Related Articles

Background

Seasonal influenza imposes a substantial personal morbidity and societal cost burden. Vaccination is the major strategy for influenza prevention; however, because antigenically drifted influenza A and B viruses circulate annually, influenza vaccines must be updated to provide protection against the predicted prevalent strains for the next influenza season. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy, safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of a trivalent inactivated split virion influenza vaccine (TIV) in healthy adults over two influenza seasons in the US.

Methods

The primary endpoint of this double-blind, randomized study was the average efficacy of TIV versus placebo for the prevention of vaccine-matched, culture-confirmed influenza (VMCCI) across the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 influenza seasons. Secondary endpoints included the prevention of laboratory-confirmed (defined by culture and/or serology) influenza, as well as safety, reactogenicity, immunogenicity, and consistency between three consecutive vaccine lots. Participants were assessed actively during both influenza seasons, and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected for viral culture from individuals with influenza-like illness. Blood specimens were obtained for serology one month after vaccination and at the end of each influenza season's surveillance period.

Results

Although the point estimate for efficacy in the prevention of all laboratory-confirmed influenza was 63.2% (97.5% confidence interval [CI] lower bound of 48.2%), the point estimate for the primary endpoint, efficacy of TIV against VMCCI across both influenza seasons, was 46.3% with a 97.5% CI lower bound of 9.8%. This did not satisfy the pre-specified success criterion of a one-sided 97.5% CI lower bound of >35% for vaccine efficacy. The VMCCI attack rates were very low overall at 0.6% and 1.2% in the TIV and placebo groups, respectively. Apart from a mismatch for influenza B virus lineage in 2005-2006, there was a good match between TIV and the circulating strains. TIV was highly immunogenic, and immune responses were consistent between three different TIV lots. The most common reactogenicity events and spontaneous adverse events were associated with the injection site, and were mild in severity.

Conclusions

Despite a good immune response, and an average efficacy over two influenza seasons against laboratory-confirmed influenza of 63.2%, the pre-specified target (lower one-sided 97.5% confidence bound for efficacy > 35%) for the primary efficacy endpoint, the prevention of VMCCI, was not met. However, the results should be interpreted with caution in view of the very low attack rates we observed at the study sites in the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007, which corresponded to relatively mild influenza seasons in the US. Overall, the results showed that TIV has an acceptable safety profile and offered clinical benefit that exceeded risk.

Trial registration

NCT00216242

Seasonal influenza viruses cause annual disease epidemics that affect individuals at low and high risk for secondary illnesses. Influenza vaccines are widely used in high-risk patients to prevent infection, but the protection afforded varies by population; uptake is also limited in some groups. Antiviral drugs for influenza are now readily available. Oseltamivir is the most widely used antiviral for the treatment and prophylaxis of seasonal influenza, and its efficacy and safety are now well established in a variety of populations. In addition to decreasing the severity and duration of the symptoms of influenza, clinical and epidemiological studies demonstrate that oseltamivir significantly reduces the frequency of secondary illnesses and exacerbation of underlying conditions; survival is also significantly improved in seriously ill patients who are hospitalized with severe influenza. Resistant viruses are isolated with a low frequency during oseltamivir treatment (0.33% in adults and 4.0% in children among almost 2000 oseltamivir-treated patients enrolled onto Roche-sponsored clinical trials of oseltamivir treatment during the oseltamivir development programme). However, an oseltamivir-resistant influenza A (H1N1) virus emerged in Europe during the 2007–08 season and circulated in the southern and northern hemispheres in 2008–09. No link with oseltamivir usage could be detected, and the clinical impact of these viruses was limited. Oseltamivir-susceptible pandemic (H1N1) 2009 viruses now predominate in many countries. Oseltamivir is generally well tolerated, with a similar adverse event profile to placebo.

