Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison of the immunogenicity and safety of the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal influenza vaccines in the elderly.
Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2014 Jul; 21(7):989-96.CV

Abstract

The influenza vaccination is known as the most effective method for preventing influenza infection and its complications in the elderly. Conventional subunit (Agrippal S1; Novartis), MF59-adjuvanted (Fluad; Novartis), and intradermal (IDflu15; Sanofi Pasteur) influenza vaccines are widely used throughout South Korea. However, few comparative studies evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of these vaccines are available. Prior to the beginning of the 2011-2012 influenza season, 335 healthy elderly volunteers randomly received one of three seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines, the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, or intradermal influenza vaccine. Serum hemagglutination-inhibiting antibody levels were measured at the time of vaccination and at 1 and 6 months after vaccination. Adverse events were recorded prospectively. A total of 113 conventional subunit, 111 MF59-adjuvanted, and 111 intradermal influenza vaccine volunteers were followed up during a 6-month postvaccination period. One month after vaccination, all three vaccines satisfied Committee for Medical Products for Human Use (CHMP) immunogenicity criteria for the A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 strains but not for the B strain. Compared with the subunit vaccine, the intradermal vaccine exhibited noninferiority, while the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine exhibited superiority. Furthermore, the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine was more immunogenic against the A/H3N2 strain than was the subunit vaccine up to 6 months postvaccination. The most common local and systemic reactions to the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal influenza vaccines were pain at the injection site (7.1%, 10.8%, and 6.3%, respectively) and generalized myalgia (0.9%, 8.1%, and 5.4%, respectively). Local and systemic reactions were similar among the three vaccine groups. MF59-adjuvanted vaccine exhibited superior immunogenicity compared with a conventional subunit vaccine and had a comparable safety profile. For older adults, the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine is preferable for providing superior immunogenicity.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea.Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea heejinmd@korea.ac.kr.Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea Transgovernmental Enterprise for Pandemic Influenza in Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

24828092

Citation

Seo, Yu Bin, et al. "Comparison of the Immunogenicity and Safety of the Conventional Subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and Intradermal Influenza Vaccines in the Elderly." Clinical and Vaccine Immunology : CVI, vol. 21, no. 7, 2014, pp. 989-96.
Seo YB, Choi WS, Lee J, et al. Comparison of the immunogenicity and safety of the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal influenza vaccines in the elderly. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2014;21(7):989-96.
Seo, Y. B., Choi, W. S., Lee, J., Song, J. Y., Cheong, H. J., & Kim, W. J. (2014). Comparison of the immunogenicity and safety of the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal influenza vaccines in the elderly. Clinical and Vaccine Immunology : CVI, 21(7), 989-96. https://doi.org/10.1128/CVI.00615-13
Seo YB, et al. Comparison of the Immunogenicity and Safety of the Conventional Subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and Intradermal Influenza Vaccines in the Elderly. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2014;21(7):989-96. PubMed PMID: 24828092.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of the immunogenicity and safety of the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal influenza vaccines in the elderly. AU - Seo,Yu Bin, AU - Choi,Won Suk, AU - Lee,Jacob, AU - Song,Joon Young, AU - Cheong,Hee Jin, AU - Kim,Woo Joo, Y1 - 2014/05/14/ PY - 2014/5/16/entrez PY - 2014/5/16/pubmed PY - 2015/4/17/medline SP - 989 EP - 96 JF - Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI JO - Clin. Vaccine Immunol. VL - 21 IS - 7 N2 - The influenza vaccination is known as the most effective method for preventing influenza infection and its complications in the elderly. Conventional subunit (Agrippal S1; Novartis), MF59-adjuvanted (Fluad; Novartis), and intradermal (IDflu15; Sanofi Pasteur) influenza vaccines are widely used throughout South Korea. However, few comparative studies evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of these vaccines are available. Prior to the beginning of the 2011-2012 influenza season, 335 healthy elderly volunteers randomly received one of three seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines, the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, or intradermal influenza vaccine. Serum hemagglutination-inhibiting antibody levels were measured at the time of vaccination and at 1 and 6 months after vaccination. Adverse events were recorded prospectively. A total of 113 conventional subunit, 111 MF59-adjuvanted, and 111 intradermal influenza vaccine volunteers were followed up during a 6-month postvaccination period. One month after vaccination, all three vaccines satisfied Committee for Medical Products for Human Use (CHMP) immunogenicity criteria for the A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 strains but not for the B strain. Compared with the subunit vaccine, the intradermal vaccine exhibited noninferiority, while the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine exhibited superiority. Furthermore, the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine was more immunogenic against the A/H3N2 strain than was the subunit vaccine up to 6 months postvaccination. The most common local and systemic reactions to the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal influenza vaccines were pain at the injection site (7.1%, 10.8%, and 6.3%, respectively) and generalized myalgia (0.9%, 8.1%, and 5.4%, respectively). Local and systemic reactions were similar among the three vaccine groups. MF59-adjuvanted vaccine exhibited superior immunogenicity compared with a conventional subunit vaccine and had a comparable safety profile. For older adults, the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine is preferable for providing superior immunogenicity. SN - 1556-679X UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/24828092/Comparison_of_the_immunogenicity_and_safety_of_the_conventional_subunit_MF59_adjuvanted_and_intradermal_influenza_vaccines_in_the_elderly_ L2 - http://cvi.asm.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=24828092 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -