Cost-effectiveness of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine for elderly population in China

BackgroundInfluenza-associated excess death occurred most in the elderly. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) versus trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) for prevention of influenza infection among elderly population in China.MethodsA decision-analytic model was developed to compare 1-year clinical and economic outcomes of three influenza vaccination options (no vaccination, TIV, and QIV) in a hypothetical cohort of Chinese elderly aged 69 years. Outcome measures included cost, influenza infection rate, influenza-related mortality rate, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) loss, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from societal perspective. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the uncertainty of model inputs.ResultsBase-case results showed no vaccination was dominated (more costly at higher QALY loss) by TIV and QIV. QIV was more costly (USD56.29 versus USD54.28) with lower influenza infection rate (0.608 versus 0.623), mortality rate (0.00199 versus 0.00204), and QALY loss (0.01213 versus 0.01243) than TIV. QIV was cost-effective compared to TIV with ICER of 6,700 USD/QALY below the willingness-to-pay threshold (29,580 USD/QALY). One-way sensitivity analysis found the cost-effectiveness of QIV was subject to the relative risk of vaccine effectiveness of QIV versus TIV, and TIV would be cost-effective if the relative risk was below 1.05. In 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, the probabilities of QIV, TIV, and no vaccination to be cost-effective were 86.3%, 13.7%, and 0%, respectively.ConclusionQIV appears to be a cost-effective option compared to TIV and no influenza vaccination for elderly population in China.     

Importance and value of adjuvanted influenza vaccine in the care of older adults from a European perspective – A systematic review of recently published literature on real-world data

BackgroundThere is an urgent need for improved influenza vaccines especially for older adults due to the presence of immunosenescence. It is therefore highly relevant to compare enhanced influenza vaccines with traditional influenza vaccines with respect to their effectiveness.ObjectiveTo compare vaccine efficacy and effectiveness of adjuvanted influenza vaccines (aTIV/aQIV) vs. non-adjuvanted standard-dose (TIV/QIV) and high-dose (TIV-HD/QIV-HD) influenza vaccines regarding influenza-related outcomes in older adults, complementing findings from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)’s systematic review of enhanced seasonal influenza vaccines from February 2020.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in Embase and MEDLINE to identify randomised controlled trials, observational studies and systematic reviews, published since ECDC’s systematic review (between 7 February 2020 and 6 September 2021). Included studies were appraised with either the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, ROBINS-I or AMSTAR 2.ResultsEleven analyses from nine real-world evidence (RWE) studies comprising ～53 million participants and assessing the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of aTIV vs. TIV, QIV and/or TIV-HD in adults aged ≥65 years over the 2006/07–2008/09 and 2011/12–2019/20 influenza seasons were identified. Nine analyses found that aTIV was significantly more effective than TIV and QIV in reducing influenza-related outcomes by clinical setting and suspected influenza outbreaks (rVE ranging from 7.5% to 25.6% for aTIV vs. TIV and 7.1% to 36.3% for aTIV vs. QIV). Seven analyses found similar effectiveness of aTIV vs. TIV-HD in reducing influenza-related medical encounters, inpatient stays and hospitalisations/emergency room visits. In three analyses, aTIV was significantly more effective than TIV-HD in reducing influenza-related medical encounters and office visits (rVE ranging from 6.6% to 16.6%). Risk of bias of identified studies was moderate to high.ConclusionsOur study suggests that both adjuvanted and high-dose vaccines are effective alternatives for vaccination programmes in older adults and preferable over conventional standard-dose vaccines.     