Introduction

The 2009 swine origin H1N1 influenza virus (swH1N1) provided an opportunity to study immune responses to a new influenza strain in the context of seasonal influenza vaccination. Our goals were: to assess whether analyzing multiple parameters of immune responsiveness to influenza has an advantage over evaluating hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) titer alone, to determine whether vaccination with the seasonal vaccine induced cross-reactive immunity to swH1N1 in some individuals, and to determine whether the immune response against swH1N1 is higher after infection than vaccination.

Methods

Antibody and T cell responses were studied in ten subjects who were first immunized with the 2009-10 seasonal influenza subunit vaccine, then six weeks later with the swH1N1 monovalent subunit vaccine. The amount of antibody against native virus glycoproteins, overall avidity of these antibodies, and HAI titer were measured. T cells were evaluated for proliferation and IFNγ secretion in response to the vaccine in vitro. Individuals with influenza-like illness were also evaluated, adding a microplate neuraminidase-inhibition (NAI) test.

Results

The immune response to influenza was highly variable and immune parameters did not increase in parallel. The seasonal vaccine induced antibodies recognizing the pandemic virus in 50% of subjects. Antibody affinity and NAI activity to swH1N1 were higher after natural infection than vaccination.

Conclusions

Evaluation of several immune parameters gives a more complete measure of immune responsiveness to influenza infection or vaccination than the HAI test alone.

Influenza is foremost among all infectious diseases for an age-related increase in risk for serious complications and death. Determining the benefit of current influenza vaccines is largely limited to epidemiologic studies, since placebo-controlled trials of influenza vaccines are no longer considered ethical in the older adult population. Vaccine effectiveness is calculated from the relative reduction in influenza outcomes in individuals who elect to be vaccinated compared with those who do not, the assumptions for which are diverse and have led to considerable controversy as to the exact benefit of influenza vaccination in older adults. In spite of this controversy, there is no doubt that new influenza vaccine technologies are needed to improve protection and reverse the trend of rising hospitalization and death rates related to influenza in older adults despite widespread influenza vaccination programs. This article will review the challenges to new vaccine development, explore the potential correlates of protection against influenza, and describe how new vaccine technologies may improve protection against complicated influenza illness in the older adult population.

Serum antibodies induced by seasonal influenza or seasonal influenza vaccination exhibit limited or no cross-reactivity against the 2009 pandemic swine-origin influenza virus of the H1N1 subtype (pH1N1). Ferrets immunized once or twice with MF59-adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine exhibited significantly reduced lung virus titers but no substantial clinical protection against pH1N1-associated disease. However, priming with MF59-adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine significantly increased the efficacy of a pandemic MF59-adjuvanted influenza vaccine against pH1N1 challenge. Elucidating the mechanism involved in this priming principle will contribute to our understanding of vaccine- and infection-induced correlates of protection. Furthermore, a practical consequence of these findings is that during an emerging pandemic, the implementation of a priming strategy with an available adjuvanted seasonal vaccine to precede the eventual pandemic vaccination campaign may be useful and life-saving.

Foremost amongst the diseases preventable by vaccination is influenza. Worldwide, influenza virus infection is associated with serious adverse events leading to hospitalization, debilitating complications, and death in elderly individuals. Immunization is considered to be the cornerstone for preventing these adverse health outcomes, and vaccination programs are timed to optimize protection during the annual influenza season. Trivalent inactivated influenza virus vaccines are believed to be both effective and cost-saving; however, in spite of widespread influenza vaccination programs, rates of hospitalization for acute respiratory illness and cardiovascular diseases have been increasing in this population during recent annual influenza seasons. From meta-analyses summarizing estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness from available observational clinical studies, this review aims to examine how effective current influenza vaccine strategies are in the aging and older adult population and to analyze which are the most important biases that interfere with measurements of influenza vaccine effectiveness. Furthermore, consideration is given to strategies that should be adopted in order to optimize influenza vaccine effectiveness in the face of immune exhaustion.

