Interim Within-Season Estimate of the Effectiveness of
Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine --- Marshfield, Wisconsin,
2007--08 Influenza Season
During clinical trials, the efficacy of vaccination with inactivated influenza vaccines for the prevention of
serologically confirmed influenza infection has been estimated as high as 70%--90% among healthier adults. However,
the effectiveness of annual influenza vaccination typically is lower during those influenza seasons when a suboptimal
match between the vaccine strains and circulating influenza strains is observed. For example, in a 4-year randomized study
of influenza vaccine among healthy persons aged 1--65 years, the predominant strain was drifted from the vaccine strain
in 2 of the 4 years. Inactivated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against culture-confirmed influenza ranged from 71% to
79% when the vaccine and circulating strains were suboptimally matched to 74% to 79% when the matches were
well matched (
1). In contrast, a 2-year study of inactivated influenza vaccine among healthy adults aged 18--64 years
found no measurable VE during a year when a poorly matched strain circulated, but found VE of 86% against
laboratory-confirmed influenza during the following year when the vaccine and circulating strains were well matched
(
2).
Although laboratory data on the antigenic characteristics of
circulating influenza viruses compared with vaccine strains are
available during influenza seasons, estimates of VE usually have not
been made until months after the conclusion of the season. This report
summarizes interim results of a 2008 case-control study to estimate the
effectiveness of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine for prevention
of medically attended, laboratory-confirmed influenza during the
2007--08 influenza season, when most circulating influenza A (H3N2) and
B viruses were suboptimally matched to the vaccine strains. Despite the
suboptimal match between two of three vaccine strains and circulating
influenza strains, overall VE in the study population during January
21--February 8, 2008, was 44%. These findings demonstrate that, in any
season, assessment of the clinical effectiveness of influenza vaccines
cannot be determined solely by laboratory evaluation of the degree of
antigenic match between vaccine and circulation strains.
Patients living in a 14 postal-code area surrounding Marshfield, Wisconsin, were eligible to participate in this
study. Nearly all residents in this area receive outpatient and inpatient care from Marshfield Clinic health-care providers.
Study enrollment began on January 21, 2008, based on laboratory evidence of influenza circulation from both
Marshfield Clinic laboratories and the Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene and continued through March 28, 2008.
Patients who visited a Marshfield Clinic facility with medically attended illnesses were screened for study eligibility
during outpatient or inpatient visits. Patients who
reported feverishness, chills, or cough were eligible for
enrollment. Those who reported symptoms for 8 or more days were not eligible for enrollment because influenza
virus shedding decreases with illness duration, making
detection of the virus unlikely after 8 days of symptoms. The majority of ill patients
not approached during a clinical encounter were identified the next day by using electronic diagnosis codes entered by
the clinician; these patients were contacted by telephone and enrolled at home if they met eligibility criteria.
The Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation institutional review board approved this study.
Nasal or nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained from consenting
patients and were tested for influenza A or B infection by reverse
transcription--polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) at the Marshfield
Clinic Research Foundation using CDC-recommended probes and primers.
Viral culture was performed on all samples that were RT-PCR positive to
provide virus isolates for antigenic characterization. Influenza
vaccination status was determined through an immunization information
system (Regional Early Childhood Immunization Network*) used by all
public and private immunization providers for vaccines administered to
adults and children. Previous validations have demonstrated that the
system captures 96%--98% of influenza vaccines administered to area
residents (Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, unpublished data,
2005--2007). Trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine from
Sanofi-Pasteur ([Fluzone®], Swiftwater, Pennsylvania) was the only influenza vaccine used by Marshfield Clinic during the 2007--08
influenza season.
For this case-control study, a case of medically attended influenza was defined as an acute illness in a patient
with feverishness, chills, or cough and documentation of influenza infection by RT-PCR. Controls were defined
as patients with the same symptoms who had a negative RT-PCR test for influenza. Using persons with actute
respiratory symptoms who test negative for influenza as controls is a method that in modeling studies has compared favorably
with
cohort studies and traditional case-control designs
for the assessment of vaccine effectiveness
(
3). Patients were categorized as immunized if they had received influenza vaccine 14 days or more before enrollment; in
addition, children aged <9 years were categorized as
immunized if they had received 2 doses of influenza vaccine.
Twenty-three children were excluded because they had received only 1 of the 2 recommended doses; this subgroup was too small
to permit a separate analysis of VE for partial immunization.
