Shuo Feng1, Ashley L Fowlkes, Andrea Steffens, Lyn Finelli, Benjamin J Cowling. 1. From the aWHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; and bInfluenza Division, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The observational test-negative study design is used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against influenza virus infection. An important assumption of the test-negative design is that vaccination does not affect the risk of infection with another virus. If such virus interference occurred, detection of other respiratory viruses would be more common among influenza vaccine recipients and vaccine effectiveness estimates could differ. We evaluated the potential for virus interference using data from the Influenza Incidence Surveillance Project. METHODS: From 2010 to 2013, outpatients presenting to clinics in 13 US jurisdictions with acute respiratory infections were tested for influenza and other respiratory viruses. We investigated whether virus interference might affect vaccine effectiveness estimates by first evaluating the sensitivity of estimates using alternative control groups that include or exclude patients with other respiratory virus detections by age group and early/middle/late stage of influenza seasons. Second, we evaluated the association between influenza vaccination receipt and other respiratory virus detection among influenza test-negative patients. RESULTS: Influenza was detected in 3,743/10,650 patients (35%), and overall vaccine effectiveness was 47% (95% CI: 42%, 52%). Estimates using each control group were consistent overall or when stratified by age groups, and there were no differences among early, middle, or late phase during influenza season. We found no associations between detection of other respiratory viruses and receipt of influenza vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: In this 3-year test-negative design study in an outpatient setting in the United States, we found no evidence of virus interference or impact on influenza vaccine effectiveness estimation.
BACKGROUND: The observational test-negative study design is used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against influenza virus infection. An important assumption of the test-negative design is that vaccination does not affect the risk of infection with another virus. If such virus interference occurred, detection of other respiratory viruses would be more common among influenza vaccine recipients and vaccine effectiveness estimates could differ. We evaluated the potential for virus interference using data from the Influenza Incidence Surveillance Project. METHODS: From 2010 to 2013, outpatients presenting to clinics in 13 US jurisdictions with acute respiratory infections were tested for influenza and other respiratory viruses. We investigated whether virus interference might affect vaccine effectiveness estimates by first evaluating the sensitivity of estimates using alternative control groups that include or exclude patients with other respiratory virus detections by age group and early/middle/late stage of influenza seasons. Second, we evaluated the association between influenza vaccination receipt and other respiratory virus detection among influenza test-negative patients. RESULTS:Influenza was detected in 3,743/10,650 patients (35%), and overall vaccine effectiveness was 47% (95% CI: 42%, 52%). Estimates using each control group were consistent overall or when stratified by age groups, and there were no differences among early, middle, or late phase during influenza season. We found no associations between detection of other respiratory viruses and receipt of influenza vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: In this 3-year test-negative design study in an outpatient setting in the United States, we found no evidence of virus interference or impact on influenza vaccine effectiveness estimation.
Authors: Heath Kelly; Peter Jacoby; Gabriela A Dixon; Dale Carcione; Simon Williams; Hannah C Moore; David W Smith; Anthony D Keil; Paul Van Buynder; Peter C Richmond Journal: Pediatr Infect Dis J Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 2.129
Authors: Rosalind M Eggo; James G Scott; Alison P Galvani; Lauren Ancel Meyers Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2016-02-08 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Sheena G Sullivan; Monique B-N Chilver; Geoff Higgins; Allen C Cheng; Nigel P Stocks Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2014-07-21 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Nevil Pierse; Heath Kelly; Mark G Thompson; Ange Bissielo; Sarah Radke; Q Sue Huang; Michael G Baker; Nikki Turner Journal: Vaccine Date: 2015-12-10 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Liselotte van Asten; Paul Bijkerk; Ewout Fanoy; Annemarijn van Ginkel; Anita Suijkerbuijk; Wim van der Hoek; Adam Meijer; Harry Vennema Journal: Influenza Other Respir Viruses Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 4.380
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: Leigh M Howard; Yuhan Liu; Yuwei Zhu; Dandan Liu; John V Willams; Ana I Gil; Marie R Griffin; Kathryn M Edwards; Claudio F Lanata; Carlos G Grijalva Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2022-01-05 Impact factor: 7.759