A long-sought goal during the battle against avian influenza is to develop a new generation of vaccines capable of mass immunizing humans as well as poultry (the major source of avian influenza for human infections) in a timely manner. Although administration of the currently licensed influenza vaccine is effective in eliciting protective immunity against seasonal influenza, this approach is associated with a number of insurmountable problems for preventing an avian influenza pandemic. Many of the hurdles may be eliminated by developing new avian influenza vaccines that do not require the propagation of an influenza virus during vaccine production. Replication-competent adenovirus-free adenovirus vectors hold promise as a carrier for influenza virus-free avian influenza vaccines owing to their safety profile and rapid manufacture using cultured suspension cells in a serum-free medium. Simple and efficient mass-immunization protocols, including nasal spray for people and automated in ovo vaccination for poultry, convey another advantage for this class of vaccines. In contrast to parenteral injection of adenovirus vector, the potency of adenovirus-vectored nasal vaccine is not appreciably interfered by pre-existing immunity to adenovirus.

Vaccination is the most cost-effective way to reduce the considerable disease burden of seasonal influenza. Although seasonal influenza vaccines are effective, their performance in the elderly and immunocompromised individuals would benefit from improvement. Major problems related to the development and production of pandemic influenza vaccines are response time and production capacity as well as vaccine efficacy and safety. Several improvements can be envisaged. Vaccine production technologies based on embryonated chicken eggs may be replaced by cell culture techniques. Reverse genetics techniques can speed up the generation of seed viruses and new mathematical modelling methods improve vaccine strain selection. Better understanding of the correlates of immune-mediated protection may lead to new vaccine targets besides the viral haemagglutinin, like the neuraminidase and M2 proteins. In addition, the role of cell-mediated immunity could be better exploited. New adjuvants have recently been shown to increase the breadth and the duration of influenza vaccine-induced protection. Other studies have shown that influenza vaccines based on different viral vector systems may also induce broad protection. It is to be expected that these developments may lead to more universal influenza vaccines that elicit broader and longer protection, and can be produced more efficiently.

Influenza is a major respiratory pathogen, which exerts a huge human and economic toll on society. Influenza is a vaccine preventable disease, however, the vaccine strains must be annually updated due to the continuous antigenic changes in the virus. Inactivated influenza vaccines have been used for over 50 years and have an excellent safety record. Annual vaccination is therefore recommended for all individuals with serious medical conditions, like COPD, and protects the vaccinee against influenza illness and also against hospitalization and death. In COPD patients, influenza infection can lead to exacerbations resulting in reduced quality of life, hospitalization and death in the most severe cases. Although there is only limited literature on the use of influenza vaccination solely in COPD patients, there is clearly enough evidence to recommend annual vaccination in this group. This review will focus on influenza virus and prophylaxis with inactivated influenza vaccines in COPD patients and other “at risk” groups to reduce morbidity, save lives, and reduce health care costs.

There is need for improved human influenza vaccines, particularly for older adults who are at greatest risk for severe disease, as well as to address the continuous antigenic drift within circulating human subtypes of influenza virus. We have engineered an influenza virus-like particle (VLP) as a new generation vaccine candidate purified from the supernatants of Sf9 insect cells following infection by recombinant baculoviruses to express three influenza virus proteins, hemagglutinin (HA), neuraminidase (NA), and matrix 1 (M1). In this study, a seasonal trivalent VLP vaccine (TVV) formulation, composed of influenza A H1N1 and H3N2 and influenza B VLPs, was evaluated in mice and ferrets for the ability to elicit antigen-specific immune responses. Animals vaccinated with the TVV formulation had hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) antibody titers against all three homologous influenza virus strains, as well as HAI antibodies against a panel of heterologous influenza viruses. HAI titers elicited by the TVV were statistically similar to HAI titers elicited in animals vaccinated with the corresponding monovalent VLP. Mice vaccinated with the TVV had higher level of influenza specific CD8+ T cell responses than a commercial trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV). Ferrets vaccinated with the highest dose of the VLP vaccine and then challenged with the homologous H3N2 virus had the lowest titers of replicating virus in nasal washes and showed no signs of disease. Overall, a trivalent VLP vaccine elicits a broad array of immunity and can protect against influenza virus challenge.

Background

Though influenza vaccines are the cornerstone of medical interventions aimed at protecting individuals against epidemic influenza, their effectiveness in HIV infected individuals is not certain. With the recent detection of influenza strains in countries with high HIV prevalence rates, we aimed at evaluating the current evidence on the efficacy and clinical effectiveness of influenza vaccines in HIV-infected individuals.

Methods

We used electronic databases to identify studies assessing efficacy or effectiveness of influenza vaccines in HIV patients. We included studies that compared the incidence of culture- or serologically-confirmed influenza or clinical influenza-like illness in vaccinated to unvaccinated HIV infected individuals. Characteristics of study participants were independently abstracted and the risk difference (RD), the number needed to vaccinate to prevent one case of influenza (NNV) and the vaccine effectiveness (VE) computed.

Results

We identified six studies that assessed the incidence of influenza in vaccinated HIV-infected subjects. Four of these studies compared the incidence in vaccinated versus unvaccinated subjects. These involved a total of 646 HIV-infected subjects. In all the 4 studies, the incidence of influenza was lower in the vaccinated compared to unvaccinated subjects with RD ranging from -0.48 (95% CI: -0.63, -0.34) to -0.15 (95% CI: -0.25, 0.05); between 3 and 7 people would need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza. Vaccine effectiveness ranged from 27% to 78%. A random effects model was used to obtain a summary RD of -0.27 (95%CI: -0.42, -0.11). There was no evidence of publication bias.

Conclusion

Current evidence, though limited, suggests that influenza vaccines are moderately effective in reducing the incidence of influenza in HIV-infected individuals. With the threat of a global influenza pandemic, there is an urgent need to evaluate the effectiveness of influenza vaccines in trials with a larger number of representative HIV-infected persons.

A single vaccination with MVA-NP+M1 boosts T-cell responses to conserved influenza antigens in humans. Protection against influenza disease and virus shedding was demonstrated in an influenza virus challenge study.

Background. The novel influenza vaccine MVA-NP+M1 is designed to boost cross-reactive T-cell responses to internal antigens of the influenza A virus that are conserved across all subtypes, providing protection against both influenza disease and virus shedding against all influenza A viruses. Following a phase 1 clinical study that demonstrated vaccine safety and immunogenicity, a phase 2a vaccination and influenza challenge study has been conducted in healthy adult volunteers.

Methods. Volunteers with no measurable serum antibodies to influenza A/Wisconsin/67/2005 received either a single vaccination with MVA-NP+M1 or no vaccination. T-cell responses to the vaccine antigens were measured at enrollment and again prior to virus challenge. All volunteers underwent intranasal administration of influenza A/Wisconsin/67/2005 while in a quarantine unit and were monitored for symptoms of influenza disease and virus shedding.

Results. Volunteers had a significantly increased T-cell response to the vaccine antigens following a single dose of the vaccine, with an increase in cytolytic effector molecules. Intranasal influenza challenge was undertaken without safety issues. Two of 11 vaccinees and 5 of 11 control subjects developed laboratory-confirmed influenza (symptoms plus virus shedding). Symptoms of influenza were less pronounced in the vaccinees and there was a significant reduction in the number of days of virus shedding in those vaccinees who developed influenza (mean, 1.09 days in controls, 0.45 days in vaccinees, P = .036).

Conclusions. This study provides the first demonstration of clinical efficacy of a T-cell–based influenza vaccine and indicates that further clinical development should be undertaken.

Clinical Trials Registration. NCT00993083.

