Effectiveness of subunit influenza vaccination in the 2014–2015 season and residual effect of split vaccination in previous seasons

BackgroundIn Navarra, Spain, subunit vaccine was first used in the 2014–2015 season, whereas trivalent split-virion influenza vaccines had been used in previous seasons. We estimate the effectiveness of the subunit vaccine in the current season and split vaccine in the two previous seasons against laboratory-confirmed influenza in the 2014–2015 season.MethodsPatients with influenza-like illness hospitalized or attended by sentinel general practitioners were swabbed for influenza testing. The previous and current vaccine status of laboratory-confirmed cases was compared to test-negative controls.ResultsAmong 1213 patients tested, 619 (51%) were confirmed for influenza virus: 52% influenza A(H3N2), 46% influenza B, and 2% A(H1N1)pdm09. The overall effectiveness for subunit vaccination in the current season was 19% (95% confidence interval [CI]: −13 to 42), 2% (95%CI: −47 to 35) against influenza A(H3N2) and 32% (95%CI: −4 to 56) against influenza B. The effectiveness against any influenza was 67% (95%CI: 17–87) for 2012–2013 and 2013–2014 vaccination only, 42% (95%CI: −31 to 74) for 2014–2015 vaccination only, and 38% (95%CI: 8–58) for vaccination in the 2012–2013, 2013–2014 and 2014–2015 seasons. The same estimates against influenza A(H3N2) were 47% (95%CI: −60 to 82), −54% (95%CI: −274 to 37) and 28% (95%CI: −17 to 56), and against influenza B were 82% (95%CI: 19–96), 93% (95%CI: 45–99) and 43% (95%CI: 5–66), respectively.ConclusionThese results suggest a considerable residual protection of split vaccination in previous seasons, low overall effectiveness of current season subunit vaccination, and possible interference between current subunit and previous split vaccines.     

The 2015–2016 influenza epidemic in Beijing,China: Unlike elsewhere,circulation of influenza A(H3N2) with moderate vaccine effectiveness

BackgroundWhile the 2015–2016 influenza season in the northern hemisphere was dominated by A(H1N1)pdm09 and B/Victoria viruses, in Beijing, China, there was also significant circulation of influenza A(H3N2) virus. In this report we estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza A(H3N2) and other circulating viruses, and describe further characteristics of the 2015–2016 influenza season in Beijing.MethodsWe estimated VE of the 2015–2016 trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV) against laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection using the test-negative study design. The effect of prior vaccination on current VE was also examined.ResultsOf 11,000 eligible patients included in the study, 2969 (27.0%) were influenza positive. Vaccination coverage was 4.2% in both cases and controls. Adjusted VE against all influenza was 8% (95% CI: −16% to 27%): 18% (95% CI: −38% to 52%) for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, 54% (95% CI: 16% to 74%) for influenza A(H3N2), and −8% (95% CI: −40% to 18%) for influenza B/Victoria. The overall VE for receipt of 2015–2016 vaccination only, 2014–2015 vaccination only, and vaccinations in both seasons was −15% (95% CI: −63% to 19%), −25% (95% CI: −78% to 13%), and 18% (95% CI: −11% to 40%), respectively.ConclusionsOverall the 2015–2016 TIV was protective against influenza infection in Beijing, with higher VE against the A(H3N2) viruses compared to A(H1N1)pdm09 and B viruses.     

Inactivated influenza vaccine effectiveness and an analysis of repeated vaccination for children during the 2016/17 season

ObjectivesWe assessed the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) in children 6 months to 15 years of age during the 2016/17 season. In addition, we estimated the impact of repeated vaccination in children on VE.MethodsOur study for VEs in preventing influenza and admission due to influenza were conducted according to a test-negative case-control design (TNCC) based on influenza rapid diagnostic test results. We also analyzed the VE by vaccine status in the current and previous seasons for the impact of repeated vaccination.ResultsDuring the 2016/17 season, the quadrivalent IIV was used in Japan. The adjusted VE in preventing influenza illness was 38% (95% CI, 29–46) against influenza A and 39% (95% CI, 18–54) against influenza B. Infants showed no significant VE. The VE in preventing hospitalization was not demonstrated. For the analysis of repeated vaccination, the vaccine was effective only when immunization occurred in the current season. The children who were immunized in two consecutive seasons were more likely to develop influenza compared to those immunized in the current season only (odds ratio, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.05–2.38], adjusted odds ratio, 1.53 [95% CI, 0.99–2.35]). However, the odds ratio of repeated vaccination was not significant when the analysis excluded those who developed influenza in the previous season.ConclusionsVE in children in the 2016/17 season was similar to values previously reported. Repeated vaccination interfered with the VE against any influenza infection in the 2016/17 season. The results of our study suggest that decreased VE by repeat vaccination phenomenon was associated with immunity by influenza infection in the previous season. However, the influenza vaccine should be recommended every season for children.     

