Marta Valenciano1, Esther Kissling2, Annicka Reuss3, Silvia Jiménez-Jorge4, Judit K Horváth5, Joan M O Donnell6, Daniela Pitigoi7, Ausenda Machado8, Francisco Pozo9. 1. Epidemiology Department, EpiConcept, Paris, France. Electronic address: m.valenciano@epiconcept.fr. 2. Epidemiology Department, EpiConcept, Paris, France. 3. Department for Infectious Disease Epidemiology Respiratory Infections Unit, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany. 4. National Centre of Epidemiology/CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Institute of Health Carlos III, Madrid, Spain. 5. Department of Public Health, Strategic Planning and Epidemiology, Office of the Chief Medical Officer, Budapest, Hungary. 6. Health Protection Surveillance Centre, Dublin, Ireland. 7. UMF Carol Davila, INCDMI Cantacuzino, Bucharest, Romania. 8. Department of Epidemiology, National Institute of Health Dr. Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal. 9. National Centre for Microbiology, National Influenza Centre-Institute of Health Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the first five I-MOVE (Influenza Monitoring Vaccine Effectiveness in Europe) influenza seasons vaccine effectiveness (VE) results were relatively homogenous among participating study sites. In 2013-2014, we undertook a multicentre case-control study based on sentinel practitioner surveillance networks in six European Union (EU) countries to measure 2013-2014 influenza VE against medically-attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. Influenza A(H3N2) and A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses co-circulated during the season. METHODS: Practitioners systematically selected ILI patients to swab within eight days of symptom onset. We compared cases (ILI positive to influenza A(H3N2) or A(H1N1)pdm09) to influenza negative patients. We calculated VE for the two influenza A subtypes and adjusted for potential confounders. We calculated heterogeneity between sites using the I(2) index and Cochrane's Q test. If the I(2) was <50%, we estimated pooled VE as (1 minus the OR)×100 using a one-stage model with study site as a fixed effect. If the I(2) was >49% we used a two-stage random effects model. RESULTS: We included in the A(H1N1)pdm09 analysis 531 cases and 1712 controls and in the A(H3N2) analysis 623 cases and 1920 controls. For A(H1N1)pdm09, the Q test (p=0.695) and the I(2) index (0%) suggested no heterogeneity of adjusted VE between study sites. Using a one-stage model, the overall pooled adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm2009 was 47.5% (95% CI: 16.4-67.0). For A(H3N2), the I(2) was 51.5% (p=0.067). Using a two-stage model for the pooled analysis, the adjusted VE against A(H3N2) was 29.7 (95% CI: -34.4-63.2). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest a moderate 2013-2014 influenza VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 and a low VE against A(H3N2). The A(H3N2) estimates were heterogeneous among study sites. Larger sample sizes by study site are needed to prevent statistical heterogeneity, decrease variability and allow for two-stage pooled VE for all subgroup analyses.
BACKGROUND: In the first five I-MOVE (Influenza Monitoring Vaccine Effectiveness in Europe) influenza seasons vaccine effectiveness (VE) results were relatively homogenous among participating study sites. In 2013-2014, we undertook a multicentre case-control study based on sentinel practitioner surveillance networks in six European Union (EU) countries to measure 2013-2014 influenza VE against medically-attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. Influenza A(H3N2) and A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses co-circulated during the season. METHODS: Practitioners systematically selected ILI patients to swab within eight days of symptom onset. We compared cases (ILI positive to influenza A(H3N2) or A(H1N1)pdm09) to influenza negative patients. We calculated VE for the two influenza A subtypes and adjusted for potential confounders. We calculated heterogeneity between sites using the I(2) index and Cochrane's Q test. If the I(2) was <50%, we estimated pooled VE as (1 minus the OR)×100 using a one-stage model with study site as a fixed effect. If the I(2) was >49% we used a two-stage random effects model. RESULTS: We included in the A(H1N1)pdm09 analysis 531 cases and 1712 controls and in the A(H3N2) analysis 623 cases and 1920 controls. For A(H1N1)pdm09, the Q test (p=0.695) and the I(2) index (0%) suggested no heterogeneity of adjusted VE between study sites. Using a one-stage model, the overall pooled adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm2009 was 47.5% (95% CI: 16.4-67.0). For A(H3N2), the I(2) was 51.5% (p=0.067). Using a two-stage model for the pooled analysis, the adjusted VE against A(H3N2) was 29.7 (95% CI: -34.4-63.2). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest a moderate 2013-2014 influenza VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 and a low VE against A(H3N2). The A(H3N2) estimates were heterogeneous among study sites. Larger sample sizes by study site are needed to prevent statistical heterogeneity, decrease variability and allow for two-stage pooled VE for all subgroup analyses.
Authors: P Vanhems; Y Baghdadi; S Roche; T Bénet; C Regis; B Lina; O Robert; N Voirin; R Ecochard; S Amour Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2016 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Huiying Chua; Shuo Feng; Joseph A Lewnard; Sheena G Sullivan; Christopher C Blyth; Marc Lipsitch; Benjamin J Cowling Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Suzanne E Ohmit; Joshua G Petrie; Ryan E Malosh; Emileigh Johnson; Rachel Truscon; Barbara Aaron; Casey Martens; Caroline Cheng; Alicia M Fry; Arnold S Monto Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Sarah A Buchan; Hannah Chung; Michael A Campitelli; Natasha S Crowcroft; Jonathan B Gubbay; Timothy Karnauchow; Kevin Katz; Allison J McGeer; J Dayre McNally; David Richardson; Susan E Richardson; Laura C Rosella; Andrew Simor; Marek Smieja; Dat Tran; George Zahariadis; Jeffrey C Kwong Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-11-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sergei S Belanov; Dmitrii Bychkov; Christian Benner; Samuli Ripatti; Teija Ojala; Matti Kankainen; Hong Kai Lee; Julian Wei-Tze Tang; Denis E Kainov Journal: Genome Biol Evol Date: 2015-11-27 Impact factor: 3.416