BACKGROUND: The efficacy of influenza vaccines may vary annually. In 2004-2005, when antigenically drifted viruses were circulating, a randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving healthy adults showed that inactivated vaccine appeared to be efficacious, whereas live attenuated vaccine appeared to be less so. METHODS: In 2005-2006, we continued our trial, examining the absolute and relative efficacies of the live attenuated and inactivated vaccines in preventing laboratory-confirmed symptomatic influenza. RESULTS: A total of 2058 persons were vaccinated in October and November 2005. Studywide influenza activity was prolonged but of low intensity; type A (H3N2) virus was circulating, which was antigenically similar to the vaccine strain. The absolute efficacy of the inactivated vaccine was 16% (95% confidence interval [CI], -171% to 70%) for the virus identification end point (virus isolation in cell culture or identification through polymerase chain reaction) and 54% (95% CI, 4%-77%) for the primary end point (virus isolation or increase in serum antibody titer). The absolute efficacies of the live attenuated vaccine for these end points were 8% (95% CI, -194% to 67%) and 43% (95% CI, -15% to 71%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With serologic end points included, efficacy was demonstrated for the inactivated vaccine in a year with low influenza attack rates. The efficacy of the live attenuated vaccine was slightly less than that of the inactivated vaccine, but not statistically greater than that of the placebo.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of influenza vaccines may vary annually. In 2004-2005, when antigenically drifted viruses were circulating, a randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving healthy adults showed that inactivated vaccine appeared to be efficacious, whereas live attenuated vaccine appeared to be less so. METHODS: In 2005-2006, we continued our trial, examining the absolute and relative efficacies of the live attenuated and inactivated vaccines in preventing laboratory-confirmed symptomatic influenza. RESULTS: A total of 2058 persons were vaccinated in October and November 2005. Studywide influenza activity was prolonged but of low intensity; type A (H3N2) virus was circulating, which was antigenically similar to the vaccine strain. The absolute efficacy of the inactivated vaccine was 16% (95% confidence interval [CI], -171% to 70%) for the virus identification end point (virus isolation in cell culture or identification through polymerase chain reaction) and 54% (95% CI, 4%-77%) for the primary end point (virus isolation or increase in serum antibody titer). The absolute efficacies of the live attenuated vaccine for these end points were 8% (95% CI, -194% to 67%) and 43% (95% CI, -15% to 71%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With serologic end points included, efficacy was demonstrated for the inactivated vaccine in a year with low influenza attack rates. The efficacy of the live attenuated vaccine was slightly less than that of the inactivated vaccine, but not statistically greater than that of the placebo.
Authors: Suzanne E Ohmit; John C Victor; Judy R Rotthoff; Esther R Teich; Rachel K Truscon; Laura L Baum; Bhavya Rangarajan; Duane W Newton; Matthew L Boulton; Arnold S Monto Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-12-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Robert B Belshe; Kathryn M Edwards; Timo Vesikari; Steven V Black; Robert E Walker; Micki Hultquist; George Kemble; Edward M Connor Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-02-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: C B Bridges; W W Thompson; M I Meltzer; G R Reeve; W J Talamonti; N J Cox; H A Lilac; H Hall; A Klimov; K Fukuda Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-10-04 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: John J Treanor; Gilbert M Schiff; Frederick G Hayden; Rebecca C Brady; C Mhorag Hay; Anthony L Meyer; Jeanne Holden-Wiltse; Hua Liang; Adam Gilbert; Manon Cox Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-04-11 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Joshua G Petrie; Suzanne E Ohmit; Emileigh Johnson; Rachel T Cross; Arnold S Monto Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2011-03-04 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Michael S Chaussee; Heather R Sandbulte; Margaret J Schuneman; Frank P Depaula; Leslie A Addengast; Evelyn H Schlenker; Victor C Huber Journal: Vaccine Date: 2011-04-08 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Stefan Avey; Subhasis Mohanty; Daniel G Chawla; Hailong Meng; Thilinie Bandaranayake; Ikuyo Ueda; Heidi J Zapata; Koonam Park; Tamara P Blevins; Sui Tsang; Robert B Belshe; Susan M Kaech; Albert C Shaw; Steven H Kleinstein Journal: J Immunol Date: 2020-02-14 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: Lisa A Jackson; Manjusha J Gaglani; Harry L Keyserling; John Balser; Nancy Bouveret; Louis Fries; John J Treanor Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2010-03-17 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: Matthew C Johns; Angelia A Eick; David L Blazes; Seung-eun Lee; Christopher L Perdue; Robert Lipnick; Kelly G Vest; Kevin L Russell; Robert F DeFraites; Jose L Sanchez Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-05-19 Impact factor: 3.240