Lineage-matched versus mismatched influenza B vaccine effectiveness following seasons of marginal influenza B circulation

BackgroundSeveral countries have recently transitioned from the trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) to the quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (QIV) in order to outweigh influenza B vaccine-mismatch. However, few studies thus far evaluated its benefits versus the TIV in a systematic manner. Our objective was to compare the QIV VE with lineage-mismatched TIV VE.MethodsWe estimated the 2015–2016, 2017–2018, 2019–2020 end-of season influenza B VE against laboratory-confirmed influenza-like illness (ILI) among community patients, using the test-negative design. VE was estimated for pre-determined age groups and for moving age intervals of 15 years.ResultsSince 2011–2012 season, alternate seasons in Israel were dominated by influenza B circulation. Compared with the lineage-mismatched TIV used during the 2015–2016 and 2017–2018 seasons, the 2019–2020 QIV showed the highest all-ages VE, with VE estimates of 56.9 (95% CI 30.1 to 73.4), 16.5 (95% CI –22.5 to 43.1) and ?25.8 (95% CI ?85.3 to 14.6) for the 2019–2020, 2017–2018 and 2015–2016 seasons, respectively. The 2019–2020 VE point estimated were the highest for the 0.5–4, 5–17 and 18–44 years age groups and for more 15-year age intervals as compared to the other seasons.ConclusionsOur results support the rapid transition from the TIV to the QIV.     

四价流感病毒灭活疫苗在18~64岁人群免疫原性和安全性的系统综述和Meta分析

目的 用Meta分析的方法评价四价流感病毒灭活疫苗在18~64岁人群的免疫原性（抗体保护率和抗体阳转率）。方法 检索Medline、Cochrane Library、Science Direct数据库,将近10年内发表的比较18~64岁人群接种四价流感病毒灭活疫苗和三价流感病毒灭活疫苗免疫原性的临床随机对照试验纳入分析。采用Revman 5.3软件对纳入文献数据进行Meta分析。结果 共纳入8篇文献,针对甲型流感株（A/H1N1、A/H3N2）的抗体保护率和抗体阳转率,两种疫苗的反应差异无统计学意义;针对不含乙型流感株B/Victoria的三价流感病毒灭活疫苗,四价流感病毒灭活疫苗抗体保护率的合并RR值为1.28（95% CI：1.08~1.51,P<0.05）,抗体阳转率的合并RR值为1.94（95% CI：1.50~2.50,P<0.05）;针对不含乙型流感株B/Yamagata的三价流感病毒灭活疫苗,四价流感病毒疫苗抗体保护率的合并RR值为1.10（95% CI：1.02~1.18,P<0.05）,抗体阳转率的合并RR值为1.99（95% CI：1.34~2.97,P<0.05）,差异有统计学意义。结论 18~64岁人群中,四价流感病毒灭活疫苗与三价流感病毒灭活疫苗对于相同的疫苗株产生的免疫原性无差异,对于三价流感病毒灭活疫苗中不含的乙型疫苗株能产生良好的免疫效果。     

Fc functional antibody responses to adjuvanted versus unadjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccination in community-dwelling older adults

BackgroundSeasonal influenza vaccination with a standard trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) induces a modest, and cross-reactive, Fc functional antibody response in older adults. Recent improvements to influenza vaccines include a quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) and a TIV adjuvanted with the squalene-based oil-in-water emulsion MF59.MethodsPre- and post-vaccination serum samples from older adults vaccinated with QIV (n = 27) and adjuvanted TIV (n = 44) were studied using hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assays and dimeric Fc-gamma receptor IIIa binding ELISAs, as a surrogate of antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC).ResultsWe found that the unadjuvanted QIV elicited a stronger HAI response against the H1N1 vaccine virus than the adjuvanted TIV. Post-vaccination levels of HA-specific ADCC antibodies were similar for older adults vaccinated with QIV and adjuvanted TIV. The ADCC response to influenza vaccination was largely determined by pre-vaccination or baseline levels of these antibodies, with older adults with low baseline levels of ADCC activity demonstrating greater post-vaccination rises.ConclusionsIn this cohort of community-dwelling older adults, the QIV was at least as good as the adjuvanted TIV in the induction of ADCC and HAI responses. Further studies on how these antibody responses translate to efficacy in preventing influenza infections are warranted.     

