The impact of repeated vaccination using 10-year vaccination history on protection against influenza in older adults: a test-negative design study across the 2010/11 to 2015/16 influenza seasons in Ontario, Canada

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Introduction

Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for older adults, but evidence regarding the impact of repeated vaccination has been inconclusive.

Aim

We investigated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza and the impact of repeated vaccination over 10 previous seasons on current season VE among older adults.

Methods

We conducted an observational test-negative study in community-dwelling adults aged > 65 years in Ontario, Canada for the 2010/11 to 2015/16 seasons by linking laboratory and health administrative data. We estimated VE using multivariable logistic regression. We assessed the impact of repeated vaccination by stratifying by previous vaccination history.

Results

We included 58,304 testing episodes for respiratory viruses, with 11,496 (20%) testing positive for influenza and 31,004 (53%) vaccinated. Adjusted VE against laboratory-confirmed influenza for the six seasons combined was 21% (95% confidence interval (CI): 18 to 24%). Patients who were vaccinated in the current season, but had received no vaccinations in the previous 10 seasons, had higher current season VE (34%; 95%CI: 9 to 52%) than patients who had received 1–3 (26%; 95%CI: 13 to 37%), 4–6 (24%; 95%CI: 15 to 33%), 7–8 (13%; 95%CI: 2 to 22%), or 9–10 (7%; 95%CI: −4 to 16%) vaccinations (trend test p = 0.001). All estimates were higher after correcting for misclassification of current season vaccination status. For patients who were not vaccinated in the current season, residual protection rose significantly with increasing numbers of vaccinations received previously.

Conclusions

Although VE appeared to decrease with increasing numbers of previous vaccinations, current season vaccination likely provides some protection against influenza regardless of the number of vaccinations received over the previous 10 influenza seasons.

Related collections

Most cited references 21

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The test-negative design for estimating influenza vaccine effectiveness.

Michael L Jackson, Jennifer C Nelson (2013)

The test-negative design has emerged in recent years as the preferred method for estimating influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) in observational studies. However, the methodologic basis of this design has not been formally developed. In this paper we develop the rationale and underlying assumptions of the test-negative study. Under the test-negative design for influenza VE, study subjects are all persons who seek care for an acute respiratory illness (ARI). All subjects are tested for influenza infection. Influenza VE is estimated from the ratio of the odds of vaccination among subjects testing positive for influenza to the odds of vaccination among subjects testing negative. With the assumptions that (a) the distribution of non-influenza causes of ARI does not vary by influenza vaccination status, and (b) VE does not vary by health care-seeking behavior, the VE estimate from the sample can generalized to the full source population that gave rise to the study sample. Based on our derivation of this design, we show that test-negative studies of influenza VE can produce biased VE estimates if they include persons seeking care for ARI when influenza is not circulating or do not adjust for calendar time. The test-negative design is less susceptible to bias due to misclassification of infection and to confounding by health care-seeking behavior, relative to traditional case-control or cohort studies. The cost of the test-negative design is the additional, difficult-to-test assumptions that incidence of non-influenza respiratory infections is similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups within any stratum of care-seeking behavior, and that influenza VE does not vary across care-seeking strata. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 206 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices—United States, 2018–19 Influenza Season

Lisa Grohskopf, Leslie Sokolow, Karen Broder … (2018)