A live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) is currently approved in the United States for the prevention of influenza in individuals 2–49 years of age. This article summarizes the available data describing the safety and efficacy of LAIV for the prevention of influenza in both children and adults. LAIV is administered as an intranasal spray and has been shown to provide high levels of efficacy against influenza illness caused by both matched and mismatched strains in children and adults. In studies comparing LAIV and inactivated influenza vaccine in children, LAIV recipients experienced 35–53% fewer cases of culture-confirmed influenza illness caused by antigenically matched strains. Protection through a second influenza season against antigenically matched strains has also been seen in children. In adults, definitive comparative studies of LAIV and inactivated vaccine have not been conducted and no statistically significant differences in efficacy have been demonstrated. The most common adverse reactions with LAIV include runny nose/nasal congestion in all age groups, fever >100°F in children, and sore throat in adults. Formulations of LAIV against pandemic influenza strains, including H5N1, H9N2, and H7N3, are currently being tested in preclinical and phase I clinical studies.

Background

Influenza infection may be more serious in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals, therefore, vaccination against seasonal and pandemic strains is highly advised. Seasonal influenza vaccines have had no significant negative effects in well controlled HIV infection, but the impact of adjuvanted pandemic A/California/07/2009 H1N1 influenza hemaglutinin (HA) vaccine, which was used for the first time in the Canadian population as an authorized vaccine in autumn 2009, has not been extensively studied.

Objective

Assess vaccine-related effects on CD4+ T cell counts and humoral responses to the vaccine in individuals attending the Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial HIV clinic.

Methods

A single dose of ArepanrixTM split vaccine including 3.75 μg A/California/07/2009 H1N1 HA antigen and ASO3 adjuvant was administered to 81 HIV-infected individuals by intramuscular injection. Plasma samples from shortly before, and 1–5 months after vaccination were collected from 80/81 individuals to assess humoral anti-H1N1 HA responses using a sensitive microbead-based array assay. Data on CD4+ T cell counts, plasma viral load, antiretroviral therapy and patient age were collected from clinical records of 81 individuals.

Results

Overall, 36/80 responded to vaccination either by seroconversion to H1N1 HA or with a clear increase in anti-H1N1 HA antibody levels. Approximately 1/3 (28/80) had pre-existing anti-H1N1 HA antibodies and were more likely to respond to vaccination (22/28). Responders had higher baseline CD4+ T cell counts and responders without pre-existing antibodies against H1N1 HA were younger than either non-responders or responders with pre-existing antibodies. Compared to changes in their CD4+ T cell counts observed over a similar time period one year later, vaccine recipients displayed a minor, transient fall in CD4+ T cell numbers, which was greater amongst responders.

Conclusions

We observed low response rates to the 2009 pandemic influenza vaccine among HIV-infected individuals without pre-existing antibodies against H1N1 HA and a minor transient fall in CD4+ T cell numbers, which was accentuated in responders. A single injection of the ArepanrixTM pandemic A/California/07/2009 H1N1 HA split vaccine may be insufficient to induce protective immunity in HIV-infected individuals without pre-existing anti-H1N1 HA responses.

Background

Recently, the promise of a new universal long-term flu vaccine has become more tangible than ever before. Such a vaccine would protect against very many seasonal and pandemic flu strains for many years, making annual vaccination unnecessary. However, due to complacency behavior, it remains unclear whether the introduction of such vaccines would maintain high and stable levels of vaccination coverage year after year.

Findings

To predict the impact of universal long-term flu vaccines on influenza epidemics we developed a mathematical model that linked human cognition and memory with the transmission dynamics of influenza. Our modeling shows that universal vaccines that provide short-term protection are likely to result in small frequent epidemics, whereas universal vaccines that provide long-term protection are likely to result in severe infrequent epidemics.

Conclusions

Influenza vaccines that provide short-term protection maintain risk awareness regarding influenza in the population and result in stable vaccination coverage. Vaccines that provide long-term protection could lead to substantial drops in vaccination coverage and should therefore include an annual epidemic risk awareness programs in order to minimize the risk of severe epidemics.

Cell-mediated immune responses should be considered in vaccination protocols.

