine. Addressing reasons for presenteeism and vaccine hesitancy among HCP is crucial to protect HCP and patients from influenza virus infection and other viral respiratory illnesses, such as COVID-19.     

Workplace influenza vaccination to reduce employee absenteeism: An economic analysis from the employers’ perspective

BackgroundEach year, up to 10% of unvaccinated adults contracts seasonal influenza, with half of this proportion developing symptoms. As a result, employers experience significant economic losses in terms of employee absenteeism. Influenza vaccines can be instrumental in reducing this burden. Workplace vaccination is expected to reduce employee absenteeism more than linearly as a result of positive externalities. It remains unclear whether workplace influenza vaccination yields a positive return on investment.MethodsWe simulated the spread of influenza in the seasons 2011–12 up to 2017–18 in Belgium by means of a compartmental transmission model. We accounted for age-specific social contact patterns and included reduced contact behavior when symptomatically infected. We simulated the impact of employer-funded influenza vaccination at the workplace and performed a cost-benefit analysis to assess the employers’ return on workplace vaccination. Furthermore, we look into the cost-benefit of rewarding vaccinated employees by offering an additional day off.ResultsWorkplace vaccination reduced the burden of influenza both on the workplace and in the population at large. Compared to the current vaccine coverage – 21% in the population at large – an employee vaccine coverage of 90% could avert an additional 355 000 cases, of which about 150 000 in the employed population and 205 000 in the unemployed population. While seasonal influenza vaccination has been cost-saving on average at about €10 per vaccinated employee, the cost-benefit analysis was prone to between-season variability.ConclusionsVaccinated employees can serve as a barrier to limit the spread of influenza in the population, reducing the attack rate by 78% at an employee coverage of 90%. While workplace vaccination is relatively inexpensive (due to economies of scale) and convenient, the return on investment is volatile. Government subsidies can be pivotal to encourage employers to provide vaccination at the workplace with positive externalities to society as a whole.     

Influenza immunization coverage of children with sickle cell disease

ObjectivesTo assess receipt of annual flu immunization among children living with sickle cell disease (SCD).MethodsReceipt of flu immunization (2014–2019) by SCD status was assessed among all Michigan children <18 years of age using the statewide immunization registry. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of annual flu immunization by SCD status and age.ResultsAnnual flu immunization coverage was higher among children with SCD (46.9%; n = 751) than without (23.2%; n = 2,012,846). The annual adjusted odds of flu immunization for those with SCD were 2.8 (95% CI: 2.5–3.1) times higher than for those without SCD; there were no significant differences by age among children with SCD. Among those without SCD, adolescents aged 13–17 were 2.2 (95% CI: 2.2–2.2) times less likely to receive annual flu immunization than children 6–35 months.ConclusionsChildren with SCD had higher annual flu immunization rates than those without SCD, but >50% remain unimmunized.     

Antigenic evolution of contemporary clade 2.3.4.4 HPAI H5 influenza A viruses and impact on vaccine use for mitigation and control

Since 2003, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) viruses of the H5 subtype have been maintained in poultry, periodically spilling back into wild migratory birds and spread to other geographic regions, with re-introduction to domestic birds causing severe impacts for poultry health, production and food sustainability. Successive waves of infection have also resulted in substantial genetic evolution and reassortment, enabling the emergence of multiple clades and subtypes within the H5 2.3.4.4 HPAI viruses. Control of AI is principally through either culling or through vaccination using conventional vaccines. Here, we antigenically and genetically characterise the emerging 2020/21 H5NX clade 2.3.4.4 strains and assess cross-reactivity to putative vaccine strains using chicken antisera. We demonstrate significant antigenic differences between commercially available poultry vaccines and currently circulating viruses suggesting that vaccination options might be suboptimal in the current outbreaks.