Immunogenicity,reactogenicity, and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine candidate versus inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine in healthy adults aged ≥18 years: A phase III,randomized trial

Background

Two influenza B lineages have been co-circulating since the 1980s, and because inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) contains only one B strain, it provides little/no protection against the alternate B-lineage. We assessed a candidate inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) containing both B lineages versus TIV in healthy adults.

Methods

Subjects received one dose of QIV (lot 1, 2, or 3) or one of two TIVs (B strain from Victoria or Yamagata lineage); randomization was 2:2:2:1:1. Hemagglutination-inhibition assays were performed 21-days post-vaccination; superiority of QIV versus TIV for the alternate B-lineage was demonstrated if the 95% confidence interval (CI) lower limit for the GMT ratio was ≥1.5, and non-inferiority against the shared strains was demonstrated if the 95% CI upper limit for the GMT ratio was ≤1.5. Reactogenicity and safety were assessed during the post-vaccination period. NCT01196975.

Results

Immunogenicity of QIV lots was consistent, QIV was superior to TIV for the alternate B-lineage strain, and QIV was non-inferior versus TIVs for shared strains (A/H1N1, A/H3N2, B-strain). Reactogenicity and safety profile of the QIV was consistent with seasonal influenza vaccines.

Conclusion

QIV provided superior immunogenicity for the added B strain without affecting the antibody response to the TIV strains, and without compromising safety.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccines in Beijing: A modeling analysis

BackgroundSince 2007, Beijing has offered a free trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) for residents aged ≥ 60 years and school students. The quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) was administered to school children in 2018 and will be administered to elderly adults in the future. In addition, health care workers (HCWs) who are involved in the prevention and control of COVID-19 were included in the program in 2020. This study aimed to analyze the cost-effectiveness of a comprehensive list of combined strategies of TIV and QIV for school children, elderly adults, and HCWs to identify the most cost-effective strategy.MethodsA decision tree was developed to compare 1-year outcomes of TIV vs. QIV in three risk groups: school children, elderly adults, and HCWs. The outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were developed to assess the robustness of the results.ResultsFrom the perspective of society, this study found that the introduction of QIVs can be cost-effective for any and all targeted groups with a willingness-to-pay threshold of 3-fold GDP per capita. Among all programs, program H (all school children, elderly adults, and HCWs received the QIV) showed a 79% probability of being cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 13,580 (95% CI: 13,294, 13,867) US$/QALY and was the preferred option in the base case scenario.ConclusionThe introduction of QIVs to school children, elderly adults, or HCWs is likely to be cost-effective, either separately or collectively. The introduction of QIV to school children, elderly adults, and health care workers simultaneously showed the highest probability of being cost-effective and was the preferred option.     

The cost-effectiveness of trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccination in communities in South Africa,Vietnam and Australia

BackgroundTo inform national healthcare authorities whether quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIVs) provide better value for money than trivalent influenza vaccines (TIVs), we assessed the cost-effectiveness of TIV and QIV in low-and-middle income communities based in South Africa and Vietnam and contrasted these findings with those from a high-income community in Australia.MethodsIndividual based dynamic simulation models were interfaced with a health economic analysis model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of vaccinating 15% of the population with QIV or TIV in each community over the period 2003–2013. Vaccination was prioritized for HIV-infected individuals, before elderly aged 65+ years and young children. Country or region-specific data on influenza-strain circulation, clinical outcomes and costs were obtained from published sources. The societal perspective was used and outcomes were expressed in International$ (I$) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.ResultsWhen compared with TIV, we found that QIV would provide a greater reduction in influenza-related morbidity in communities in South Africa and Vietnam as compared with Australia. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of QIV versus TIV was estimated at I$4183/QALY in South Africa, I$1505/QALY in Vietnam and I$80,966/QALY in Australia.ConclusionsThe cost-effectiveness of QIV varied between communities due to differences in influenza epidemiology, comorbidities, and unit costs. Whether TIV or QIV is the most cost-effective alternative heavily depends on influenza B burden among subpopulations targeted for vaccination in addition to country-specific willingness-to-pay thresholds and budgetary impact.     