Current vaccine strategies against influenza focus on generating robust antibody responses. Because of the high degree of antigenic drift among circulating influenza strains over the course of a year, vaccine strains must be reformulated specifically for each influenza season. The time delay from isolating the pandemic strain to large-scale vaccine production would be detrimental in a pandemic situation. A vaccine approach based on cell-mediated immunity that avoids some of these drawbacks is discussed here. Specifically, cell-mediated responses typically focus on peptides from internal influenza proteins, which are far less susceptible to antigenic variation. We review the literature on the role of CD4+ and CD8+ T cell–mediated immunity in influenza infection and the available data on the role of these responses in protection from highly pathogenic influenza infection. We discuss the advantages of developing a vaccine based on cell-mediated immune responses toward highly pathogenic influenza virus and potential problems arising from immune pressure.

Introduction

The risk of poor vaccine immunogenicity and more severe influenza disease in HIV necessitate strategies to improve vaccine efficacy.

Methods

A randomized, multi-centered, controlled, vaccine trial with three parallel groups was conducted at 12 CIHR Canadian HIV Trials Network sites. Three dosing strategies were used in HIV infected adults (18 to 60 years): two standard doses over 28 days, two double doses over 28 days and a single standard dose of influenza vaccine, administered prior to the 2008 influenza season. A trivalent killed split non-adjuvanted influenza vaccine (Fluviral™) was used. Serum hemagglutinin inhibition (HAI) activity for the three influenza strains in the vaccine was measured to assess immunogenicity.

Results

297 of 298 participants received at least one injection. Baseline CD4 (median 470 cells/µL) and HIV RNA (76% of patients with viral load <50 copies/mL) were similar between groups. 89% were on HAART. The overall immunogenicity of influenza vaccine across time points and the three influenza strains assessed was poor (Range HAI ≥40 = 31–58%). Double dose plus double dose booster slightly increased the proportion achieving HAI titre doubling from baseline for A/Brisbane and B/Florida at weeks 4, 8 and 20 compared to standard vaccine dose. Increased immunogenicity with increased antigen dose and booster dosing was most apparent in participants with unsuppressed HIV RNA at baseline. None of 8 serious adverse events were thought to be immunization-related.

Conclusion

Even with increased antigen dose and booster dosing, non-adjuvanted influenza vaccine immunogenicity is poor in HIV infected individuals. Alternative influenza vaccines are required in this hyporesponsive population.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00764998

Annual vaccination against seasonal influenza viruses is recommended for certain individuals that have a high risk for complications resulting from infection with these viruses. Recently it was recommended in a number of countries including the USA to vaccinate all healthy children between 6 and 59 months of age as well. However, vaccination of immunologically naïve subjects against seasonal influenza may prevent the induction of heterosubtypic immunity against potentially pandemic strains of an alternative subtype, otherwise induced by infection with the seasonal strains.

Here we show in a mouse model that the induction of protective heterosubtypic immunity by infection with a human A/H3N2 influenza virus is prevented by effective vaccination against the A/H3N2 strain. Consequently, vaccinated mice were no longer protected against a lethal infection with an avian A/H5N1 influenza virus. As a result H3N2-vaccinated mice continued to loose body weight after A/H5N1 infection, had 100-fold higher lung virus titers on day 7 post infection and more severe histopathological changes than mice that were not protected by vaccination against A/H3N2 influenza.

The lack of protection correlated with reduced virus-specific CD8+ T cell responses after A/H5N1 virus challenge infection. These findings may have implications for the general recommendation to vaccinate all healthy children against seasonal influenza in the light of the current pandemic threat caused by highly pathogenic avian A/H5N1 influenza viruses.

Seasonal influenza vaccination may induce heterosubtypic immunity against avian influenza virus (H5N1).