VE was estimated by using logistic regression to compare
patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza with patients who tested
negative for influenza. The likelihood of receiving influenza
vaccination in this population is associated with a propensity to seek
health care, and use of test-negative controls helped adjust for this
source of bias by estimating VE for medically attended influenza
illness. Comparisons of this study design to traditional cohort and
case-control methods for assessing VE have been published recently (
3). For this analysis, the enrolled patients were categorized into two
groups: persons for whom influenza vaccine was recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
(ACIP) for the 2007--08 season based on age or an existing chronic medical
condition† that increased their risk for
influenza-related complications (i.e., the ACIP recommended group), and healthy children and adults aged 5--49 years (i.e.,
the healthy group).
Logistic regression models were adjusted for age, week of enrollment, and presence of a chronic medical condition.
The last variable was not included in the models restricted to healthy patients aged 5--49 years. VE was estimated as 100
´ [1 -- adjusted odds ratio]) and was interpreted as zero if the percentage was negative. The first 59 influenza virus
isolates obtained during the study were submitted to CDC for detailed antigenic characterization.
During January 21--February 8, 2008, a total of 1,779 patients
were assessed for study eligibility after a clinical encounter for
acute respiratory illness or febrile illness. A total of 850 (48%) did
not meet eligibility criteria; 773 (91%) of exclusions resulted from
absence of feverishness, chills, or cough or an illness duration 8 days
or longer. Of the 929 eligible patients, 639 (69%) consented to the
study and were tested for influenza infection. Final enrollment for
this interim analysis was reduced to 616 patients after exclusion of 23
partially immunized children who had received only 1 of 2 recommended
vaccine doses.
Influenza was detected by RT-PCR in 191 (31%)
enrollees; 75% of influenza infections were type A. Distribution
by sex was similar for patients who tested positive and patients who tested negative for influenza
(Table 1); however, the median age was higher for patients who tested positive (21 years) than those who tested negative (10
years). Approximately 19% of patients who tested positive and 39% of those who tested negative had been vaccinated
against influenza.
The overall interim estimate of VE was 44% (Table 2); the estimate was higher among persons in the healthy
group aged 5--49 years (54%). The overall estimate of VE for prevention of medically attended influenza A infections
was 58%. No VE was observed for prevention of medically
attended influenza B infections.
Subtyping by RT-PCR performed at CDC demonstrated that 40 of 41
influenza A specimens were influenza A (H3N2) viruses; the remaining
specimen was an H3N2 and B virus mixture. Preliminary data on antigenic
characterizations were available for nine influenza A (H3N2) viruses
and 18 of 20 influenza B viruses. Two of nine influenza A (H3N2)
viruses were A/Wisconsin/67/2005-like, the H3N2 component of the
2007--08 Northern Hemisphere vaccine; the other seven were
A/Brisbane/10/2007-like (H3N2) viruses, a strain that is drifted from
the A/Wisconsin/76/2005 strain. All 18 influenza B viruses were
B/Florida/04/2006-like, belonging to the B/Yamagata/16/88 lineage of
viruses. B/Yamagata-like viruses are antigenically distinct from the
B/Victoria-like lineage virus that was included in the 2007--08
influenza vaccine.
Reported by:
E Belongia, MD, B Kieke, L Coleman,
PhD, J Donahue, DVM, PhD, S Irving, J Meece, PhD, M Vandermause,
Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, Marshfield, Wisconsin. D Shay,
MD, P Gargiullo, PhD, A Balish, A Foust, MA, L Guo, MD, S Lindstrom,
PhD, X Xu, MD, A Klimov, PhD, J Bresee, MD, N Cox, PhD Influenza Div,
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Disease, CDC.
Editorial Note:
Influenza infections result in substantial morbidity and mortality each year in the United States
(
4,5). Because of the sizeable burden of influenza-associated disease, annual influenza vaccination was recommended by
ACIP for the 2007--08 season for children aged 6--59 months, adults aged
>50 years, persons with chronic medical conditions that place them at high risk for serious
influenza-related complications, and close contacts of these
groups and of children aged <6 months (
6).
Viral data reported to World Health Organization (WHO) and National Respiratory and Enteric Virus
Surveillance System (NREVSS) laboratories in the United States during the 2007--08 influenza season through April 5,
2008, demonstrated that influenza A and B viruses accounted for
74% and 26%, respectively, of influenza viruses
characterized in the United States (
7).