Effectiveness of the current and prior influenza vaccinations in Northern Spain, 2018–2019

BackgroundThe population targeted for influenza vaccination can be repeatedly vaccinated over successive seasons, and vaccines received in previous seasons may retain preventive effect. This study aims to estimate the effectiveness of inactivated influenza vaccines received in the current and prior seasons in the 2018–2019 season.MethodsInfluenza-like illness patients attended by sentinel general practitioners or admitted to hospitals in Navarre, Spain, were tested for influenza. Vaccination status in the current and three prior seasons was obtained from the vaccination registry. The test-negative design was used to estimate the vaccine effectiveness.ResultsA total of 381 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 cases, 341 A(H3N2) cases and 1222 controls were analysed. As compared to individuals unvaccinated in the current and three prior seasons, the influenza vaccine effectiveness against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 57% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 40%, 70%) for current season vaccination regardless of prior doses and 48% (95%CI: 14%, 68%) for vaccination in prior seasons but not in the current season. These estimates were 12% (95%CI: −23%, 37%) and 27% (95%CI: −22%, 56%), respectively, against influenza A(H3N2). Individuals vaccinated with the two A(H1N1)pdm09 strains in influenza vaccines since 2009, A/Michigan/45/2015 and A/California/07/2009, had higher protection (68%; 95%CI: 53%, 77%) than those vaccinated with A/Michigan/45/2015 only (29%, p = 0.020) or with A/California/07/2009 only (34%, p = 0.005).ConclusionThese results suggest moderate effectiveness of influenza vaccination against A(H1N1)pdm09 and low effectiveness against A(H3N2) influenza in the 2018–2019 season. Vaccination in prior seasons maintained a notable protective effect. Strains included in previous vaccines were as effective as the current vaccine strain, and both added their effects against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09.     

Influenza vaccine effectiveness in preventing hospitalization among Beijing residents in China, 2013–15

BackgroundEstimates of influenza vaccination effectiveness (VE) are valuable for populations where the vaccine has been promoted in order to support vaccination policy and to permit evaluation of vaccination strategies. Such studies would be important for China due to limited data available during seasons when the vaccine strains matched or mismatched the circulating viruses.MethodsWe conducted a test-negative study in hospitals in Beijing. Patients admitted to five hospitals in the city were enrolled during the winter influenza seasons of 2013–14 and 2014–15. Influenza virus infections were determined by PCR, and influenza vaccination records were extracted from a centralized electronic immunization registry. Influenza VE was estimated by logistic regression adjusting for age group, sex and chronic conditions, and matched by calendar week.ResultsA total of 2368 inpatients were recruited during the study period with a vaccination coverage in the control group of 12.8%. The overall estimate of influenza VE was 46.9% (95% CI: −20.4%, 76.6%) for the 2013–14 season and 5.0% (95% CI: −53.0%, 41.0%) for the 2014–15 season. Estimates of VE were relatively higher in children aged 6–17 years than older persons across two influenza seasons while estimates of VE for both adults and elderly were relatively low.ConclusionsOur findings were consistent with expected influenza vaccination effectiveness in seasons when the vaccine matched or mismatched circulating viruses. Strategies to increase influenza vaccine coverage could provide a public health benefit.     

Impact of repeated influenza vaccinations in persons over 65 years of age: A large population-based cohort study of severe influenza over six consecutive seasons, 2011/12–2016/17

