Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in the United States during the 2015-2016 Season.

BACKGROUND: The A(H1N1)pdm09 virus strain used in the live attenuated influenza vaccine was changed for the 2015-2016 influenza season because of its lack of effectiveness in young children in 2013-2014. The Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network evaluated the effect of this change as part of its estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness in 2015-2016. METHODS: We enrolled patients 6 months of age or older who presented with acute respiratory illness at ambulatory care clinics in geographically diverse U.S. sites. Using a test-negative design, we estimated vaccine effectiveness as (1-OR)×100, in which OR is the odds ratio for testing positive for influenza virus among vaccinated versus unvaccinated participants. Separate estimates were calculated for the inactivated vaccines and the live attenuated vaccine. RESULTS: Among 6879 eligible participants, 1309 (19%) tested positive for influenza virus, predominantly for A(H1N1)pdm09 (11%) and influenza B (7%). The effectiveness of the influenza vaccine against any influenza illness was 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 41 to 55; P<0.001). Among children 2 to 17 years of age, the inactivated influenza vaccine was 60% effective (95% CI, 47 to 70; P<0.001), and the live attenuated vaccine was not observed to be effective (vaccine effectiveness, 5%; 95% CI, -47 to 39; P=0.80). Vaccine effectiveness against A(H1N1)pdm09 among children was 63% (95% CI, 45 to 75; P<0.001) for the inactivated vaccine, as compared with -19% (95% CI, -113 to 33; P=0.55) for the live attenuated vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccines reduced the risk of influenza illness in 2015-2016. However, the live attenuated vaccine was found to be ineffective among children in a year with substantial inactivated vaccine effectiveness. Because the 2016-2017 A(H1N1)pdm09 strain used in the live attenuated vaccine was unchanged from 2015-2016, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices made an interim recommendation not to use the live attenuated influenza vaccine for the 2016-2017 influenza season. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health.).

Illness Severity and Work Productivity Loss Among Working Adults With Medically Attended Acute Respiratory Illnesses: US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network 2012-2013.

BACKGROUND: Influenza causes significant morbidity and mortality, with considerable economic costs, including lost work productivity. Influenza vaccines may reduce the economic burden through primary prevention of influenza and reduction in illness severity. METHODS: We examined illness severity and work productivity loss among working adults with medically attended acute respiratory illnesses and compared outcomes for subjects with and without laboratory-confirmed influenza and by influenza vaccination status among subjects with influenza during the 2012-2013 influenza season. RESULTS: Illnesses laboratory-confirmed as influenza (ie, cases) were subjectively assessed as more severe than illnesses not caused by influenza (ie, noncases) based on multiple measures, including current health status at study enrollment (≤7 days from illness onset) and current activity and sleep quality status relative to usual. Influenza cases reported missing 45% more work hours (20.5 vs 15.0; P < .001) than noncases and subjectively assessed their work productivity as impeded to a greater degree (6.0 vs 5.4; P < .001). Current health status and current activity relative to usual were subjectively assessed as modestly but significantly better for vaccinated cases compared with unvaccinated cases; however, no significant modifications of sleep quality, missed work hours, or work productivity loss were noted for vaccinated subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza illnesses were more severe and resulted in more missed work hours and productivity loss than illnesses not confirmed as influenza. Modest reductions in illness severity for vaccinated cases were observed. These findings highlight the burden of influenza illnesses and illustrate the importance of laboratory confirmation of influenza outcomes in evaluations of vaccine effectiveness.

The impact of selection bias on vaccine effectiveness estimates from test-negative studies.

