Hobson D, Baker F A, Curry R L, Beare A S, Massey P M
J Hyg (Lond). 1973 Dec;71(4):641-7. doi: 10.1017/s0022172400022907.
Intranasal vaccines of inactivated or living attentuated A2/Hong Kong influenza viruses were compared for clinical acceptability, serological effects and protective efficiency against natural epidemic influenza in a large industrial and clerical population.Neither vaccine resulted in any significant untoward side-effects. The serum haemagglutination-inhibiting (HI) antibody response within 1 month of vaccination was similar with both vaccines; approximately 50% of those with little or no pre-vaccination antibody developed 4-fold or greater rises in titre. The effect of the antigenic potency of the vaccines and the prior immunological experience of the population is discussed. Volunteers given live vaccine showed a 2.2-fold lower incidence of clinical influenza than those given killed vaccine in a natural epidemic 16 months after vaccination.
在一个大型工业和文职人员群体中，对灭活或减毒活A2/香港流感病毒鼻内疫苗的临床可接受性、血清学效应及预防自然流行性感冒的保护效力进行了比较。两种疫苗均未产生任何明显的不良副作用。接种疫苗后1个月内，两种疫苗的血清血凝抑制（HI）抗体反应相似；接种前抗体水平很低或没有抗体的人群中，约50%的人抗体滴度出现了4倍或更高的升高。文中讨论了疫苗抗原效力及人群既往免疫经验的影响。接种减毒活疫苗的志愿者在接种后16个月的自然流行中，临床流感发病率比接种灭活疫苗的志愿者低2.2倍。