Summary This report updates the 2017–18 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2017;66[No. RR-2]). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. A licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine should be used. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIVs), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) are expected to be available for the 2018–19 season. Standard-dose, unadjuvanted, inactivated influenza vaccines will be available in quadrivalent (IIV4) and trivalent (IIV3) formulations. Recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4) and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) will be available in quadrivalent formulations. High-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3) and adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3) will be available in trivalent formulations. Updates to the recommendations described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP held on October 25, 2017; February 21, 2018; and June 20, 2018. New and updated information in this report includes the following four items. First, vaccine viruses included in the 2018–19 U.S. trivalent influenza vaccines will be an A/Michigan/45/2015 (H1N1)pdm09–like virus, an A/Singapore/INFIMH-16-0019/2016 (H3N2)-like virus, and a B/Colorado/06/2017–like virus (Victoria lineage). Quadrivalent influenza vaccines will contain these three viruses and an additional influenza B vaccine virus, a B/Phuket/3073/2013–like virus (Yamagata lineage). Second, recommendations for the use of LAIV4 (FluMist Quadrivalent) have been updated. Following two seasons (2016–17 and 2017–18) during which ACIP recommended that LAIV4 not be used, for the 2018–19 season, vaccination providers may choose to administer any licensed, age-appropriate influenza vaccine (IIV, RIV4, or LAIV4). LAIV4 is an option for those for whom it is appropriate. Third, persons with a history of egg allergy of any severity may receive any licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate influenza vaccine (IIV, RIV4, or LAIV4). Additional recommendations concerning vaccination of egg-allergic persons are discussed. Finally, information on recent licensures and labeling changes is discussed, including expansion of the age indication for Afluria Quadrivalent (IIV4) from ≥18 years to ≥5 years and expansion of the age indication for Fluarix Quadrivalent (IIV4), previously licensed for ≥3 years, to ≥6 months. This report focuses on the recommendations for use of vaccines for the prevention and control of influenza during the 2018–19 season in the United States. A Background Document containing further information and a brief summary of these recommendations are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used within Food and Drug Administration–licensed indications. Updates and other information are available at CDC’s influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check CDC’s influenza website periodically for additional information.

0 comments Cited 147 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

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

Edward A Belongia, Burney A. Kieke, James G Donahue … (2009)

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. 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. 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. 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.

0 comments Cited 131 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Euro Surveill

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Euro Surveill

Journal ID (publisher-id): eurosurveillance

Title: Eurosurveillance

Publisher: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)

ISSN (Print): 1025-496X

ISSN (Electronic): 1560-7917

Publication date (Print): 09 January 2020

Volume: 25

Issue: 1

Electronic Location Identifier: 1900245

Affiliations

[1 ]ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[2 ]Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[3 ]Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[4 ]Department of Family & Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[5 ]Centre for Vaccine Preventable Diseases, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[6 ]University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[7 ]Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[8 ]London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada

[9 ]Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[10 ]Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

[11 ]Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

[12 ]North York General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[13 ]Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[14 ]William Osler Health System, Brampton, Ontario, Canada

[15 ]Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[16 ]McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

[17 ]Newfoundland & Labrador Public Health Laboratory, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

[18 ]CIRN is acknowledged at the end of the article

Author notes

Correspondence : Jeff Kwong ( jeff.kwong@ 123456utoronto.ca )

Article

Publisher ID: 1900245 Publisher ID: 1900245

DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.1.1900245

PMC ID: 6961264

PubMed ID: 31937397

SO-VID: 15661923-8e63-4dfb-9a68-3b14e4a02bd3

License:

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) Licence. You may share and adapt the material, but must give appropriate credit to the source, provide a link to the licence, and indicate if changes were made.

History

Date received : 13 April 2019

Date accepted : 04 December 2019

Custom metadata

sequence 4

Keywords: influenza vaccine,vaccine effectiveness,repeated vaccination,older adults

Data availability:

Keywords: influenza vaccine, vaccine effectiveness, repeated vaccination, older adults

The impact of repeated vaccination using 10-year vaccination history on protection against influenza in older adults: a test-negative design study across the 2010/11 to 2015/16 influenza seasons in Ontario, Canada

Read this article at

Abstract

Introduction

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Related collections

Genome Engineering using CRISPR

Most cited references 21

The test-negative design for estimating influenza vaccine effectiveness.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices—United States, 2018–19 Influenza Season

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

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 57

Cited by 13

Most referenced authors 365