Pierse Nevil, Kelly Heath, Thompson Mark G, Bissielo Ange, Radke Sarah, Huang Q Sue, Baker Michael G, Turner Nikki
The University of Otago, Wellington, PO Box 7343, Wellington South 6242, New Zealand.
The Australian National University, Canberra 0200, ACT Australia; Victorian Infectious Diseases Reference Laboratory, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Vaccine. 2016 Jan 20;34(4):503-509. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.11.073. Epub 2015 Dec 10.
We aimed to estimate the protection afforded by inactivated influenza vaccine, in both community and hospital settings, in a well characterised urban population in Auckland during 2014.
We used two different comparison groups, all patients who tested negative for influenza and only those patients who tested negative for influenza and had a non-influenza respiratory virus detected, to calculate the vaccine effectiveness in a test negative study design. Estimates were made separately for general practice outpatient consultations and hospitalised patients, stratified by age group and by influenza type and subtype. Vaccine status was confirmed by electronic record for general practice patients and all respiratory viruses were detected by real time polymerase chain reaction.
1039 hospitalised and 1154 general practice outpatient consultations met all the study inclusion criteria and had a respiratory sample tested for influenza and other respiratory viruses. Compared to general practice patients, hospitalised patients were more likely to be very young or very old, to be Māori or Pacific Islander, to have a low income and to suffer from chronic disease. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) adjusted for age and other participant characteristics using all influenza negative controls was 42% (95% CI: 16 to 60%) for hospitalised and 56% (95% CI: 35 to 70%) for general practice patients. The vaccine appeared to be most effective against the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 strain with an adjusted VE of 62% (95% CI:38 to 77%) for hospitalised and 59% (95% CI:36 to 74%) for general practice patients, using influenza virus negative controls. Similar results found when patients testing positive for a non-influenza respiratory virus were used as the control group.
This study contributes to validation of the test negative design and confirms that inactivated influenza vaccines continue to provide modest but significant protection against laboratory-confirmed influenza.
我们旨在评估2014年奥克兰一个特征明确的城市人群中,社区和医院环境下灭活流感疫苗提供的保护作用。
我们使用了两个不同的比较组,即所有流感检测呈阴性的患者,以及仅那些流感检测呈阴性且检测出非流感呼吸道病毒的患者,以在检测阴性研究设计中计算疫苗效力。分别针对全科门诊咨询患者和住院患者进行估计,并按年龄组、流感类型和亚型进行分层。通过电子记录确认全科门诊患者的疫苗接种状态,所有呼吸道病毒均通过实时聚合酶链反应检测。
1039名住院患者和1154名全科门诊咨询患者符合所有研究纳入标准,并进行了流感和其他呼吸道病毒的呼吸道样本检测。与全科门诊患者相比,住院患者更可能是非常年幼或非常年长、是毛利人或太平洋岛民、低收入且患有慢性病。使用所有流感阴性对照,经年龄和其他参与者特征调整后的疫苗效力,住院患者为42%(95%可信区间:16%至60%),全科门诊患者为56%(95%可信区间:35%至70%)。使用流感病毒阴性对照时,疫苗对甲型(H1N1)pdm09流感毒株似乎最有效,住院患者调整后的疫苗效力为62%(95%可信区间:38%至77%),全科门诊患者为59%(95%可信区间:36%至74%)。当将检测出非流感呼吸道病毒呈阳性的患者用作对照组时,发现了类似结果。
本研究有助于验证检测阴性设计,并证实灭活流感疫苗继续为实验室确诊的流感提供适度但显著的保护。