BackgroundA forty-year debate on the potential negative effects of repeated seasonal influenza vaccination has been inconclusive, with multiple observational studies of various design providing heterogeneous results too inadequate to inform vaccination policy.MethodsA large population-based cohort study including over one-million observations in individuals over age 65 from six consecutive seasons (2011/12–2016/17) in Stockholm County, Sweden. Current season vaccine effectiveness (VE) against severe, mostly hospital-attended, influenza was assessed using Cox multivariate regression analyses adjusting for demographic variables, comorbidities and previous seasonal influenza vaccination status.ResultsIn none of the six seasons was VE significantly different in persons vaccinated in the current season only, compared to those who had been vaccinated in both the current and the previous season. Neither were there any differences in VE during the seasons 2014/15–2016/17 when comparing persons vaccinated during the current season only vs. those vaccinated during one-three or four-five previous influenza seasons. In contrast, persons only vaccinated during one or more previous years had no protection during the current season.ConclusionsPersons above 65 years are the largest group at risk for severe or complicated influenza and policy should support their yearly seasonal influenza vaccination, which is to-date the best preventive measure available for all risk groups. No negative effects of repeated seasonal vaccination were seen in this large population-based cohort of older persons with severe influenza, which strengthens the recommendation that persons belonging to this age group should be vaccinated yearly.     

Relative effectiveness of high dose versus standard dose influenza vaccines in older adult outpatients over four seasons, 2015–16 to 2018–19

BackgroundNew influenza vaccine formulations are designed to improve vaccine effectiveness and protect those most vulnerable to infection. High dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3), licensed for ages ≥65 years, produces greater antibody responses and efficacy in clinical trials, but post-licensure vaccine effectiveness (VE) compared to standard dose (SD-IIV3/4) vaccine remains an open question.MethodsUsing a test-negative, case control design and propensity analyses to adjust for confounding, US Influenza VE Network data from the 2015–2016 through 2018–2019 seasons were analyzed to determine relative VE (rVE) between HD-IIV3 and SD-IIV3/4 among outpatients ≥65 years old presenting with acute respiratory illness. Influenza vaccination status was derived from electronic medical records and immunization registries.ResultsAmong 3861 enrollees, 2993 (78%) were vaccinated; 1573 (53%) received HD-IIV3 and 1420 (47%) received SD-IIV3/4. HD-IIV3 recipients differed from SD-IIV3/4 recipients by race, previous vaccination, number of outpatient visits in the previous year and timing of vaccination, and were balanced in the propensity model except the timing of vaccination. Compared with no vaccination, significant protection against any influenza A was observed from both HD-IIV3 (VE = 29%; 95%CI = 10%, 44%) and SD-IIV3/4 (VE = 24%; 95%CI = 5%, 39%); rVE = 18% (95%CI = 0%, 33%, SD as referent). When stratified by virus type, against A/H1N1, HD-IIV3 VE was 30% (95%CI = −7%, 54%), SD-IIV3/4 VE was 40% (95%CI = 10%, 61%), and rVE = −32%; (95%CI = −94%, 11%); Against A/H3N2, HD-IIV3 VE was 31% (95%CI = 9%, 47%), SD-IIV3/4 VE was 19% (95%CI = −5%, 37%), and rVE = 27%; (95% CI = 9%, 42%).ConclusionsAmong adults ≥65 years of age, recipients of standard and high dose influenza vaccines differed significantly in their characteristics. After adjusting for these differences, high dose vaccine offered more protection against A/H3N2 and borderline significant protection against all influenza A requiring outpatient care during the 2015–2018 influenza seasons.     

Long term effectiveness of adjuvanted influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine in children

BackgroundImmunological studies have indicated that the effectiveness of AS03 adjuvanted monovalent influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine (Pandemrix^®) may be of longer duration than what is seen for non-adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccines. Sixty-nine percent of children 6 months–18 years of age in Stockholm County received at least one dose of Pandemrix^® during the 2009 pandemic. We studied the effectiveness of the vaccine during the influenza seasons 2010–2011 and 2012–2013 in children hospitalized with virologically confirmed influenza. The season 2011–2012 was not included, since influenza A(H3N2) was the predominant circulating strain.MethodsIn a retrospective case-control study using a modified test-negative design we compared the percentage vaccinated with Pandemrix^® among children diagnosed with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (cases), with that of those diagnosed with influenza A(H3N2) or influenza B (controls) during the two seasons. We excluded children born after July 1, 2009, since only children who were 6 months of age or older received the pandemic vaccine in October–December 2009.ResultsDuring the 2010–2011 season, 3/16 (19%) of children diagnosed with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, vs. 32/41 (78%) of those with influenza A(H3N2) or influenza B had been vaccinated with Pandemrix^® in 2009. The odds ratio, after adjustment for sex, age and underlying diseases, for becoming a case when vaccinated with Pandemrix^® was 0.083 (95%CI 0.014, 0.36), corresponding to a VE of 91.7%. During the season 2012–2013, there was no difference between the two groups; 59% of children diagnosed with influenza A(H3N2)/B and 60% of those with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 had been vaccinated with Pandemrix^® in 2009.ConclusionThe AS03 adjuvanted monovalent influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 vaccine (Pandemrix^®) was effective in preventing hospital admission for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 in children during at least two seasons.     

