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.     

Influenza vaccine effectiveness among patients with high-risk medical conditions in the United States, 2012–2016

BackgroundAnnual influenza vaccination has been recommended for persons with high-risk conditions since the 1960s. However, few estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) for persons with high-risk conditions are available.MethodsData from the U.S. Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network from 2012 to 2016 were analyzed to compare VE of standard-dose inactivated vaccines against medically-attended influenza among patients aged ≥6 months with and without high-risk medical conditions. Patients with acute respiratory illness were tested for influenza by RT-PCR. Presence of high-risk conditions and vaccination status were obtained from medical records. VE by influenza virus type/subtype and age group was calculated for patients with and without high-risk conditions using the test-negative design. Interaction terms were used to test for differences in VE by high-risk conditions.ResultsOverall, 9643 (38%) of 25,369 patients enrolled during four influenza seasons had high-risk conditions; 2213 (23%) tested positive for influenza infection. For all ages, VE against any influenza was lower among patients with high-risk conditions (41%, 95% CI: 35–47%) than those without (48%, 95% CI: 43–52%; P-for-interaction = 0.02). For children aged <18 years, VE against any influenza was 51% (95% CI: 39–61%) and 52% (95% CI: 39–61%) among those with and without high-risk conditions, respectively (P-for-interaction = 0.54). For adults aged ≥18 years, VE against any influenza was 38% (95% CI: 30–45%) and 44% (95% CI: 38–50%) among those with and without high-risk conditions, respectively (P-for-interaction = 0.21). For both children aged <18 and adults aged ≥18 years, VEs against illness related to influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1)pdm09, and influenza B virus infection were similar among those with and without high-risk conditions.ConclusionsInfluenza vaccination provided protection against medically-attended influenza among patients with high-risk conditions, at levels approaching those observed among patients without high-risk conditions. Results from our analysis support recommendations of annual vaccination for patients with high-risk conditions.     

Development,Production, and Postmarketing Surveillance of Hepatitis A Vaccines in China

China has long experience using live attenuated and inactivated vaccines against hepatitis A virus (HAV) infection. We summarize this experience and provide recent data on adverse events after immunization (AEFIs) with hepatitis A vaccines in China. We reviewed the published literature (in Chinese and English) and the published Chinese regulatory documents on hepatitis A vaccine development, production, and postmarketing surveillance of AEFI. We described the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of hepatitis A vaccines and horizontal transmission of live HAV vaccine in China. In clinical trials, live HAV vaccine was associated with fever (0.4%–5% of vaccinees), rash (0%–1.1%), and elevated alanine aminotransferase (0.015%). Inactivated HAV vaccine was associated with fever (1%–8%), but no serious AEFIs were reported. Live HAV vaccine had seroconversion rates of 83% to 91%, while inactivated HAV vaccine had seroconversion rates of 95% to 100%. Community trials showed efficacy rates of 90% to 95% for live HAV and 95% to 100% for inactivated HAV vaccine. Postmarketing surveillance showed that HAV vaccination resulted in an AEFI incidence rate of 34 per million vaccinees, which accounted for 0.7% of adverse events reported to the China AEFI monitoring system. There was no difference in AEFI rates between live and inactivated HAV vaccines. Live and inactivated HAV vaccines manufactured in China were immunogenic, effective, and safe. Live HAV vaccine had substantial horizontal transmission due to vaccine virus shedding; thus, further monitoring of the safety of virus shedding is warranted.Key words: hepatitis A, vaccine, safety, efficacy     

Rapid assessment of influenza vaccine effectiveness: analysis of an internet-based cohort

The effectiveness of influenza vaccination programmes is seldom known during an epidemic. We developed an internet-based system to record influenza-like symptoms and response to infection in a participating cohort. Using self-reports of influenza-like symptoms and of influenza vaccine history and uptake, we estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) without the need for individuals to seek healthcare. We found that vaccination with the 2010 seasonal influenza vaccine was significantly protective against influenza-like illness (ILI) during the 2010-2011 influenza season (VE 52%, 95% CI 27-68). VE for individuals who received both the 2010 seasonal and 2009 pandemic influenza vaccines was 59% (95% CI 27-77), slightly higher than VE for those vaccinated in 2010 alone (VE 46%, 95% CI 9-68). Vaccinated individuals with ILI reported taking less time off work than unvaccinated individuals with ILI (3.4 days vs. 5.3 days, P<0.001).     

