Announcements
Eurosurveillance remains in the updated list of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). It was first added to the DOAJ on 9 September 2004. Eurosurveillance is also listed in the Securing a Hybrid Environment for Research Preservation and Access / Rights MEtadata for Open archiving (SHERPA/RoMEO) [2], a database which uses a colour‐coding scheme to classify publishers according to their self‐archiving policy and to show the copyright and open access self-archiving policies of academic journals. Eurosurveillance is listed there as a ‘green’ journal, which means that authors can archive pre-print (i.e. pre-refereeing), post-print (i.e. final draft post-refereeing) and archive the publisher's version/PDF.

Follow Eurosurveillance on Twitter: @Eurosurveillanc

Note of concern published for 'Epidemiological investigation of MERS-CoV spread in a single hospital in South Korea, May to June 2015', http://bit.ly/29QFXPp


In this issue


Home Eurosurveillance Edition  2016: Volume 21/ Issue 40 Article 3
Back to Table of Contents
Previous Download (pdf)
Next

Eurosurveillance, Volume 21, Issue 40, 06 October 2016
Letter
Fry, Flannery, Olsen, Grohskopf, and Bresee: Letter to the editor: Regarding the editorial by Penttinen and Friede

+ Author affiliations


Citation style for this article: Fry AM, Flannery B, Olsen SJ, Grohskopf L, Bresee J. Letter to the editor: Regarding the editorial by Penttinen and Friede. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(40):pii=30366. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.40.30366

Received:28 September 2016; Accepted:05 October 2016

To the editor: In the editorial by Penttinen and Friede, the authors summarised data from 2015 to 2016 on live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) effectiveness in a Table and used the data in the Table to make several conclusions [1]. Unfortunately, the Table has several errors and, therefore, misrepresents the available data and studies. On 26 June 2016, the United States (US) Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended that LAIV not be used during the 2016/17 season in the US [2]. Among all studies using a test-negative case–control design (TNCCD), the study from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) network) and the US Department of Defence (DoD) study (US Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine (USAFSAM) Sentinel Provider network) had the largest number of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-infected children aged 2–17 years and larger or comparable numbers of children who received LAIV; these numbers were not correctly shown in the Table in the editorial. The US CDC study included 133 children aged 2–17 years who received LAIV (23 LAIV-vaccinated children had influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection) and 1,078 children who were unvaccinated. The US DoD study included 93 children vaccinated with LAIV (23 LAIV-vaccinated children had influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection) and 338 unvaccinated children (personal communication September 2016, Susan Federinko, USAFSAM). The youngest age for which LAIV is licensed for use in the US is two years; the US CDC VE estimates refer to children aged 2–17 years. The sample sizes for the other studies in the Table should also be consistently reported so that the same numerical comparisons are available for each study.

The authors incorrectly reported the lower confidence interval of the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 VE estimate from the study in the United Kingdom (UK) as 8.5 instead of −8.5 [3]. They also incorrectly suggested in the text that this VE result was statistically significant, when it was not significant. Also, the VE estimate from Finland was for type A influenza, not for influenza A(H1N1pdm09). Thus, all studies that included an RT-PCR-confirmed H1N1pdm09 virus outcome failed to find statistically significant protection against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection by LAIV. Conversely, all studies found significant protection against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection for inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV) and reported higher point estimates for IIV [2,3]. In fact, US children who received LAIV were three times more likely to be influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine failures than children who received IIV during 2015/16 [2]. Data from the previous five influenza seasons in the US, and all other data from the US (ICICLE, DoD) and other countries that were available at that time, were used to inform the 26 June 2016 ACIP decision and the subsequent decision by the American Academy of Paediatrics [2,4,5]; both of these interim decisions are aimed at maximising the likelihood that influenza vaccination will protect US children in the upcoming season.

As Penttinen and Friede state, studies before the 2009 influenza pandemic suggested that LAIV was efficacious and offered some advantages over IIV in young children [1]. Also, some recent studies have suggested a role for LAIV in strategies to immunise against poorly immunogenic novel avian influenza viruses. Antibody titres after vaccination with either IIV or LAIV pre-pandemic avian influenza vaccines were suboptimal, even with higher antigen doses [6]. However, monovalent LAIV effectively primed for a protective antibody response to a single booster dose of IIV containing a matched or related haemagglutinin [6]. Thus, LAIVs have a role in strategies to prevent both seasonal and pandemic influenza infections. It is critical to understand why LAIV did not work as expected against the 2009 pandemic virus in the multivalent formations. In addition, information on the effects of prior vaccination on LAIV vaccine effectiveness will be critical since US children have high influenza vaccine coverage and many are vaccinated with IIV before the age of two years. This information will improve future influenza LAIVs and enhance our ability to utilise them optimally.


Conflict of interest

None declared.

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed to the 600 words in the letter.


References

  1. Penttinen PM, Friede MH. Decreased effectiveness of the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 strain in live attenuated influenza vaccines: an observational bias or a technical challenge?Euro Surveill. 2016;21(38):30350. DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.38.30350 PMID: 27684999

  2. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). ACIP presentation slides: June 2016 meeting. Atlanta: United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [Accessed: 27 Sep 2016]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/slides-2016-06.html

  3. Pebody R, Warburton F, Ellis J, Andrews N, Potts A, Cottrell S,  et al.  Effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccine for adults and children in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza in primary care in the United Kingdom: 2015/16 end-of-season results. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(38):30348. DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.38.30348 PMID: 27684603

  4. Grohskopf LA, Sokolow LZ, Broder KR, Olsen SJ, Karron RA, Jernigan DB,  et al.  Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines; Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices — United States, 2016–17 Influenza Season. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65(5):1-54.DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6504a4er

  5. American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Committee on Infectious Diseases. Recommendations for the prevention and control of influenza in children, 2016-2017. Pediatrics. 2016;138(4):e20162527.

  6. Talaat KR, Luke CJ, Khurana S, Manischewitz J, King LR, McMahon BA,  et al.  A live attenuated influenza A(H5N1) vaccine induces long-term immunity in the absence of a primary antibody response. J Infect Dis. 2014;209(12):1860-9. DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiu123 PMID: 24604819



Back to Table of Contents
Previous Download (pdf)
Next

The publisher’s policy on data collection and use of cookies.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by authors contributing to Eurosurveillance do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) or the editorial team or the institutions with which the authors are affiliated. Neither ECDC nor any person acting on behalf of ECDC is responsible for the use that might be made of the information in this journal. The information provided on the Eurosurveillance site is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between a patient/site visitor and his/her physician. Our website does not host any form of commercial advertisement. Except where otherwise stated, all manuscripts published after 1 January 2016 will be published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence. You are free to share and adapt the material, but you must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the licence, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

Eurosurveillance [ISSN] - ©2007-2016. All rights reserved
 

This website is certified by Health On the Net Foundation. Click to verify. This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information:
verify here.