Of influenza A viruses subtyped, 27% were influenza A (H1N1) viruses,
and 73% were influenza A (H3N2) viruses. Antigenic characterization of
a subset of these viruses by CDC indicated that 69% of A (H1N1) viruses
were A/Solomon Islands/3/2006-like, the A (H1N1) vaccine component, but
that 71% of A (H3N2) viruses were A/Brisbane/10/2007-like, a recent
antigenic variant of the A/Wisconsin/67/2005-like virus, the A (H3N2)
vaccine component. In addition, 95% of antigenically characterized B
viruses belonged to the B/Yamagata lineage. Viruses in this lineage are
antigenically distinct from the B/Malaysia/2506/2004-like component of
the 2007--08 vaccine, which is in the B/Victoria lineage. These viral
surveillance data suggested that the effectiveness of the 2007--08
influenza vaccine might be reduced against circulating influenza A
(H3N2) and B viruses. However, in this analysis, preliminary VE results
indicated that, despite the antigenic differences between vaccine and
circulating H3N2 strains, the effectiveness of vaccine in preventing
medically attended respiratory illnesses from influenza A infections
was 58%. In contrast, no VE could be demonstrated against influenza B.
Multiple previous studies of the effectiveness of influenza vaccines have been reported (i.e., observational studies of
the clinical effects of vaccination as opposed to randomized clinical trials)
(
8).
VE varies from influenza season to season, based in part on the degree
of antigenic match between vaccine and circulating influenza strains.
VE previously has been assessed sporadically in different populations
and by using different methods. Annual systematic assessments of VE
using laboratory-confirmed outcomes have not been available within an
influenza season. Furthermore, antigenic characterization data rarely
have been available for influenza viruses isolated from participants of
VE studies, and not previously from the population for whom annual
vaccination is recommended by ACIP. Despite a mismatch between the
vaccine influenza A (H3N2) strain and seven of nine influenza A (H3N2)
viruses isolated from study participants, the data in this report are
consistent with results obtained in seasons with a moderate antigenic
mismatch between vaccine and circulating strains of H3N2 viruses (
1,8).
Based on preliminary analyses of A/Brisbane/10/2007-like (H3N2) viruses and the 2007--08 vaccine H3N2
strain using the method of antigenic mapping
(
9), an average fourfold difference was observed between the homologous
titer for the vaccine strain and average titers for circulating strains. These differences were measured with
hemagglutination inhibition tests by using a panel of reference postinfection ferret antisera. The degree of mismatch
between the A/Wisconsin/67/2005 vaccine strain and H3N2 viruses tested at CDC thus far during the U.S. 2007--08 influenza
season can be described as moderate in relation to antigenic distances seen over time for H3N2 viruses
(
10).
By contrast, all the influenza B viruses isolated in the Marshfield
Clinic study this season and antigenically characterized thus far
belong to the B lineage not contained in this season's vaccine. Viruses
from the B/Victoria-like lineage and B/Yamagata-like lineage are
substantially more antigenically distinct from each other than
A/Wisconsin/67/2005-like and A/Brisbane/10/2007-like H3N2 viruses are
from each other.
The findings in this report are subject to at least four limitations. First, analyses were conducted while enrollment
and laboratory testing were ongoing, and not all RT-PCR positive samples had yet been confirmed by culture. Thus,
the preliminary subtype distribution and antigenic characterization results might not be representative of all
patients in the study with influenza. Second, VE was estimated only for prevention of influenza among persons who sought care
for acute respiratory illness, comparing patients who tested positive for influenza with patients who tested negative.
Certain patients who tested negative for influenza might actually have had influenza virus infections,
although RT-PCR is the most sensitive diagnostic test available. In addition, although simulation models have
demonstrated that VE estimated with test-negative controls
was close to the actual VE when test specificity was high, as is also the case with RT-PCR
(
3), this method is only beginning to be used in studies. VE was assessed against medically attended influenza and
not against more severe outcomes of influenza infection, such as influenza hospitalizations; VE might vary with severity
of the outcome studied. Third, if the antigenic characteristics of
influenza viruses circulating in other regions of the
United States differ substantially from viruses isolated from the Marshfield, Wisconsin, study participants, VE might vary
by region. Finally, enrollment of patients continued in this study thorough March 28, and final analyses might differ
from these interim assessments of VE.