Assessment of influenza vaccine effectiveness in a sentinel surveillance network 2010–13, United States

BackgroundInfluenza vaccines are now widely used to reduce the burden of annual epidemics of influenza virus infections. Influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) is monitored annually to determine VE against each season's circulating influenza strains in different groups such as children, adults and the elderly. Few prospective surveillance programs are available to evaluate influenza VE against medically attended illness for patients of all ages in the United States.MethodsWe conducted surveillance of patients with acute respiratory illnesses in 101 clinics across the US during three consecutive influenza seasons. We analyzed laboratory testing results for influenza virus, self-reported vaccine history, and patient characteristics, defining cases as patients who tested positive for influenza virus and controls as patients who tested negative for influenza virus. Comparison of influenza vaccination coverage among cases versus controls, adjusted for potential confounders, was used to estimate VE as one minus the adjusted odds ratio multiplied by 100%.ResultsWe included 10,650 patients during three influenza seasons from August 2010 through December 2013, and estimated influenza VE in children 6m–5y of age (58%; 95% CI: 49%–66%), children 6–17y (45%; 95% CI: 34%–53%), adults 18–49y (36%; 95% CI: 24%, 46%), and adults ≥50y (34%, 95% CI: 13%, 51%). VE was higher against influenza A(H1N1) compared to A(H3N2) and B.ConclusionsOur estimates of moderate influenza VE confirm the important role of vaccination in protecting against medically attended influenza virus infection.     

Influenza vaccine effectiveness against influenza-associated hospitalization in 2015/16 season,Beijing, China

BackgroundVaccination is recommended to prevent influenza virus infection and associated complications. This study aimed to estimate the influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalization in the 2015/16 season in Beijing.MethodsPatients who were hospitalized in the 5 study hospitals between 1 Oct 2015 and 15 May 2016 were recruited. Influenza vaccination status was obtained for PCR-confirmed influenza patients and the selected controls who tested negative for the virus. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the influenza VE matching by calendar week, and adjusting for age, study sites, underlying medical conditions, smoking status, and hospital admissions over the past 12 months.ResultsThe overall VE was −37.9% (95% CI: −103.3, 6.5) against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalization. The 2015–16 seasonal vaccine was had −61.9% (95% CI: −211.9, 15.9), −5.4% (95% CI: −108.1, 46.6) and −45.2% (95% CI: −152.6, 16.5) effectiveness to prevent infection from A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and influenza B, respectively.ConclusionsInfluenza vaccination did not show effective protection against hospitalization with influenza in 2015/16 season in Beijing.     

Does consecutive influenza vaccination reduce protection against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionVaccination against influenza on an annual basis is widely recommended, yet recent studies suggest consecutive vaccination may reduce vaccine effectiveness (VE).PurposeTo assess whether when examining the entirety of existing data consecutive influenza vaccination reduces VE compared to current season influenza vaccination.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from inception to April 26, 2017; citations of included studies.Study selectionRandomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of children, adults and/or the elderly that reported laboratory-confirmed influenza infection over 2 or more consecutive influenza seasons were eligible.Data extractionData related to study characteristics, participant demographics, cases of influenza infection by vaccination group and risk of bias assessment was extracted in duplicate.Data synthesisFive RCTs involving 11,987 participants did not show a significant reduction in VE when participants vaccinated in two consecutive seasons (VE 71%, 95% CI 62–78%) were compared to those vaccinated in the current season (VE 58%, 95% CI 48–66%) (odds ratio [OR] 0.88, 95% CI 0.62–1.26, p = 0.49, I² = 39%). Twenty-eight observational studies involving 28,627 participants also did not show a reduction (VE for two consecutive seasons 41%, 95% CI 30–51% compared to VE for current season 47%, 95% CI 39–54%; OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.98–1.32, p = 0.09, I² = 63%). Results from subgroup analyses by influenza type/subtype, vaccine type, age, vaccine match and co-morbidity support these findings; however, dose–response results were inconsistent. Certainty in the evidence was assessed to be very low due to unexplained heterogeneity and imprecision.LimitationsThe inclusion of studies with relatively small sample sizes and low event rates contributed to the imprecision of summary VE and OR estimates, which were based on unadjusted data.ConclusionAvailable evidence does not support a reduction in VE with consecutive influenza vaccination, but the possibility of reduced effectiveness cannot be ruled out due to very low certainty in this evidence.Funding sourceCIHR Foundation Grant (PROSPERO: CRD42017059893).     