Cost effectiveness of trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccines in 50- to 64-year-old adults in Korea

BackgroundInfluenza causes severe complications in at-risk populations, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Vaccination is the most effective measure to prevent infection and complications caused by seasonal influenza. However, no study has analyzed the cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccines in 50- to 64-year-olds in South Korea.ObjectiveWe examined the application of the National Immunization Program (NIP) in 50- to 64-year-olds and compared the cost-effectiveness of quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) with that of trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) in South Korea.MethodsOne-year static model was assumed by constructing separate decision trees for age subgroups: 50–54, 55–59, and 60–64. Each subgroup was divided into at-risk and not-at-risk groups. Using circulation data from previous studies and Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, we estimated the probabilities of influenza infection, outpatient treatment, hospitalization, and deaths. Medical cost was estimated from 2015 to 2017 National Health Insurance Sharing Service claim data, while productivity losses from work absenteeism or death were estimated from labor and economic surveys of Korean government. Disutility was estimated based on previous studies.ResultsCompared with non-vaccination, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the 50–54, 55–59, and 60–64 age groups for TIV were US$2010.90, US$2004.58, and US$1865.55, respectively, while for QIV were US$2187.17, US$2190.89, and US$2074.52, respectively. Compared with TIV, ICERs for QIV were US$4445.66, US$4578.06, and US$4751.93, respectively. All the aforementioned ICER values were lower than the 2017 Korean GDP per capita of US$29,742.839.ConclusionImplementing the NIP in the 50- to 64-year-old age group was found to be cost effective. Since both TIV and QIV were cost effective, we recommend QIV as the preferred option, based on its greater protection against Influenza B.     

A Phase III randomised trial of the immunogenicity and safety of quadrivalent versus trivalent inactivated subunit influenza vaccine in adult and elderly subjects,assessing both anti-haemagglutinin and virus neutralisation antibody responses

BackgroundTrivalent influenza vaccines (TIVs) offer substantial protection against matching B-strains, however, protection against alternate-lineage B-strains may be enhanced by adding a second B-strain in quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIVs). In this Phase III, double-blind, multicentre, randomised study, the immunogenicity and safety of subunit inactivated QIV versus TIV was assessed in adult (aged ≥18 to ≤60 years) and elderly (aged ≥61 years) subjects by analysing a combination of haemagglutinin inhibition (HI) and virus neutralisation (VN).MethodsSubjects (n = 1980) were recruited off season (2015/2016) from 20 centres in five European countries and randomised to receive either QIV (n = 1538), TIV with B-strain of the Victoria lineage (n = 221) or TIV with B-strain of the Yamagata lineage (n = 221). The primary aim was to demonstrate non-inferiority of QIV to TIV for immunogenicity against matched influenza strains based on post-vaccination HI titres. Secondary aims were to show superiority of QIV to TIV for immunogenicity against alternate-lineage B-strains and to characterise the immune response by reverse cumulative distribution (RCD) curves of antibody titres and derived serological parameters for HI and VN. Reactogenicity and occurrence of adverse events were assessed post-vaccination.ResultsQIV elicited a non-inferior immune response for matched strains (upper limit of 95% CI for HI geometric mean ratios [GMRs] <1.5) and a superior response for alternate-lineage B-strains (HI GMRs < 1; p < 0.0001) versus TIV. RCD curves demonstrated that post-vaccination HI and VN titres were higher for QIV versus TIV for both alternate-lineage B-strains. Seroconversion rates and geometric mean fold increases of the VN assay were consistent with the HI assay for all strains in QIV. Reporting rates of local and systemic reactions were similar in both vaccine groups.ConclusionsQIV was non-inferior in immunogenicity to TIV for matched strains and superior to the alternate-lineage B-strains in TIV. Safety and tolerability profiles of QIV and TIV were comparable.     

