Literature DB >> 19086915

Effectiveness of inactivated influenza vaccines varied substantially with antigenic match from the 2004-2005 season to the 2006-2007 season.

Edward A Belongia1, Burney A Kieke, James G Donahue, Robert T Greenlee, Amanda Balish, Angie Foust, Stephen Lindstrom, David K Shay.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We estimated the effectiveness of inactivated influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed, medically attended influenza during 3 seasons with variable antigenic match between vaccine and patient strains.
METHODS: Patients were enrolled during or after a clinical encounter for acute respiratory illness. Influenza infection was confirmed by culture or reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Case-control analyses were performed that used data from patients who were ill without influenza (hereafter, "test-negative control subjects") and data from asymptomatic control subjects from the population (hereafter, "traditional control subjects"). Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated as [100 x (1-adjusted odds ratio)]. Influenza isolates were antigenically characterized.
RESULTS: Influenza was detected in 167 (20%) of 818 patients in 2004-2005, in 51 (14%) of 356 in 2005-2006, and in 102 (11%) of 932 in 2006-2007. Analyses that used data from test-negative control subjects showed that VE was 10% (95% confidence interval [CI], -36% to 40%) in 2004-2005, 21% (95% CI, -52% to 59%) in 2005-2006, and 52% (95% CI, 22% to 70%) in 2006-2007. Using data from traditional control subjects, VE for those seasons was estimated to be 5% (95% CI, -52% to 40%), 11% (95% CI, -96% to 59%), and 37% (95% CI, -10% to 64%), respectively; confidence intervals included 0. The percentage of viruses that were antigenically matched to vaccine strains was 5% (3 of 62) in 2004-2005, 5% (2 of 42) in 2005-2006, and 91% (85 of 93) in 2006-2007.
CONCLUSIONS: Influenza VE varied substantially across 3 seasons and was highest when antigenic match was optimal. VE estimates that used data from test-negative control subjects were consistently higher than those that used data from traditional control subjects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19086915     DOI: 10.1086/595861

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Infect Dis        ISSN: 0022-1899            Impact factor:   5.226


  133 in total

Review 1.  Influenza vaccines: from surveillance through production to protection.

Authors:  Pritish K Tosh; Robert M Jacobson; Gregory A Poland
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2010-01-29       Impact factor: 7.616

2.  Comparison of nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs for influenza detection in adults.

Authors:  Stephanie A Irving; Mary F Vandermause; David K Shay; Edward A Belongia
Journal:  Clin Med Res       Date:  2012-06-21

3.  Incidence of medically attended influenza infection and cases averted by vaccination, 2011/2012 and 2012/2013 influenza seasons.

Authors:  Michael L Jackson; Lisa A Jackson; Burney Kieke; David McClure; Manjusha Gaglani; Kempapura Murthy; Ryan Malosh; Arnold Monto; Richard K Zimmerman; Ivo M Foppa; Brendan Flannery; Mark G Thompson
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 3.641

4.  Effectiveness of 2012-2013 influenza vaccine against influenza-like illness in general population: estimation in a French web-based cohort.

Authors:  Marion Debin; Vittoria Colizza; Thierry Blanchon; Thomas Hanslik; Clement Turbelin; Alessandra Falchi
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2013-12-16       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Consistency of influenza A virus detection test results across respiratory specimen collection methods using real-time reverse transcription-PCR.

Authors:  Sarah Spencer; Manjusha Gaglani; Allison Naleway; Sue Reynolds; Sarah Ball; Sam Bozeman; Emily Henkle; Jennifer Meece; Mary Vandermause; Lydia Clipper; Mark Thompson
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2013-10-09       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 6.  Influenza vaccine failure: failure to protect or failure to understand?

Authors:  Gregory A Poland
Journal:  Expert Rev Vaccines       Date:  2018-06-26       Impact factor: 5.217

7.  Trivalent influenza vaccine-induced antibody response to circulating influenza a (H3N2) viruses in 2010/11 and 2011/12 seasons.

Authors:  Satoshi Hiroi; Saeko Morikawa; Keiko Nakata; Akiko Maeda; Tsuneji Kanno; Shin Irie; Satoko Ohfuji; Yoshio Hirota; Tetsuo Kase
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Employer-incurred health care costs and productivity losses associated with influenza.

Authors:  Sudeep Karve; Derek A Misurski; Genevieve Meier; Keith L Davis
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2013-01-15       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  Influenza vaccine effectiveness assessment through sentinel virological data in three post-pandemic seasons.

Authors:  Núria Torner; Ana Martínez; Luca Basile; M Angeles Marcos; Andrés Antón; M Mar Mosquera; Ricard Isanta; Carmen Cabezas; Mireia Jané; Angela Domínguez; The Pidirac Sentinel Surveillance Program Of Catalonia
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2014-11-01       Impact factor: 3.452

10.  Effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States during a season with circulation of all three vaccine strains.

Authors:  John J Treanor; H Keipp Talbot; Suzanne E Ohmit; Laura A Coleman; Mark G Thompson; Po-Yung Cheng; Joshua G Petrie; Geraldine Lofthus; Jennifer K Meece; John V Williams; Lashondra Berman; Caroline Breese Hall; Arnold S Monto; Marie R Griffin; Edward Belongia; David K Shay
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2012-07-25       Impact factor: 9.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.