INTRODUCTION: Estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) from test-negative studies may be subject to selection bias. In the context of influenza VE, we used simulations to identify situations in which meaningful selection bias can occur. We also analyzed observational study data for evidence of selection bias. METHODS: For the simulation study, we defined a hypothetical population whose members are at risk for acute respiratory illness (ARI) due to influenza and other pathogens. An unmeasured "healthcare seeking proclivity" affects both probability of vaccination and probability of seeking care for an ARI. We varied the direction and magnitude of these effects and identified situations where meaningful bias occurred. For the observational study, we reanalyzed data from the United States Influenza VE Network, an ongoing test-negative study. We compared "bias-naïve" VE estimates to bias-adjusted estimates, which used data from the source populations to correct for sampling bias. RESULTS: In the simulation study, an unmeasured care-seeking proclivity could create selection bias if persons with influenza ARI were more (or less) likely to seek care than persons with non-influenza ARI. However, selection bias was only meaningful when rates of care seeking between influenza ARI and non-influenza ARI were very different. In the observational study, the bias-naïve VE estimate of 55% (95% CI, 47--62%) was trivially different from the bias-adjusted VE estimate of 57% (95% CI, 49--63%). CONCLUSIONS: In combination, these studies suggest that while selection bias is possible in test-negative VE studies, this bias in unlikely to be meaningful under conditions likely to be encountered in practice. Researchers and public health officials can continue to rely on VE estimates from test-negative studies.

Burden of medically attended influenza infection and cases averted by vaccination - United States, 2013/14 through 2015/16 influenza seasons.

BACKGROUND: In addition to preventing hospitalizations and deaths due to influenza, influenza vaccination programs can reduce the burden of outpatient visits for influenza. We estimated the incidence of medically-attended influenza at three geographically diverse sites in the United States, and the cases averted by vaccination, for the 2013/14 through 2015/16 influenza seasons. METHODS: We defined surveillance populations at three sites from the United States Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network. Among these populations, we identified outpatient visits laboratory-confirmed influenza via active surveillance, and identified all outpatient visits for acute respiratory illness from healthcare databases. We extrapolated the total number of outpatient visits for influenza from the proportion of surveillance visits with a positive influenza test. We combined estimates of incidence, vaccine coverage, and vaccine effectiveness to estimate outpatient visits averted by vaccination. RESULTS: Across the three sites and seasons, incidence of medically attended influenza ranged from 14 to 54 per 1000 population. Incidence was highest in children aged 6 months to 9 years (33 to 70 per 1000) and lowest in adults aged 18-49 years (21 to 27 per 1000). Cases averted ranged from 9 per 1000 vaccinees (Washington, 2014/15) to 28 per 1000 (Wisconsin, 2013/14). DISCUSSION: Seasonal influenza epidemics cause a considerable burden of outpatient medical visits. The United States influenza vaccination program has caused meaningful reductions in outpatient visits for influenza, even in years when the vaccine is not well-matched to the dominant circulating influenza strain.

A randomized placebo-controlled trial of acetaminophen for prevention of post-vaccination fever in infants.

BACKGROUND: Fever is common following infant vaccinations. Two randomized controlled trials demonstrated the efficacy of acetaminophen prophylaxis in preventing fever after whole cell pertussis vaccination, but acetaminophen prophylaxis has not been evaluated for prevention of fever following contemporary vaccines recommended for infants in the United States. METHODS: Children six weeks through nine months of age were randomized 1:1 to receive up to five doses of acetaminophen (10-15 mg per kg) or placebo following routine vaccinations. The primary outcome was a rectal temperature ≥38°C within 32 hours following the vaccinations. Secondary outcomes included medical utilization, infant fussiness, and parents' time lost from work. Parents could request unblinding of the treatment assignment if the child developed fever or symptoms that would warrant supplementary acetaminophen treatment for children who had been receiving placebo. RESULTS: A temperature ≥38°C was recorded for 14% (25/176) of children randomized to acetaminophen compared with 22% (37/176) of those randomized to placebo but that difference was not statistically significant (relative risk [RR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40-1.01). Children randomized to acetaminophen were less likely to be reported as being much more fussy than usual (10% vs 24%) (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.25-0.70) or to have the treatment assignment unblinded (3% vs 9%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.83) than those randomized to placebo. In age-stratified analyses, among children ≥24 weeks of age, there was a significantly lower risk of temperature ≥38°C in the acetaminophen group (13% vs. 25%; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: The results of this relatively small trial suggest that acetaminophen may reduce the risk of post-vaccination fever and fussiness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00325819.