Comparison of the immunogenicity and safety of quadrivalent and tetravalent influenza vaccines in children and adolescents

BackgroundChildren and adolescents are susceptible to influenza. Vaccination is the most important strategy for preventing influenza, yet there are few studies on the immunogenicity and safety of quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (QIV) containing two A strains (H1N1 and H3N2) and two B lineages (Victoria and Yamagata). Therefore, to further clarify the immunogenicity and safety of QIV in children and adolescents, a meta-analysis was performed to provide a reference for the development of influenza prevention strategies.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for articles published as of February 12, 2019. Random clinical trials comparing the immunogenicity and safety of QIV and TIV among children and adolescents were selected. The main outcomes were comparisons of immunogenicity (seroprotection rate [SPR] and seroconversion rate [SCR] and adverse events using risk ratios (RRs). The meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models.ResultsAmong the 6 months up to 3 years group, QIV showed a higher SPR for B lineages than for TIV-B/Yamagata, with pooled RRs of 3.07 (95% CI: 2.58–3.66) and 1.06 (95% CI: 1.01–1.11), respectively. For the 3 years through 18 years, QIV had a higher SCR and SPR for the Yamagata lineage than for TIV-B/Victoria, with pooled RRs of 2.30 (95% CI: 1.83–2.88) and 1.16 (95% CI: 1.03–1.30), respectively. Compared to TIV-B/Yamagata, a higher SCR and SPR for the Victoria lineage was found for QIV, with RRs of 3.09 (95% CI: 1.99–4.78) and 1.72 (95% CI: 1.22–2.41), respectively. Regarding adverse events, only pain was more frequently reported for QIV than TIV ; the RR was 1.09 (95% CI: 1.02–1.17).ConclusionsThe immunogenicity of QIV for common ingredients was similar to that of TIV, but the former exhibited significantly higher immunogenicity for the unique lineage. QIV also had the same reliable safety as TIV.     

18岁以上人群接种四价流感病毒灭活疫苗免疫原性和安全性的Meta分析

目的 评价18岁以上人群接种四价流感病毒灭活疫苗(QIV)免疫原性和安全性.方法 检索美国国家医学图书馆数据库、Cochrane协作网图书馆、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国期刊全文数据库和万方全文数据库,将有关比较18岁以上人群接种QIV和三价流感病毒灭活疫苗(TIV)免疫原性和安全性的随机对照试验纳入分析.以接种疫苗21 d后产生的针对H1N1、H3N2、B/Victoria、B/Yamagata四个疫苗株的抗体保护率(SPR)和抗体阳转率(SCR)以及不良反应发生率作为结局指标,合并组间的SPR、SCR和不良反应发生率的相对危险度(RR).结果 共纳入5篇文献.针对B/Yamagata的SPR的RR是1.12(95％ CI:1.02～1.22),SCR的RR是2.11(95％ CI:1.51～2.95).针对B/Victoria的SPR的RR是1.14(95％ CI:1.03～1.25),SCR的RR是1.78(95％ CI:1.24～2.55).接种QIV和TIV(含B/Yamagata)后接种部位疼痛发生率的RR是1.23 (95％ CI:1.05～1.44).结论 18岁以上成人接种QIV不仅可以产生与TIV相似的免疫效果和安全性,而且可以对TIV未包含的乙型流感疫苗株产生较好免疫效果.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of switching from a trivalent to a quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in the Peruvian immunisation programme