Comparison of multiple estimates of efficacy for influenza vaccine

Influenza vaccine trials typically report vaccine efficacy for infection-confirmed symptomatic illness. Data on indirect vaccine efficacy for susceptibility, the degree of vaccine protection to susceptibles, or indirect vaccine efficacy for illness given infection, are sparse. Using inactivated influenza vaccine randomized trial data, we calculated indirect vaccine efficacy for susceptibility of 20% [95% CI 9-30] and indirect vaccine efficacy for illness among infected persons 12% [95% CI 2-22], values inferior to a direct vaccine efficacy for infection-confirmed symptomatic illness of 55% [95% CI −21 to 84] and an indirect effect of 61% [95% CI 8-83]. Such data reveal variance in protective efficacy of the vaccine for multi-dimensional direct and indirect efficacy measures.     

Effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccine in Australia, 2015: An epidemiological,antigenic and phylogenetic assessment

BackgroundA record number of laboratory-confirmed influenza cases were notified in Australia in 2015, during which type A(H3) and type B Victoria and Yamagata lineages co-circulated. We estimated effectiveness of the 2015 inactivated seasonal influenza vaccine against specific virus lineages and clades.MethodsThree sentinel general practitioner networks conduct surveillance for laboratory-confirmed influenza amongst patients presenting with influenza-like illness in Australia. Data from the networks were pooled to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) for seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine in Australia in 2015 using the case test-negative study design.ResultsThere were 2443 eligible patients included in the study, of which 857 (35%) were influenza-positive. Thirty-three and 19% of controls and cases respectively were reported as vaccinated. Adjusted VE against all influenza was 54% (95% CI: 42, 63). Antigenic characterisation data suggested good match between vaccine and circulating strains of A(H3); however VE for A(H3) was low at 44% (95% CI: 21, 60). Phylogenetic analysis indicated most circulating viruses were from clade 3C.2a, rather than the clade included in the vaccine (3C.3a). VE point estimates were higher against B/Yamagata lineage influenza (71%; 95% CI: 57, 80) than B/Victoria (42%, 95% CI: 13, 61), and in younger people.ConclusionsOverall seasonal vaccine was protective against influenza infection in Australia in 2015. Higher VE against the B/Yamagata lineage included in the trivalent vaccine suggests that more widespread use of quadrivalent vaccine could have improved overall effectiveness of influenza vaccine. Genetic characterisation suggested lower VE against A(H3) influenza was due to clade mismatch of vaccine and circulating viruses.     

Implications of genetic traits on vaccine efficacy

Literature on genetic screening in the community suggests that people having specific genotypes may either get or protect from infection, for example, malaria, human papilloma virus, and haemophilic influenza, for which vaccines are either already developed or being targeted. In such a situation, the evaluation of the efficacy of vaccine in the community needs to be examined with caution. In this paper, I present a method for the estimation of vaccine efficacy (VE) in the presence of genetic traits/component (theta) and the sample size required to estimate the 95 per cent CI with a given relative width for the estimated vaccine efficacy. Considering true efficacy ranging from 40 to 80 per cent and the possible values of the genetic component (theta) ranging from 0 to 60 per cent, the VE was estimated. The 95 per cent confidence intervals (CI) for the estimated VE for relative widths (R) 1.0 and 0.1 were computed. The sample sizes required for each of the unvaccinated and vaccinated cohorts were computed for estimating the 95 per cent CI for given incidence rates in the unvaccinated (Iu) cohort. In the presence of genetic traits I found that the VE was consistently overestimated. There existed change in the location as well as the asymmetry of the 95 per cent CIs over the point estimate of VE. The sample size required for estimating 95 per cent CI of VE was substantially reduced, resulting in savings. The more the genetic component (theta) affecting disease in the community, the more the savings in sample size. I examined the above estimators for (i) VE, (ii) 95 per cent CI for VE and (iii) sample size required for estimating 95 per cent CI of VE using the real-life data from the Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine trial conducted in Finland and the global genetic structure of encapsulated H. influenza. Because of escalated VE and large savings in sample size for estimating the 95 per cent CI for VE, I recommend that the design should consider the genetic component that causes/protects from infection/disease for the evaluation of efficacy of vaccine in the field.     