Repeated seasonal influenza vaccination among elderly in Europe: Effects on laboratory confirmed hospitalised influenza

In Europe, annual influenza vaccination is recommended to elderly. From 2011 to 2014 and in 2015–16, we conducted a multicentre test negative case control study in hospitals of 11 European countries to measure influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against laboratory confirmed hospitalised influenza among people aged ≥65 years. We pooled four seasons data to measure IVE by past exposures to influenza vaccination.We swabbed patients admitted for clinical conditions related to influenza with onset of severe acute respiratory infection ≤7 days before admission. Cases were patients RT-PCR positive for influenza virus and controls those negative for any influenza virus. We documented seasonal vaccination status for the current season and the two previous seasons.We recruited 5295 patients over the four seasons, including 465A(H1N1)pdm09, 642A(H3N2), 278 B case-patients and 3910 controls. Among patients unvaccinated in both previous two seasons, current seasonal IVE (pooled across seasons) was 30% (95%CI: −35 to 64), 8% (95%CI: −94 to 56) and 33% (95%CI: −43 to 68) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B respectively. Among patients vaccinated in both previous seasons, current seasonal IVE (pooled across seasons) was −1% (95%CI: −80 to 43), 37% (95%CI: 7–57) and 43% (95%CI: 1–68) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B respectively.Our results suggest that, regardless of patients’ recent vaccination history, current seasonal vaccine conferred some protection to vaccinated patients against hospitalisation with influenza A(H3N2) and B. Vaccination of patients already vaccinated in both the past two seasons did not seem to be effective against A(H1N1)pdm09. To better understand the effect of repeated vaccination, engaging in large cohort studies documenting exposures to vaccine and natural infection is needed.     

Negative impact of prior influenza vaccination on current influenza vaccination among people infected and not infected in prior season: A test-negative case-control study in Japan

BackgroundAccumulating evidences indicate that repeated influenza vaccination has negative impact on the vaccine effectiveness (VE). However no published studies considered past influenza infection when assessing the VE of repeated vaccination.MethodsProspective surveillance was conducted from 2009 to 2012 at a community hospital on a small island in Japan. The study included all outpatients with an influenza-like illness (ILI) who attended the hospital, and a rapid diagnostic test (RDT) was used to diagnose influenza A/B infection. The VE of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) against medically attended influenza A (MA-fluA) was estimated using a test-negative case-control study design. The influence of TIV in the prior season on VE in the current season was investigated in the context of MA-fluA during the prior season.ResultsDuring the three influenza seasons, 5838 ILI episodes (4127 subjects) were analysed. Subjects who had an episode of MA-fluA in the prior season were at a significantly lower risk of MA-fluA in the current season (adjusted odds ratio: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.30–0.50). The overall adjusted VE was 28% (95% CI, 14–40). VE was substantially lower in subjects vaccinated in the prior season compared to those who had not been vaccinated in prior season (19%; 95% CI: 0–35 vs 46%; 95% CI: 26–60, test for interaction, P value <0.05). In subjects who did not have MA-fluA in the prior season showed the attenuation of VE due to repeated vaccination (13%; 95% CI: −7 to 30 vs 44%; 95% CI: 24–59, test for interaction, P < 0.05). However this effect was not detected in subjects who had contracted MA-fluA in the prior season.ConclusionsNegative effects of repeated vaccination were significant among those without history of MA-fluA in the prior season.     

Influenza vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization with laboratory-confirmed influenza in Greece: A pooled analysis across six seasons, 2013–2014 to 2018–2019