BackgroundSeasonal influenza is an acute respiratory infection mostly caused by type A and B influenza viruses. The severe form of the infection can be life-threatening and lead to a significant burden. Vaccination is the most efficient way of preventing influenza infections and limit this burden.ObjectivesTo assess the cost-effectiveness of switching from a trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) to a quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) in the vaccination programme in Peru, and to evaluate the health and economic impact of reaching the vaccination coverage rate targeted by the Ministry of Health.MethodsA decision-analytic static cost-effectiveness model, was adapted to the Peruvian setting under both payer and societal perspectives.ResultsA switch from TIV to QIV would prevent 29,126 additional cases (including 12,815 consultations), 54 hospitalisations, and 23 deaths related to influenza, mostly in the population <2 years-old and >60 years-old. This would lead to a saving of US $505,206 under the payer perspective, that would partially offset the investment necessary to introduce QIV into the immunisation programme. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is $16,649 per QALYs gained. The main drivers of the model results were vaccine efficacy against influenza B viruses, degree of match, vaccines prices and proportion of cases attributable to influenza B. The robustness of the results seems satisfactory as QIV has the probability of being a cost-effective strategy of 83.8% (considering a threshold of three GDP per capita). Reaching the coverage targeted by the Ministry of Health would result in health benefits and disease management savings, and lower ICERs.ConclusionIntroducing QIV instead of TIV in the Peruvian immunisation programme is expected to be a cost-effective strategy, especially in younger children and the elderly. The benefit of QIV would be even more important if the coverage targeted by the Ministry of Health would be reached in the most vulnerable groups.     

Cost-Effectiveness of Quadrivalent Versus Trivalent Influenza Vaccination in the Dutch National Influenza Prevention Program

ObjectivesAs of 2019, quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) has replaced trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) in the national immunization program in The Netherlands. Target groups are individuals of 60+ years of age and those with chronic diseases. The objective was to estimate the incremental break-even price of QIV over TIV at a threshold of €20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).MethodsAn age-structured compartmental dynamic model was adapted for The Netherlands to assess health outcomes and associated costs of vaccinating all individuals at higher risk for influenza with QIV instead of TIV over the seasons 2010 to 2018. Influenza incidence rates were derived from a global database. Other parameters (probabilities, QALYs and costs) were extracted from the literature and applied according to Dutch guidelines. A threshold of €20 000 per QALY was applied to estimate the incremental break-even prices of QIV versus TIV. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model outcomes.ResultsRetrospectively, vaccination with QIV instead of TIV could have prevented on average 9500 symptomatic influenza cases, 2130 outpatient visits, 84 hospitalizations, and 38 deaths per year over the seasons 2010 to 2018. This translates into 385 QALYs and 398 life-years potentially gained. On average, totals of €431 527 direct and €2 388 810 indirect costs could have been saved each year.ConclusionUsing QIV over TIV during the influenza seasons 2010 to 2018 would have been cost-effective at an incremental price of maximally €3.81 (95% confidence interval, €3.26-4.31). Sensitivity analysis showed consistent findings on the incremental break-even price in the same range.     

Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BackgroundA quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) includes two A strains (A/H1N1, A/H3N2) and two B lineages (B/Victoria, B/Yamagata). The presence of both B lineages eliminate potential B lineage mismatch of trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) with the circulating strain.MethodsElectronic database searches of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CCRCT), Scopus and Web of Science were conducted for articles published until June 30, 2015 inclusive. Articles were limited to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults using inactivated intramuscular vaccine and published in English language only. Summary estimates of immunogenicity (by seroprotection and seroconversion rates) and adverse events outcomes were compared between QIV and TIV, using a risk ratio (RR). Studies were pooled using inverse variance weights with a random effect model and the I² statistic was used to estimate heterogeneity.ResultsA total of five RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. For immunogenicity outcomes, QIV had similar efficacy for the three common strains; A/H1N1, A/H3N2 and the B lineage included in the TIV. QIV also showed superior efficacy for the B lineage not included in the TIV; pooled seroprotection RR of 1.14 (95%CI: 1.03–1.25, p = 0.008) and seroconversion RR of 1.78 (95%CI: 1.24–2.55, p = 0.002) for B/Victoria, and pooled seroprotection RR of 1.12 (95%CI: 1.02–1.22, p = 0.01) and seroconversion RR of 2.11 (95%CI: 1.51–2.95, p < 0.001) for B/Yamagata, respectively. No significant differences were found between QIV and TIV for aggregated local and systemic adverse events within 7 days post-vaccination. There were no vaccine-related serious adverse events reported for either QIV or TIV. Compared to TIV, injection-site pain was more common for QIV, with a pooled RR of 1.18 (95%CI: 1.03–1.35, p = 0.02).ConclusionIn adults, inactivated QIV was as immunogenic as seasonal TIV, with equivalent efficacy against the shared three strains included in TIV, and a superior immunogenicity against the non-TIV B lineage.     

