• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Repeated annual influenza vaccination and vaccine effectiveness: Review of evidence

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Expert Rev Vaccines. 2017 May 31. doi: 10.1080/14760584.2017.1334554. [Epub ahead of print]
[h=1]Repeated annual influenza vaccination and vaccine effectiveness: Review of evidence.[/h] Belongia EA[SUP]1[/SUP], Skowronski DM[SUP]2[/SUP], McLean HQ[SUP]1[/SUP], Chambers C[SUP]2[/SUP], Sundaram ME[SUP]3[/SUP], De Serres G[SUP]4[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]

[h=3]Abstract[/h] [h=4]INTRODUCTION:[/h] Studies in the 1970s and 1980s signaled concern that repeated influenza vaccination could affect vaccine protection. The antigenic distance hypothesis provided a theoretical framework to explain variability in repeat vaccination effects based on antigenic similarity between successive vaccine components and the epidemic strain. Areas covered. A meta-analysis of vaccine effectiveness studies from 2010-11 through 2014-15 shows substantial heterogeneity in repeat vaccination effects within and between seasons and subtypes. When negative effects were observed, they were most pronounced for H3N2, especially in 2014-15 when vaccine components were unchanged and antigenically distinct from the epidemic strain. Studies of repeated vaccination across multiple seasons suggest that vaccine effectiveness may be influenced by more than one prior season. In immunogenicity studies, repeated vaccination blunts the hemagglutinin antibody response, particularly for H3N2. Expert commentary. Substantial heterogeneity in repeated vaccination effects is not surprising given the variation in study populations and seasons, and the variable effects of antigenic distance and immunological landscape in different age groups and populations. Caution is required in the interpretation of pooled results across multiple seasons, since this can mask important variation in repeat vaccination effects between seasons. Multi-season clinical studies are needed to understand repeat vaccination effects and guide recommendations.


[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] Influenza; effectiveness; efficacy; immunogenicity; meta-analysis; recurrent; repeat; vaccine

PMID: 28562111 DOI: 10.1080/14760584.2017.1334554
 
Back
Top Bottom