Immunogenicity and efficacy of Russian live attenuated and US inactivated influenza vaccines used alone and in combination in nursing home residents

The immunogenicity and efficacy of Russian live attenuated and US inactivated trivalent influenza vaccines administered alone or in three different combinations were evaluated in a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded study of 614 elderly or chronically ill nursing home residents in St. Petersburg, Russia during the 1996-97 influenza season. Postvaccination serum antibody responses were more frequent among individuals administered the combination vaccines than among those vaccinated with live or inactivated vaccine alone. Only individuals who received live vaccine, alone or in combination with inactivated vaccine, achieved significant postvaccination increases in virus-specific nasal IgA. Efficacy in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza in vaccinated versus nonvaccinated individuals was 67% (95%CI, 36-81%) for recipients of a combination of the vaccines compared with 51% (95%CI, -17-79%) for recipients of live vaccine alone and 50% (95%CI, -26-80%) for recipients of inactivated vaccine alone. These results suggest that administration of a combination of influenza vaccines may provide a strategy for improved influenza vaccination of elderly people.     

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.     

Extrapolating theoretical efficacy of inactivated influenza A/H5N1 virus vaccine from human immunogenicity studies

Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 has been a public health concern for almost 20 years due to its potential ability to become transmissible among humans. Phase I and II clinical trials have assessed safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity of inactivated influenza A/H5N1 virus vaccines. A shortage of vaccine is likely to occur during the first months of a pandemic. Hence, determining whether to give one dose to more people or two doses to fewer people to best protect the population is essential. We use hemagglutination–inhibition antibody titers as an immune correlate for avian influenza vaccines. Using an established relationship to obtain a theoretical vaccine efficacy from immunogenicity data from thirteen arms of six phase I and phase II clinical trials of inactivated influenza A/H5N1 virus vaccines, we assessed: (1) the proportion of theoretical vaccine efficacy achieved after a single dose (defined as primary response level), and (2) whether theoretical efficacy increases after a second dose, with and without adjuvant. Participants receiving vaccine with AS03 adjuvant had higher primary response levels (range: 0.48–0.57) compared to participants receiving vaccine with MF59 adjuvant (range: 0.32–0.47), with no observed trends in primary response levels by antigen dosage. After the first and second doses, vaccine with AS03 at dosage levels 3.75, 7.5 and 15 mcg had the highest estimated theoretical vaccine efficacy: Dose (1) 45% (95% CI: 36–57%), 53% (95% CI: 42–63%) and 55% (95% CI: 44–64%), respectively and Dose (2) 93% (95% CI: 89–96%), 97% (95% CI: 95–98%) and 97% (95% CI: 96–100%), respectively. On average, the estimated theoretical vaccine efficacy of lower dose adjuvanted vaccines (AS03 and MF59) was 17% higher than that of higher dose unadjuvanted vaccines, suggesting that including an adjuvant is dose-sparing. These data indicate adjuvanted inactivated influenza A/H5N1 virus vaccine produces high theoretical efficacy after two doses to protect individuals against a potential avian influenza pandemic.     

Comparison of vaccine effectiveness against influenza hospitalization of cell-based and egg-based influenza vaccines, 2017–2018

Egg-based influenza vaccines could be less effective than cell-based vaccine due to adaptive mutations acquired for growth. We conducted a test-negative case-control study at Kaiser Permanente Southern California to assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalization for laboratory-confirmed influenza during 2017–2018. Among the 1186 cases and 6946 controls, 74% and 59%, respectively, were ages ≥ 65 years. For any influenza, the adjusted relative VE of cell-based vaccine versus egg-based vaccines was 43% (95% CI: −45% to 77%) for patients ages < 65 years and 6% (95% CI: −46% to 39%) for patients ages ≥ 65 years. For influenza A(H3N2), the adjusted relative VE was 61% (95% CI: −63% to 91%) for patients ages < 65 years and −4% (95% CI: −70% to 37%) for patients ages ≥ 65 years. Statistically significant protection against influenza hospitalization of cell-based vaccine compared to egg-based vaccines was not observed, but further studies in additional influenza seasons are warranted.     

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

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

Estimation of the efficacy of live, attenuated influenza vaccine from a two-year, multi-center vaccine trial: implications for influenza epidemic control

The authors provide an analysis of data from a two-year (1996-1998), multicenter (ten US cities), double-blinded, placebo-controlled influenza vaccine trial in children. The vaccine was the trivalent cold-adapted influenza vaccine. Estimates are made of the vaccine efficacy for susceptibility to culture-confirmed influenza (VE(S)) while taking inter-center variability in the risk of infection into account. Our overall estimate of VE(S) against influenza is 0.92 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89-0.94). In addition, for the second year, although the vaccine contained antigen for A/Wuhan-like (H3N2), the estimated VE(S) for epidemic variant A/Sydney-like (H3N2) was 0.89 (95% CI 0.81-0.94). Thus, the vaccine showed a high degree of protection against a variant not closely matched to the vaccine antigen. With regard to natural immunity, an influenza A infection in the first year reduces the estimated risk of an influenza A infection in the second year by a factor of 0.88 (95% CI 0.21-0.98). When comparing year 1 to year 2, there is a negative correlation of -0.50 in the center-specific attack rates in the placebo groups. This is consistent with the theory that natural immunity provides overall community protection to children. The authors argue that mass vaccination of 70% of the children with the cold-adapted influenza vaccine could provide substantial protection to the community at large.     