Safety and immunogenicity of a quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in adults

Background and aims

Although two antigenically distinct B strain lineages of influenza have co-circulated globally since the mid-1980s, trivalent influenza vaccines (TIVs) contain only one, resulting in frequent mismatches. This study examined the safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) candidate.

Methods

This was a phase III, randomized, active-controlled, multicenter trial in adults during the 2011/2012 influenza season. Enrollment was stratified to include equal numbers of subjects 18–60 and >60 years of age. Subjects were randomized 5:1:1 to be vaccinated with the QIV, the licensed TIV, or an investigational TIV containing the alternate B strain lineage. Hemagglutinin inhibition antibody titers were assessed pre-vaccination and 21 days post-vaccination.

Results

1116 subjects were vaccinated with QIV, 226 with the licensed TIV, and 223 with the investigational TIV. For all four vaccine strains, antibody responses to the QIV were non-inferior to the response to the TIV for the matched strains. For both B strains, post-vaccination antibody responses to the QIV were superior to the responses to the TIVs lacking the corresponding B strain. The QIV met all European Medicines Agency criteria for all four vaccine strains. Solicited reactions, unsolicited adverse events, and serious adverse events were similar for the QIV and pooled TIV groups. The most commonly reported solicited reactions were injection-site pain, headache, and myalgia, and most solicited reactions were mild or moderate and appeared and resolved within 3 days of vaccination. No treatment-related serious adverse events or deaths were reported.

Conclusions

The inactivated QIV was well tolerated without any safety concerns. For all four vaccine strains, antibody responses to the QIV were superior to the responses to TIV for the unmatched strains and non-inferior for the matched strains. QIV could therefore help address an unmet need due to mismatched B strains in previous influenza vaccines.

Clinical trial registry number

EudraCT: 2011-001976-21.     

Post-marketing surveillance of adverse events following immunization with inactivated quadrivalent and trivalent influenza vaccine in health care providers in Western Australia

In 2015, inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) was first introduced into the Australian market. A routine vaccine safety surveillance system in Western Australia was used to conduct post-licensure surveillance of adverse events following immunization with inactivated QIV and trivalent influenza vaccines (TIV) in a sample of 1685 healthcare providers (HCPs). A similar percentage of HCPs who received QIV reported having any reaction seven days post-vaccination as HCPs who received TIV (13.6 vs. 12.8%, respectively; p = 0.66). However, a slightly higher percentage of HCPs who received QIV reported pain or swelling at the injection site as compared to HCPs who received TIV (6.9% vs. 4.2%, respectively; p = 0.02). No serious vaccine-associated adverse events were detected during follow-up of either vaccine. Acknowledging the study limitations, the results of this post-marketing surveillance support the safety of QIV, suggesting there is little difference in the reactogenicity of QIV as compared to TIV.     