These preliminary data based on study enrollment during January
21--February 8 suggest several conclusions. First, when assessing VE,
laboratory data on antigenic characterization of circulating influenza
viruses compared with vaccine strains should be interpreted together
with data on the clinical effectiveness of vaccination in preventing
laboratory-confirmed influenza illnesses. Although two of three vaccine
strains were not optimally matched with circulating viruses this
season, an interim VE estimate suggests that vaccination provided
substantial protection against medically attended acute respiratory
illness in this study population. In addition, intraseason estimates of
VE, such as those from this analysis, might be useful to public health
authorities and medical practitioners in their communications about the
benefits of vaccination, especially late in the influenza season. Such
data also might be helpful to practitioners when evaluating the need
for antiviral treatment and prophylaxis for their patients. Therefore,
creating systems that enable collection and dissemination of timely VE
data during an influenza season are a priority for CDC. Finally,
health-care providers should be aware of the types and subtypes of
influenza circulating in their communities over the course of each
influenza season. If influenza B strains predominate during the
remainder of this season, providers can anticipate an increased risk
for vaccine failures and should consider early use of antiviral
medications for treatment and prophylaxis of persons at high risk for
complications from influenza infection.
Acknowledgments
The findings in this report are based, in part, on contributions from V Allison, J Anderson, E Bergmann, C Beyer, L Bennetti, N
Berger, C Becker, A Bernitt, A Brockman, K Buedding, D Cole, A Deedon,
J Frahmann, D Gamble, L Gavigan, D Gentz, G Greenwald, N Hartl,
J Herr, D Hilgemann, L Ivacic, D Johnson, D Kempf, T Kronenwetter-Koeppel, D Marx, C Meyer, C Reis, S Reisner, J Salzwedel, S
Strey, P Siegler, P Stockwell, L Verhagen, D York, J Zygarlicke, Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, Marshfield, Wisconsin.
References
- Edwards KM, DuPont WD, Westrich MK, Plummer WD, Palmer PS, Wright PF. A randomized controlled trial of cold-adapted and
inactivated vaccines for the prevention of influenza A disease. J Infect Dis 1994;169:68--76.
- Bridges CB, Thompson WW, Meltzer MI, et al. Effectiveness and cost-benefit of influenza vaccination of healthy working adults:
a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000;284:1655--63.
- Orenstein EW, De Serres G, Haber MJ, et al. Methodologic issues
regarding the use of three observational study designs to assess
influenza vaccine effectiveness. Int J Epidemiol 2007;36:623--31.
- Thompson WW, Shay DK, Weintraub E, et al. Mortality associated
with influenza and respiratory syncytial virus in the United States.
JAMA 2003;289:179--86.
- Thompson WW, Shay DK, Weintraub E, et al. Influenza-associated hospitalizations in the United States. JAMA 2004;292:1333--40.
- CDC. Prevention and control of influenza: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), 2007.
MMWR 2007;56(No. RR-6).
- CDC.
Update: influenza activity---United States, September 30, 2007--April
5, 2008, and composition of the 2008--09 influenza vaccine. MMWR
2008;57:404--9.
- Nichol KL, Nordin JD, Nelson DB, Mullooly JP, Hak E. Effectiveness
of influenza vaccine in the community-dwelling elderly. N Engl J Med
2007;357:1373--81.
- Smith DJ, Lapedes AS, de Jong JC, et al. Mapping the antigenic and
genetic evolution of influenza virus. Science 2004;305:371--6.
- Russell CA, Jones TC, Barr IG, et al. The global circulation of seasonal influenza A(H3N2) viruses. Science. In press 2008.
* Available at http://www.recin.org/default.asp.
† Defined as existing if the patient had two or more health-care visits with relevant
International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical
Modification
diagnosis codes during 2007. Diagnosis codes were based on ACIP
criteria, including cardiac, pulmonary, renal,
neurological/musculoskeletal, metabolic, cerebrovascular,
immunosuppressive, circulatory system, and liver disorders; diabetes
mellitus; and malignancies.
Table 1

Return to top.
Table 2

Return to top.
|
Use of trade names and commercial sources is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services.
References to non-CDC sites on the Internet are
provided as a service to
MMWR readers and do not constitute or imply
endorsement of these organizations or their programs by CDC or the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services. CDC is not responsible for the content
of pages found at these sites. URL addresses listed in
MMWR were current as of
the date of publication. |
Disclaimer
All
MMWR HTML versions of articles are electronic conversions from ASCII text
into HTML. This conversion may have resulted in character translation or format errors in the HTML version.
Users should not rely on this HTML document, but are referred to the electronic PDF version and/or
the original
MMWR paper copy for the official text, figures, and tables.
An original paper copy of this issue can be obtained from the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), Washington, DC 20402-9371; telephone: (202) 512-1800.
Contact GPO for current prices.
**Questions or messages regarding errors in formatting should be addressed to
mmwrq@cdc.gov.
Date last reviewed: 4/16/2008