Literature DB >> 21968444

A systematic review of intradermal influenza vaccines.

Flora Young1, Fawziah Marra.   

Abstract

Influenza infection is associated with many complications, which can lead to hospitalizations and death. This is particularly true for the older adults who are not able to mount as good an immune response as younger adults due to their declining immune function. As such, different strategies are being evaluated to increase immunogenicity in the older adults, including use of adjuvanted vaccines and different delivery techniques, which can enhance immunogenicity as well as potentially be dose-sparing. The objective of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of studies that evaluated the efficacy (in terms of immunogenicity) and safety of intradermal (ID) influenza vaccines compared with traditional methods of administration in the general population and the older adults. Thirteen randomized, controlled, open-label trials were included in this systematic review. Seven trials were conducted in young adults 18-60 years of age, 4 trials were studied in older subjects >60 years, and 2 trials included both young and older adults, of which one did separate analyses for both groups and one did a separate analysis for the older adult population only. We found 7 studies out of 8 for the 18-60-year olds and 4 out of 6 studies in the over 60-year olds showed comparable efficacy between ID and intramuscular (IM) administration. Two out of 6 studies in the over 60-year olds showed superiority of ID administration over IM. Rates of adverse events occurring in the first 3 days were comparable between ID and IM administration of influenza vaccines; however, when assessing adverse events occurring in the first 7 days, rates of local adverse events were consistently higher in the ID group, specifically erythema, swelling, induration, and pruritis. In conclusion, our review shows comparable efficacy between ID and IM administration of influenza vaccine in both the younger and older adults.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21968444     DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.09.077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vaccine        ISSN: 0264-410X            Impact factor:   3.641


  21 in total

Review 1.  Traditional and new influenza vaccines.

Authors:  Sook-San Wong; Richard J Webby
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 26.132

2.  Effects of different routes of administration on the immunogenicity of the Tat protein and a Tat-derived peptide.

Authors:  Valentina Finessi; Francesco Nicoli; Eleonora Gallerani; Fabio Sforza; Mariaconcetta Sicurella; Aurelio Cafaro; Antonella Caputo; Barbara Ensoli; Riccardo Gavioli
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Assessment of acceptability and usability of new delivery prototype device for intradermal vaccination in healthy subjects.

Authors:  Timothi J S Van Mulder; Stijn Verwulgen; Koen C L Beyers; Linda Scheelen; Monique M Elseviers; Pierre Van Damme; Vanessa Vankerckhoven
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  Immunogenicity, safety and tolerability of intradermal influenza vaccines.

Authors:  Ivan F N Hung; Kwok-Yung Yuen
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2017-07-06       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Comparison of the immunogenicity and safety of the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal influenza vaccines in the elderly.

Authors:  Yu Bin Seo; Won Suk Choi; Jacob Lee; Joon Young Song; Hee Jin Cheong; Woo Joo Kim
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2014-05-14

Review 6.  Fluzone® intra-dermal (Intanza®/Istivac® Intra-dermal): An updated overview.

Authors:  Nicola Luigi Bragazzi; Andrea Orsi; Filippo Ansaldi; Roberto Gasparini; Giancarlo Icardi
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 3.452

7.  Safety and immunogenicity of influenza vaccine among HIV-infected adults: Conventional vaccine vs. intradermal vaccine.

Authors:  Yu Bin Seo; Jacob Lee; Joon Young Song; Hee Jung Choi; Hee Jin Cheong; Woo Joo Kim
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Assessment of Forces in Intradermal Injection Devices: Hydrodynamic Versus Human Factors.

Authors:  Stijn Verwulgen; Koen Beyers; Timothi Van Mulder; Thomas Peeters; Steven Truijen; Francis Dams; Vanessa Vankerckhoven
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2018-04-18       Impact factor: 4.200

9.  Brief Exposure of Skin to Near-Infrared Laser Modulates Mast Cell Function and Augments the Immune Response.

Authors:  Yoshifumi Kimizuka; Wataru Katagiri; Joseph J Locascio; Ayako Shigeta; Yuri Sasaki; Mai Shibata; Kaitlyn Morse; Ruxandra F Sîrbulescu; Mizuki Miyatake; Patrick Reeves; Makoto Suematsu; Jeffrey Gelfand; Timothy Brauns; Mark C Poznansky; Kosuke Tsukada; Satoshi Kashiwagi
Journal:  J Immunol       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 5.422

Review 10.  Intradermal vaccination for infants and children.

Authors:  Akihiko Saitoh; Yuta Aizawa
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016-05-02       Impact factor: 3.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.