Avian influenza virus (H5N1) can be transmitted to humans, resulting in a severe or fatal disease. The aim of this study was to evaluate the immune cross-reactivity between human and avian influenza (H5N1) strains in healthy donors vaccinated for seasonal influenza A (H1N1)/(H3N2). A small frequency of CD4 T cells specific for subtype H5N1 was detected in several persons at baseline, and seasonal vaccine administration enhanced the frequency of such reactive CD4 T cells. We also observed that seasonal vaccination is able to raise neutralizing immunity against influenza (H5N1) in a large number of donors. No correlation between influenza-specific CD4 T cells and humoral responses was observed. N1 may possibly be a target for both cellular and humoral cross-type immunity, but additional experiments are needed to clarify this point. These findings highlight the possibility of boosting cross-type cellular and humoral immunity against highly pathogenic avian influenza A virus subtype H5N1 by seasonal influenza vaccination.

Influenza virus-like particles (VLPs) are a promising cell culture-based vaccine, and the skin is considered an attractive immunization site. In this study, we examined the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of influenza VLPs (H1N1 A/PR/8/34) after skin vaccination using vaccine dried on solid microneedle arrays. Coating of microneedles with influenza VLPs using an unstabilized formulation was found to decrease hemagglutinin (HA) activity, whereas inclusion of trehalose disaccharide preserved the HA activity of influenza VLP vaccines after microneedles were coated. Microneedle vaccination of mice in the skin with a single dose of stabilized influenza VLPs induced 100% protection against challenge infection with a high lethal dose. In contrast, unstabilized influenza VLPs, as well as intramuscularly injected vaccines, provided inferior immunity and only partial protection (≤40%). The stabilized microneedle vaccination group showed IgG2a levels that were 1 order of magnitude higher than those of other groups and had the lowest lung viral titers after challenge. Also, levels of recall immune responses, including hemagglutination inhibition titers, neutralizing antibodies, and antibody-secreting plasma cells, were significantly higher after skin vaccination with stabilized formulations. Therefore, our results indicate that HA stabilization, combined with vaccination via the skin using a vaccine formulated as a solid microneedle patch, confers protection superior to that with intramuscular injection and enables potential dose-sparing effects which are reflected by pronounced increases in rapid recall immune responses against influenza virus.

Highly pathogenic avian influenza A viruses of the H5N1 subtype continue to circulate in poultry, and zoonotic transmissions are reported frequently. Since a pandemic caused by these highly pathogenic viruses is still feared, there is interest in the development of influenza A/H5N1 virus vaccines that can protect humans against infection, preferably after a single vaccination with a low dose of antigen. Here we describe the induction of humoral and cellular immune responses in ferrets after vaccination with a cell culture-derived whole inactivated influenza A virus vaccine in combination with the novel adjuvant CoVaccine HT. The addition of CoVaccine HT to the influenza A virus vaccine increased antibody responses to homologous and heterologous influenza A/H5N1 viruses and increased virus-specific cell-mediated immune responses. Ferrets vaccinated once with a whole-virus equivalent of 3.8 μg hemagglutinin (HA) and CoVaccine HT were protected against homologous challenge infection with influenza virus A/VN/1194/04. Furthermore, ferrets vaccinated once with the same vaccine/adjuvant combination were partially protected against infection with a heterologous virus derived from clade 2.1 of H5N1 influenza viruses. Thus, the use of the novel adjuvant CoVaccine HT with cell culture-derived inactivated influenza A/H5N1 virus antigen is a promising and dose-sparing vaccine approach warranting further clinical evaluation.

Seasonal influenza virus infection is a leading cause of illness and mortality in young children and the elderly each year. Current influenza vaccines generate protective antibody responses; however, these must be given annually to provide protection against serologically distinct viruses. By contrast, CD8+ T cells are capable of recognizing conserved antigenic determinants within the influenza virion and, as such, may provide protection against a number of variant strains of the virus. CD8+ T cells play a critical key role in controlling and resolving influenza virus infections via the production of cytokines and cytolytic mediators. This article focuses on the induction of the influenza-specific CD8+ T-cell response and how these cells acquire and maintain effector function after induction. Moreover, we discuss how cytotoxic T-lymphocyte function correlates with protection following vaccination.