BackgroundMonitoring seasonal influenza Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) is key to inform vaccination strategies and sustain uptake. Pooling data across multiple seasons increases precision and allows for subgroup analyses, providing more conclusive evidence. Our aim was to assess VE against hospitalization with laboratory-confirmed influenza in Greece over six seasons, from 2013 to 2014 to 2018–2019, using routinely collected surveillance data.MethodsSwab samples from hospitalized patients across the country were tested for influenza by RT-PCR. We used the test-negative design, with patients testing positive for influenza serving as cases and those testing negative serving as controls. VE was calculated as one minus the Odds Ratio (OR) for influenza vaccination, estimated by mixed-effects logistic regression and adjusted for age, sex, hospitalization type (being in intensive care or not), time from symptom onset to swabbing, and calendar time. Stratified estimates by age and hospitalization type were obtained, and also subgroup estimates by influenza type/subtype and season. Antigenic and genetic characterization of a subset of circulating influenza strains was performed.ResultsA total of 3,882 test-positive cases and 5,895 test-negative controls were analyzed. Across all seasons, adjusted VE was 45.5% (95% CI: 31.6–56.6) against all influenza, 62.8% against A(H1N1)pdm09 (95% CI: 40.7–76.7), 28.2% against A(H3N2) (95% CI: 12.0–41.3) and 45.5% against influenza B (95% CI: 29.1–58.1). VE was slightly lower for patients aged 60 years and over, and similar between patients hospitalized inside or outside intensive care. Circulating A(H1N1)pdm09 and B strains were antigenically similar to the vaccine strains, whereas A(H3N2) were not.ConclusionOur results confirm the public health benefits from seasonal influenza vaccination, despite the suboptimal effectiveness against A(H3N2) strains. Continued monitoring of VE is essential, and routinely collected surveillance data can be valuable in this regard.     

Influenza vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza in a vaccine-mismatched influenza B-dominant season

BackgroundThe 2017–2018 influenza season in Israel was characterized by the predominance of influenza B Yamagata, with a lesser circulation of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and influenza A(H3N2). We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of the inactivated influenza vaccine which was selected for use that season.MethodsEnd-of-season VE and 95% confidence intervals (CI) against laboratory-confirmed influenza-like illness (ILI) were estimated by means of the test-negative design. Age-specific VE analysis was carried out using a moving age interval.ResultsSpecimen were obtained from 1,453 community ILI patients; 610 (42.0%) were influenza-positive, among which 69.7% were B, 17.2% A(H1N1)pdm09 and 13.4% A(H3N2). A 98.6% of molecularly characterized influenza B belonged to the Yamagata lineage. Of the sampled individuals, 1320 were suitable for VE analysis. Of those vaccinated, 90.6% received the inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) containing a Victoria lineage influenza B-like virus. VE against influenza A differed by age, with the highest VE of 72.9% (95%CI 31.9–89.2%) observed in children 0.5–14 years old, while all ages VE was 46.6% (95%CI 10.4–68.2%). All ages VE against influenza B was 23.2% (95%CI −10.1–46.4%) with age-specific analysis showing non-significant VE estimates. Utilizing a moving age interval of 15 years, afforded a detailed age-specific insight into influenza VE against the influenza viruses circulating during the 2017–2018 season.ConclusionsThe moderate-high 2017–2018 influenza A VE among children and adolescents, supports seasonal influenza vaccination at a young age. The low VE against influenza B in Israel, is most likely the result of influenza B/TIV-mismatch.     

Three-season effectiveness of inactivated influenza vaccine in preventing influenza illness and hospitalization in children in Japan, 2013–2016

ObjectivesWe assessed the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) in children 6 months to 15 years of age in 2015/16 season. In addition, based on the data obtained during the three seasons from 2013 to 2016, we estimated the three-season VE in preventing influenza illness and hospitalization.MethodsOur study was conducted according to a test-negative case-control design (TNCC) and as a case-control study based on influenza rapid diagnostic test results.ResultsDuring 2015/16 season, the quadrivalent IIV was first used in Japan. The adjusted VE in preventing influenza illness was 49% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 42–55%) against any type of influenza, 57% (95% CI: 50–63%) against influenza A and 34% (95% CI: 23–44%) against influenza B. The 3-season adjusted VE was 45% (95% CI: 41–49%) against influenza virus infection overall (N = 12,888), 51% (95% CI: 47–55%) against influenza A (N = 10,410), and 32% (95% CI: 24–38%) against influenza B (N = 9232). An analysis by age groups showed low or no significant VE in infants or adolescents. By contrast, VE was highest in the young group (1–5 years old) and declined with age thereafter. The 3-season adjusted VE in preventing hospitalization as determined in a case-control study was 52% (95% CI: 42–60%) for influenza A and 28% (95% CI: 4–46%) for influenza B, and by TNCC design, it was 54% (95% CI: 41–65%) for influenza A and 34% (95% CI: 6–54%) for influenza B.ConclusionWe demonstrated not only VE in preventing illness, but also VE in preventing hospitalization based on much larger numbers of children than previous studies.