Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Effect of Antigenic Drift on Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in the United States—2019–2020

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          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

          Background

          At the start of the 2019–2020 influenza season, concern arose that circulating B/Victoria viruses of the globally emerging clade V1A.3 were antigenically drifted from the strain included in the vaccine. Intense B/Victoria activity was followed by circulation of genetically diverse A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses that were also antigenically drifted. We measured vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the United States against illness from these emerging viruses.

          Methods

          We enrolled outpatients aged ≥6 months with acute respiratory illness at 5 sites. Respiratory specimens were tested for influenza by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Using the test-negative design, we determined influenza VE by virus subtype/lineage and genetic subclades by comparing odds of vaccination in influenza cases versus test-negative controls.

          Results

          Among 8845 enrollees, 2722 (31%) tested positive for influenza, including 1209 (44%) for B/Victoria and 1405 (51%) for A(H1N1)pdm09. Effectiveness against any influenza illness was 39% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 32–44), 45% (95% CI: 37–52) against B/Victoria and 30% (95% CI: 21–39) against A(H1N1)pdm09-associated illness. Vaccination offered no protection against A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses with antigenically drifted clade 6B.1A 183P-5A+156K HA genes (VE 7%; 95% CI: –14 to 23%) which predominated after January.

          Conclusions

          Vaccination provided protection against influenza illness, mainly due to infections from B/Victoria viruses. Vaccine protection against illness from A(H1N1)pdm09 was lower than historically observed effectiveness of 40%–60%, due to late-season vaccine mismatch following emergence of antigenically drifted viruses. The effect of drift on vaccine protection is not easy to predict and, even in drifted years, significant protection can be observed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • 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, 2019–20 Influenza Season

          Summary This report updates the 2018–19 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2018;67[No. RR-3]). 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 2019–20 season. Standard-dose, unadjuvanted, inactivated influenza vaccines will be available in quadrivalent formulations (IIV4s). High-dose (HD-IIV3) and adjuvanted (aIIV3) inactivated influenza vaccines will be available in trivalent formulations. Recombinant (RIV4) and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) will be available in quadrivalent formulations. Updates to the recommendations described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP held on October 25, 2018; February 27, 2019; and June 27, 2019. Primary updates in this report include the following two items. First, 2019–20 U.S. trivalent influenza vaccines will contain hemagglutinin (HA) derived from an A/Brisbane/02/2018 (H1N1)pdm09–like virus, an A/Kansas/14/2017 (H3N2)–like virus, and a B/Colorado/06/2017–like virus (Victoria lineage). Quadrivalent influenza vaccines will contain HA derived from these three viruses, and a B/Phuket/3073/2013–like virus (Yamagata lineage). Second, recent labeling changes for two IIV4s, Afluria Quadrivalent and Fluzone Quadrivalent, are discussed. The age indication for Afluria Quadrivalent has been expanded from ≥5 years to ≥6 months. The dose volume for Afluria Quadrivalent is 0.25 mL for children aged 6 through 35 months and 0.5 mL for all persons aged ≥36 months (≥3 years). The dose volume for Fluzone Quadrivalent for children aged 6 through 35 months, which was previously 0.25 mL, is now either 0.25 mL or 0.5 mL. The dose volume for Fluzone Quadrivalent is 0.5 mL for all persons aged ≥36 months (≥3 years). This report focuses on the recommendations for use of vaccines for the prevention and control of influenza during the 2019–20 season in the United States. A brief summary of these recommendations and a Background Document containing additional information 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 from CDC’s influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Variable influenza vaccine effectiveness by subtype: a systematic review and meta-analysis of test-negative design studies.

            Influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) can vary by type and subtype. Over the past decade, the test-negative design has emerged as a valid method for estimation of VE. In this design, VE is calculated as 100% × (1 - odds ratio) for vaccine receipt in influenza cases versus test-negative controls. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate VE by type and subtype.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The case test-negative design for studies of the effectiveness of influenza vaccine.

              A modification to the case-control study design has become popular to assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) against viral infections. Subjects with symptomatic illness seeking medical care are tested by a highly specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay for the detection of the infection of interest. Cases are subjects testing positive for the virus; those testing negative represent the comparison group. Influenza and rotavirus VE studies using this design are often termed "test-negative case-control" studies, but this design has not been formally described or evaluated. We explicitly state several assumptions of the design and examine the conditions under which VE estimates derived with it are valid and unbiased. We derived mathematical expressions for VE estimators obtained using this design and examined their statistical properties. We used simulation methods to test the validity of the estimators and illustrate their performance using an influenza VE study as an example. Because the marginal ratio of cases to non-cases is unknown during enrollment, this design is not a traditional case-control study; we suggest the name "case test-negative" design. Under sets of increasingly general assumptions, we found that the case test-negative design can provide unbiased VE estimates. However, differences in health care-seeking behavior among cases and non-cases by vaccine status, strong viral interference, or modification of the probability of symptomatic illness by vaccine status can bias VE estimates. Vaccine effectiveness estimates derived from case test-negative studies are valid and unbiased under a wide range of assumptions. However, if vaccinated cases are less severely ill and seek care less frequently than unvaccinated cases, then an appropriate adjustment for illness severity is required to avoid bias in effectiveness estimates. Viral interference will lead to a non-trivial bias in the vaccine effectiveness estimate from case test-negative studies only when incidence of influenza is extremely high and duration of transient non-specific immunity is long. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clinical Infectious Diseases
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                1058-4838
                1537-6591
                December 01 2021
                December 06 2021
                December 25 2020
                December 01 2021
                December 06 2021
                December 25 2020
                : 73
                : 11
                : e4244-e4250
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta GA, USA
                [2 ]University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh PA, USA
                [3 ]Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle WA, USA
                [4 ]University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI, USA
                [5 ]Marshfield Clinic Research Institute, Marshfield WI, USA
                [6 ]Baylor Scott & White Health, Texas A&M University College of Medicine, Temple TX, USA
                Article
                10.1093/cid/ciaa1884
                33367650
                a73892bc-f399-4cf0-9287-73ced22281b2
                © 2020
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content176

                Cited by45

                Most referenced authors345