tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 9;12(1):e0169528. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169528. eCollection 2017.
[h=1]Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in the Netherlands from 2003/2004 through 2013/2014: The Importance of Circulating Influenza Virus Types and Subtypes.[/h] Darvishian M[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]2,[/SUP][SUP]3,[/SUP][SUP]4[/SUP], Dijkstra F[SUP]5[/SUP], van Doorn E[SUP]2[/SUP], Bijlsma MJ[SUP]2[/SUP], Donker GA[SUP]6[/SUP], de Lange MM[SUP]5[/SUP], Cadenau LM[SUP]5[/SUP], Hak E[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]2[/SUP], Meijer A[SUP]7[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) varies over different influenza seasons and virus (sub)types/lineages. To assess the association between IVE and circulating influenza virus (sub)types/lineages, we estimated the overall and (sub)type specific IVE in the Netherlands. We conducted a test-negative case control study among subjects with influenza-like illness or acute respiratory tract infection consulting the Sentinel Practices over 11 influenza seasons (2003/2004 through 2013/2014) in the Netherlands. The adjusted IVE was estimated using generalized linear mixed modelling and multiple logistic regression. In seven seasons vaccine strains did not match the circulating viruses. Overall adjusted IVE was 40% (95% CI 18 to 56%) and 20% (95% CI -5 to 38%) when vaccine (partially)matched and mismatched the circulating viruses, respectively. When A(H3N2) was the predominant virus, IVE was 38% (95% CI 14 to 55%). IVE against infection with former seasonal A(H1N1) virus was 83% (95% CI 52 to 94%), and with B virus 67% (95% CI 55 to 76%). In conclusion IVE estimates were particularly low when vaccine mismatched the circulating viruses and A(H3N2) was the predominant influenza virus subtype. Tremendous effort is required to improve vaccine production procedure and to explore the factors that influence the IVE against A(H3N2) virus.
PMID: 28068386 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169528
[PubMed - in process] Free full text
[h=1]Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in the Netherlands from 2003/2004 through 2013/2014: The Importance of Circulating Influenza Virus Types and Subtypes.[/h] Darvishian M[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]2,[/SUP][SUP]3,[/SUP][SUP]4[/SUP], Dijkstra F[SUP]5[/SUP], van Doorn E[SUP]2[/SUP], Bijlsma MJ[SUP]2[/SUP], Donker GA[SUP]6[/SUP], de Lange MM[SUP]5[/SUP], Cadenau LM[SUP]5[/SUP], Hak E[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]2[/SUP], Meijer A[SUP]7[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) varies over different influenza seasons and virus (sub)types/lineages. To assess the association between IVE and circulating influenza virus (sub)types/lineages, we estimated the overall and (sub)type specific IVE in the Netherlands. We conducted a test-negative case control study among subjects with influenza-like illness or acute respiratory tract infection consulting the Sentinel Practices over 11 influenza seasons (2003/2004 through 2013/2014) in the Netherlands. The adjusted IVE was estimated using generalized linear mixed modelling and multiple logistic regression. In seven seasons vaccine strains did not match the circulating viruses. Overall adjusted IVE was 40% (95% CI 18 to 56%) and 20% (95% CI -5 to 38%) when vaccine (partially)matched and mismatched the circulating viruses, respectively. When A(H3N2) was the predominant virus, IVE was 38% (95% CI 14 to 55%). IVE against infection with former seasonal A(H1N1) virus was 83% (95% CI 52 to 94%), and with B virus 67% (95% CI 55 to 76%). In conclusion IVE estimates were particularly low when vaccine mismatched the circulating viruses and A(H3N2) was the predominant influenza virus subtype. Tremendous effort is required to improve vaccine production procedure and to explore the factors that influence the IVE against A(H3N2) virus.
PMID: 28068386 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169528
[PubMed - in process] Free full text