Background

Influenza vaccines are most effective when the antigens in the vaccine match those of circulating influenza strains. The extent to which the vaccine is protective when circulating strains differ from vaccine antigens, or are mismatched, is uncertain. We propose to systematically review the cross-protection offered by influenza vaccines against circulating influenza A or B viruses that are not antigenically well-matched to vaccine strains.

Methods/Design

This is a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. Placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting laboratory-confirmed influenza among healthy participants vaccinated with antigens of influenza strains that differed from those circulating will be included. The primary outcome is the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza (polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or viral culture). The secondary outcome is the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza through antibody assay (a less sensitive test than PCR or viral culture) alone or combined with PCR, and/ or viral culture. The review will be limited to RCTs written in English.

We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, previous influenza reviews, and the reference lists of included studies to identify potentially relevant RCTs. Two independent reviewers will conduct all levels of screening, data abstraction, and quality appraisal (using the Cochrane risk of bias tool).

If appropriate, random effects meta-analysis of vaccine efficacy will be conducted in SAS (version 9.2) by calculating the relative risk. Vaccine efficacy will be calculated using the following formula: (1 - relative risk × 100). The results will be analyzed by type of vaccine (live attenuated, trivalent inactivated, or other). Subgroup analysis will include the effects of age (children, adults, older participants), and influenza A versus influenza B on the results. For influenza B we will also consider variable degrees of antigenic mismatch (lineage and drift mismatch).

Discussion

Our results can be used by researchers and policy-makers to help predict the efficacy of influenza vaccines during mismatched influenza seasons. Furthermore, the review will be of interest to patients and clinicians to determine whether to get immunized or support immunization for a particular influenza season.

The influenza pandemic of 2009 demonstrated the inability of the established global capacity for egg-based vaccine production technology to provide sufficient vaccine for the population in a timely fashion. Several alternative technologies for developing influenza vaccines have been proposed, among which non-replicating virus-like particles (VLPs) represent an attractive option because of their safety and immunogenic characteristics. VLP vaccines against pandemic influenza have been developed in tobacco plant cells and in Sf9 insect cells infected with baculovirus that expresses protein genes from pandemic influenza strains. These technologies allow rapid and large-scale production of vaccines (3–12 weeks). The 2009 influenza outbreak provided an opportunity for clinical testing of a pandemic influenza VLP vaccine in the midst of the outbreak at its epicenter in Mexico. An influenza A(H1N1)2009 VLP pandemic vaccine (produced in insect cells) was tested in a phase II clinical trial involving 4,563 healthy adults. Results showed that the vaccine is safe and immunogenic despite high preexisting anti-A(H1N1)2009 antibody titers present in the population. The safety and immunogenicity profile presented by this pandemic VLP vaccine during the outbreak in Mexico suggests that VLP technology is a suitable alternative to current influenza vaccine technologies for producing pandemic and seasonal vaccines.

Immunization procedures with live attenuated and inactivated vaccines were carried out on a group of young recruits at the beginning of an outbreak of infection due to an A/Victoria/3/75-related virus strain, which occurred in February 1977 in a military camp. A retrospective investigation on protection from clinical influenza was then performed in order to investigate whether immunization with live virus vaccines, administered at the beginning of an epidemic, could provide early protection from the disease. In the course of the two weeks following vaccination, laboratory-confirmed clinical influenza cases occurred in 4 subjects among the 110 volunteers of the control group which received placebo, and in 8, 7 and 4 subjects respectively of the 3 groups of about 125 individuals, each of which received one of the following vaccine preparations: (a), live attenuated A/Victoria/3/75 influenza virus oral vaccine, grown on chick embryo kidney culture; (b), live attenuated nasal vaccine, a recombinant of A/Puerto Rico/8/34 with A/Victoria/3/75 virus; and (c), inactivated A/Victoria/3/75 virus intramuscular vaccine. These data do not support the hypothesis that, during an epidemic of infection, early protection from clinical influenza can be achieved through immunization with live attenuated or inactivated influenza virus vaccines, in spite of the high immunizing capability of the vaccine preparations.