Division of Epidemiology, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Primary Care & Population Health Research Program, Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
JAMA Pediatr. 2018 Sep 1;172(9):e181514. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.1514. Epub 2018 Sep 4.
Recent observational studies report conflicting results regarding the effectiveness of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV), particularly against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09.
To compare the effectiveness of LAIV and inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) against laboratory-confirmed influenza.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A test-negative study to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) using population-based, linked, individual-level laboratory, health administrative, and immunization data. Data were obtained from 10 169 children and adolescents aged 2 to 17 years (children) who were tested for influenza in inpatient or outpatient settings during periods when influenza was circulating based on a threshold level of 5% weekly test positivity for the province during the 4 influenza seasons spanning from November 11, 2012, to April 30, 2016, in Alberta, Canada. Logistic regression was used to estimate VE by vaccine type, influenza season, and influenza type and subtype. The relative effectiveness of each vaccine type was assessed by comparing the odds of laboratory-confirmed influenza infection for LAIV recipients with that for IIV recipients.
The primary exposure was receipt of LAIV or IIV before testing for influenza.
The primary outcome was influenza case status as determined by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction testing.
A total of 10 779 respiratory specimens (from 10 169 children) collected and tested for influenza during the 4 influenza seasons were included, with 53.4% from males; the mean (SD) age was 7.0 (4.6) years. Across the 4 influenza seasons, 3161 children tested positive for influenza. Combining the 4 influenza seasons, the adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 69% (95% CI, 56%-78%) for LAIV compared with 79% (95% CI, 70%-86%) for IIV. Vaccine effectiveness against influenza A(H3N2) was 36% (95% CI, 14%-53%) for LAIV and 43% (95% CI, 22%-59%) for IIV. Against influenza B, VE was 74% (95% CI, 62%-82%) for LAIV and 56% (95% CI, 41%-66%) for IIV. There were no significant differences in the odds of influenza infection for LAIV recipients compared with IIV recipients except for influenza B during the 2015-2016 season, when LAIV recipients had lower odds of infection than IIV recipients (odds ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.17-0.76).
There was no evidence to support the lack of effectiveness of LAIV against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09. These results support administration of either vaccine type in this age group.
最近的观察性研究报告称,减毒活流感疫苗(LAIV)的有效性存在冲突结果,特别是针对甲型 H1N1pdm09。
比较 LAIV 和灭活流感疫苗(IIV)对实验室确诊流感的效果。
设计、设置和参与者:这是一项使用基于人群的、关联的、个体层面的实验室、卫生行政和免疫接种数据来估计流感疫苗效力(VE)的阴性病例对照研究。数据来自加拿大艾伯塔省的 10169 名 2 至 17 岁的儿童和青少年(儿童),这些儿童在流感流行期间的住院或门诊环境中接受了流感检测,依据是该省每周流感检测阳性率达到 5%的阈值。在 2012 年 11 月 11 日至 2016 年 4 月 30 日的 4 个流感季节中,使用逻辑回归按疫苗类型、流感季节和流感类型和亚型估计 VE。通过比较 LAIV 接种者和 IIV 接种者实验室确诊流感感染的可能性来评估每种疫苗类型的相对有效性。
主要暴露是在流感检测前接受 LAIV 或 IIV。
主要结局是通过逆转录酶聚合酶链反应检测确定的流感病例状态。
共纳入了 4 个流感季节中收集和检测的 10779 份呼吸道标本(来自 10169 名儿童),其中 53.4%来自男性;平均(SD)年龄为 7.0(4.6)岁。在 4 个流感季节中,共有 3161 名儿童的流感检测呈阳性。将 4 个流感季节合并,LAIV 对甲型 H1N1pdm09 的调整后 VE 为 69%(95%CI,56%-78%),而 IIV 的 VE 为 79%(95%CI,70%-86%)。LAIV 对甲型 H3N2 的疫苗有效性为 36%(95%CI,14%-53%),而 IIV 的疫苗有效性为 43%(95%CI,22%-59%)。乙型流感的 VE 为 74%(95%CI,62%-82%),而 IIV 的 VE 为 56%(95%CI,41%-66%)。除了 2015-2016 季节的乙型流感之外,LAIV 接种者与 IIV 接种者相比,流感感染的可能性没有显著差异,在该季节,LAIV 接种者的感染可能性低于 IIV 接种者(比值比,0.36;95%CI,0.17-0.76)。
没有证据支持 LAIV 对甲型 H1N1pdm09 无效。这些结果支持在该年龄组中使用这两种疫苗类型。