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.     

Efficacy of live attenuated influenza vaccine in children: A meta-analysis of nine randomized clinical trials

Nine randomized clinical trials, including approximately 25,000 children aged 6–71 months and 2000 children aged 6–17 years, have evaluated the efficacy of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) against culture-confirmed influenza as compared to placebo or trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV). We conducted meta-analyses, based on Mantel–Haenszel relative risks from fixed effect models, to provide an estimate of vaccine efficacy (VE). Relative to placebo, year 1 VE for two doses in vaccine-naïve young children was 77% (95% CI: 72%, 80%; P < 0.001) against antigenically similar strains and 72% against strains regardless of antigenic similarity. Efficacy was 85%, 76%, and 73% against antigenically similar A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B, respectively. Year 1 VE of one dose against antigenically similar strains in vaccine-naive children was 60%; efficacy of one dose in previously vaccinated children in year 2 of the various studies was 87%. In head-to-head trials comparing two doses of TIV and LAIV, vaccine-naïve children who received two doses of LAIV experienced 46% fewer cases of influenza illness caused by antigenically similar strains. Similarly, for studies including older children who had been previously vaccinated, those receiving one LAIV dose experienced 35% fewer cases of influenza illness than those receiving one TIV dose. LAIV showed high VE versus placebo with no evidence of difference by age or by circulating subtype. In these studies, LAIV was more effective than TIV.     

Intraseason decline in influenza vaccine effectiveness during the 2016 southern hemisphere influenza season: A test-negative design study and phylogenetic assessment

Background

We estimated the effectiveness of seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine and the potential influence of timing of immunization on vaccine effectiveness (VE) using data from the 2016 southern hemisphere influenza season.

Effectiveness of adenovirus type 5 vectored and inactivated COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic COVID-19, COVID-19 pneumonia,and severe COVID-19 caused by the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant: Evidence from an outbreak in Yunnan,China, 2021

BackgroundIn partial response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, countries around the world are conducting large-scale vaccination campaigns. Real-world estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant are still limited. An outbreak in Ruili city of China provided an opportunity to evaluate VE against the Delta variant of two types of COVID-19 vaccines in use in China and globally – inactivated (CoronaVac and BBIBP-CorV) and adenovirus type 5 vectored (Convidecia) vaccines.MethodsWe estimated VE using a retrospective cohort study two months after the Ruili vaccination campaign (median: 63 days). Close contacts of infected people (Chinese nationality, 18 years and above) were included to assess VE against symptomatic Covid-19, COVID-19 pneumonia, and severe COVID-19. We calculated the relative risks (RR) of the outcomes for unvaccinated compared with fully vaccinated individuals. We used logistic regression analyses to estimate adjusted VEs, controlling for gender and age group (18–59 years and 60 years and over).We compared unvaccinated and fully vaccinated individuals on duration of RT-PCR positivity and Ct value.FindingsThere were 686 close contacts eligible for VE estimates. Adjusted VE of ad5-vectored vaccine was 61.5% (95% CI, 9.5–83.6) against symptomatic COVID-19, 67.9% (95%CI: 1.7–89.9) against pneumonia, and 100% (95%CI: 36.6–100) against severe/critical illness. For the two inactivated vaccines, combined VE was 74.6% (95% CI, 36.0–90.0) against symptomatic COVID-19, 76.7% (95% CI: 19.3–93.3) against pneumonia, and 100% (95% CI: 47.6–100) against severe/critical COVID-19. There were no statistically significant differences in VE between two inactivated vaccines for symptomatic COVID-19 and for pneumonia, nor were there statistically significant differences between inactivated and ad5-vectored VE in any of the three outcomes. The median durations of RT-PCR positivity were 17 days for fifteen people vaccinated with an inactivated vaccine, 18 days for forty-four people vaccinated with the Ad5 vectored vaccine, and 26 days for eleven unvaccinated individuals. InterpretationThese results provide reassuring evidence that the three vaccines are effective at preventing Delta-variant COVID-19 in short term following vaccination campaign, and are most effective at preventing more serious illness. The findings of reduced duration of RT-PCR positivity and length of hospital stay associated with full vaccination suggests potential saving of health-care system resources.     

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.     

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.