Quadrivalent influenza vaccines in low and middle income countries: Cost-effectiveness,affordability and availability

In high-income countries, there is an increased tendency to replace inactivated seasonal trivalent influenza (TIV) vaccines with quadrivalent (QIV) vaccines as these are considered to give a greater public health benefit. In addition, several recent studies from the USA and Europe indicate that replacement with QIV might also be cost-effective; however, the situation in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) is less clear as few studies have investigated this aspect.The paper by de Boer et al. (2018) describes a dynamic modelling study commissioned by WHO that suggests that in LMICs, under certain conditions, QIV might also be more cost-effective than TIV. In this commentary, we discuss some important aspects that policymakers in LMICs might wish to take into account when considering replacing TIV by QIV.Indeed, from the data presented in the paper by de Boer et al. it can be inferred that replacing QIV for TIV would mean a 25–29% budget increase for seasonal influenza vaccination in South Africa and Vietnam, resulting in an incremental influenza-related health impact reduction of only 7–8% when a 10% symptomatic attack rate is assumed. We argue that national health budget considerations in LMIC might lead decision-makers to choose other investments with higher health impact for a budget equivalent to roughly a quarter of the yearly TIV immunization costs.In addition to an increased annual cost that would be associated with a decision to replace TIV with QIV, there would be an increased pressure on manufacturers to produce QIV in time for the influenza season requiring manufacturers to produce some components of the seasonal vaccine at risk prior to the WHO recommendations for influenza vaccines.Unless the current uncertainties, impracticalities and increased costs associated with QIVs are resolved, TIVs are likely to remain the more attractive option for many LMICs. Each country should establish its context-specific process for decision-making based on national data on disease burden and costs in order to determine whether the health gains out-weigh the additional cost of moving to QIV. For example, immunizing more people in the population, especially those in higher risk groups, with TIV might not only provide better value for money but also deliver better health outcomes in LMICs.Countries with local influenza vaccine manufacturing capacity should include in their seasonal influenza vaccine procurement process an analysis of the pros- and cons- of TIV versus QIV, to ensure both feasibility and sustainability of local manufacturing.     

Active SMS-based influenza vaccine safety surveillance in Australian children

IntroductionAustralia’s novel, active surveillance system, AusVaxSafety, monitors the post-market safety of vaccines in near real time. We analysed cumulative surveillance data for children aged 6 months to 4 years who received seasonal influenza vaccine in 2015 and/or 2016 to determine: adverse event following immunisation (AEFI) rates by vaccine brand, age and concomitant vaccine administration.MethodsParent/carer reports of AEFI occurring within 3 days of their child receiving an influenza vaccine in sentinel immunisation clinics were solicited by Short Message Service (SMS) and/or email-based survey. Retrospective data from 2 years were combined to examine specific AEFI rates, particularly fever and medical attendance as a proxy for serious adverse events (SAE), with and without concomitant vaccine administration. As trivalent influenza vaccines (TIV) were funded in Australia’s National Immunisation Program (NIP) in 2015 and quadrivalent (QIV) in 2016, respectively, we compared their safety profiles.Results7402 children were included. Data were reported weekly through each vaccination season; no safety signals or excess of adverse events were detected. More children who received a concomitant vaccine had fever (7.5% versus 2.8%; p < .001). Meningococcal B vaccine was associated with the highest increase in AEFI rates among children receiving a specified concomitant vaccine: 30.3% reported an AEFI compared with 7.3% who received an influenza vaccine alone (p < .001). Reported fever was strongly associated with medical attendance (OR: 42.6; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 25.6–71.0). TIV and QIV safety profiles included low and expected AEFI rates (fever: 4.3% for TIV compared with 3.2% for QIV (p = .015); injection site reaction: 1.9% for TIV compared with 3.0% for QIV (p < .001)). There was no difference in safety profile between brands.DiscussionActive participant-reported data provided timely vaccine brand-specific safety information. Our surveillance system has particular utility in monitoring the safety of influenza vaccines, given that they may vary in composition annually.     

The economic value of a quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine

The recently licensed quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine (QIV) may provide better protection than the traditional trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) as it includes one more influenza B strain. We developed a Monte Carlo simulation model to determine the economic value of a QIV compared to the TIV for 10 influenza seasons (1999–2009). The addition of the influenza B strain to convert the TIV into a QIV could result in substantial cost-savings to society (median of $3.1 billion) and third party payers (median of $292 million), even when the cost of QIV is significantly higher.