COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness in Autumn and Winter 2022 to 2023 Among Older Europeans.

Importance: In the context of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants or lineages and new vaccines, it is key to accurately monitor COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (CVE) to inform vaccination campaigns. Objective: To estimate the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines administered in autumn and winter 2022 to 2023 against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (with all circulating viruses and XBB lineage in particular) among people aged 60 years or older in Europe, and to compare different CVE approaches across the exposed and reference groups used. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case-control study obtained data from VEBIS (Vaccine Effectiveness, Burden and Impact Studies), a multicenter study that collects COVID-19 and influenza data from 11 European sites: Croatia; France; Germany; Hungary; Ireland; Portugal; the Netherlands; Romania; Spain, national; Spain, Navarre region; and Sweden. Participants were primary care patients aged 60 years or older with acute respiratory infection symptoms who were recruited at the 11 sites after the start of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign from September 2022 to August 2023. Cases and controls were defined as patients with positive and negative, respectively, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test results. Exposures: The exposure was COVID-19 vaccination. The exposure group consisted of patients who received a COVID-19 vaccine during the autumn and winter 2022 to 2023 vaccination campaign and 14 days or more before symptom onset. Reference group included patients who were not vaccinated during or in the 6 months before the 2022 to 2023 campaign (seasonal CVE), those who were never vaccinated (absolute CVE), and those who were vaccinated with at least the primary series 6 months or more before the campaign (relative CVE). For relative CVE of second boosters, patients receiving their second booster during the campaign were compared with those receiving 1 booster 6 months or more before the campaign. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed, medically attended, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Four CVE estimates were generated: seasonal, absolute, relative, and relative of second boosters. CVE was estimated using logistic regression, adjusting for study site, symptom onset date, age, chronic condition, and sex. Results: A total of 9308 primary care patients were included, with 1687 cases (1035 females; median [IQR] age, 71 [65-79] years) and 7621 controls (4619 females [61%]; median [IQR] age, 71 [65-78] years). Within 14 to 89 days after vaccination, seasonal CVE was 29% (95% CI, 14%-42%), absolute CVE was 39% (95% CI, 6%-60%), relative CVE was 31% (95% CI, 15% to 44%), and relative CVE of second boosters was 34% (95% CI, 18%-47%) against all SARS-CoV-2 variants. In the same interval, seasonal CVE was 44% (95% CI, -10% to 75%), absolute CVE was 52% (95% CI, -23% to 82%), relative CVE was 47% (95% CI, -8% to 77%), and relative CVE of second boosters was 46% (95% CI, -13% to 77%) during a period of high XBB circulation. Estimates decreased with time since vaccination, with no protection from 180 days after vaccination. Conclusions and Relevance: In this case-control study among older Europeans, all CVE approaches suggested that COVID-19 vaccines administered in autumn and winter 2022 to 2023 offered at least 3 months of protection against symptomatic, medically attended, laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The effectiveness of new COVID-19 vaccines against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants should be continually monitored using CVE seasonal approaches.

Exploring the effect of clinical case definitions on influenza vaccine effectiveness estimation at primary care level: Results from the end-of-season 2022-23 VEBIS multicentre study in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Within influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies at primary care level with a laboratory-confirmed outcome, clinical case definitions for recruitment of patients can vary. We used the 2022-23 VEBIS primary care European multicentre study end-of-season data to evaluate whether the clinical case definition affected IVE estimates. METHODS: We estimated VE using a multicentre test-negative case-control design. We measured VE against any influenza and influenza (sub)types, by age group (0-14, 15-64, ≥65 years) and by influenza vaccine target group, using logistic regression. We estimated IVE among patients meeting the European Union (EU) acute respiratory infection (ARI) case definition and among those meeting the EU influenza-like illness (ILI) case definition, including only sites providing information on specific symptoms and recruiting patients using an ARI case definition (as the EU ILI case definition is a subset of the EU ARI one). RESULTS: We included 24 319 patients meeting the EU ARI case definition, of whom 21 804 patients (90 %) meet the EU ILI case definition, for the overall pooled VE analysis against any influenza. The overall and influenza (sub)type-specific VE varied by ≤2 % between EU ILI and EU ARI populations. DISCUSSION: Among all analyses, we found similar VE estimates between the EU ILI and EU ARI populations, with few (10%) additional non-ILI ARI patients recruited. These results indicate that VE in the 2022-23 influenza season was not affected by use of a different clinical case definition for recruitment, although we recommend investigating whether this holds true for next seasons.

Vaccine Effectiveness against GP-Attended Symptomatic COVID-19 and Hybrid Immunity among Adults in Hungary during the 2022-2023 Respiratory Season Dominated by Different SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Subvariants.

Hungary provides the opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in a setting where naturally acquired immunity and hybrid immunity are likely to play a greater role due to suboptimal vaccination coverage. METHODS: A test-negative study was conducted during the 2022-2023 respiratory season at the primary care level to determine the effectiveness of at least one COVID-19 booster dose in preventing medically attended symptomatic RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults. Unvaccinated patients were used as a reference group. RESULTS: A total of 247 cases and 1073 controls were included in the analysis. CVE was 56.8% (95% CI: 11.9-78.8%) in the population aged 60 years and older and 2.3% (95% CI: -50.0-36.3%) in the younger adults against COVID-19 caused by Omicron subvariants, mainly BA.5, BQ.1, and XBB.1. Self-reported COVID-19 in the 60-365 days prior to the current illness did not confer protection against reinfection without vaccination, but together with booster vaccination, it reduced the risk of COVID-19 by 63.0% (95% CI: -28.0-89.3%) and 87.6% (95% CI: 26.4-97.9%) among the 18-59 and 60+ age groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CVE against COVID-19 was moderately high in the 60+ age groups. Because of the benefit of hybrid immunity, persons with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection should still be considered for vaccination campaigns.

COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 BA.1/BA.2 lineages among adults and adolescents in a multicentre primary care study, Europe, December 2021 to June 2022.

BackgroundScarce European data in early 2021 suggested lower vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron lineages than previous variants.AimWe aimed to estimate primary series (PS) and first booster VE against symptomatic BA.1/BA.2 infection and investigate potential biases.MethodsThis European test-negative multicentre study tested primary care patients with acute respiratory symptoms for SARS-CoV-2 in the BA.1/BA.2-dominant period. We estimated PS and booster VE among adults and adolescents (PS only) for all products combined and for Comirnaty alone, by time since vaccination, age and chronic condition. We investigated potential bias due to correlation between COVID-19 and influenza vaccination and explored effect modification and confounding by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.ResultsAmong adults, PS VE was 37% (95% CI: 24-47%) overall and 60% (95% CI: 44-72%), 43% (95% CI: 26-55%) and 29% (95% CI: 13-43%) < 90, 90-179 and ≥ 180 days post vaccination, respectively. Booster VE was 42% (95% CI: 32-51%) overall and 56% (95% CI: 47-64%), 22% (95% CI: 2-38%) and 3% (95% CI: -78% to 48%), respectively. Primary series VE was similar among adolescents. Restricting analyses to Comirnaty had little impact. Vaccine effectiveness was higher among older adults. There was no signal of bias due to correlation between COVID-19 and influenza vaccination. Confounding by previous infection was low, but sample size precluded definite assessment of effect modification.ConclusionPrimary series and booster VE against symptomatic infection with BA.1/BA.2 ranged from 37% to 42%, with similar waning post vaccination. Comprehensive data on previous SARS-CoV-2 infection would help disentangle vaccine- and infection-induced immunity.

Vaccine effectiveness against influenza hospitalisation in adults during the 2022/2023 mixed season of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B circulation, Europe: VEBIS SARI VE hospital network.

We conducted a multicentre hospital-based test-negative case-control study to measure vaccine effectiveness (VE) against PCR-confirmed influenza in adult patients with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) during the 2022/2023 influenza season in Europe. Among 5547 SARI patients ≥18 years, 2963 (53%) were vaccinated against influenza. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 11% (95% CI: -23-36); 20% (95% CI: -4-39) against A(H3N2) and 56% (95% CI: 22-75) against B. During the 2022/2023 season, while VE against hospitalisation with influenza B was >55%, it was ≤20% for influenza A subtypes. While influenza vaccination should be a priority for future seasons, improved vaccines against influenza are needed.

Influenza vaccine effectiveness in Europe: Results from the 2022-2023 VEBIS (Vaccine Effectiveness, Burden and Impact Studies) primary care multicentre study.

Background: Influenza A(H3N2) viruses dominated early in the 2022-2023 influenza season in Europe, followed by higher circulation of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B viruses. The VEBIS primary care network estimated the influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) using a multicentre test-negative study. Materials and Methods: Primary care practitioners collected information and specimens from patients consulting with acute respiratory infection. We measured VE against any influenza, influenza (sub)type and clade, by age group, by influenza vaccine target group and by time since vaccination, using logistic regression. Results: We included 38 058 patients, of which 3786 were influenza A(H3N2), 1548 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and 3275 influenza B cases. Against influenza A(H3N2), VE was 36% (95% CI: 25-45) among all ages and ranged between 30% and 52% by age group and target group. VE against influenza A(H3N2) clade 2b was 38% (95% CI: 25-49). Overall, VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 46% (95% CI: 35-56) and ranged between 29% and 59% by age group and target group. VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 clade 5a.2a was 56% (95% CI: 46-65) and 79% (95% CI: 64-88) against clade 5a.2a.1. VE against influenza B was 76% (95% CI: 70-81); overall, 84%, 72% and 71% were among 0-14-year-olds, 15-64-year-olds and those in the influenza vaccination target group, respectively. VE against influenza B with a position 197 mutation of the hemagglutinin (HA) gene was 79% (95% CI: 73-85) and 90% (95% CI: 85-94) without this mutation. Conclusion: The 2022-2023 end-of-season results from the VEBIS network at primary care level showed high VE among children and against influenza B, with lower VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2).

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalisation in adults (≥ 20 years) during Omicron-dominant circulation: I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS SARI VE networks, Europe, 2021 to 2022.

IntroductionThe I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS hospital networks have been measuring COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in participating European countries since early 2021.AimWe aimed to measure VE against PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in patients ≥ 20 years hospitalised with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) from December 2021 to July 2022 (Omicron-dominant period).MethodsIn both networks, 46 hospitals (13 countries) follow a similar test-negative case-control protocol. We defined complete primary series vaccination (PSV) and first booster dose vaccination as last dose of either vaccine received ≥ 14 days before symptom onset (stratifying first booster into received < 150 and ≥ 150 days after last PSV dose). We measured VE overall, by vaccine category/product, age group and time since first mRNA booster dose, adjusting by site as a fixed effect, and by swab date, age, sex, and presence/absence of at least one commonly collected chronic condition.ResultsWe included 2,779 cases and 2,362 controls. The VE of all vaccine products combined against hospitalisation for laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was 43% (95% CI: 29-54) for complete PSV (with last dose received ≥ 150 days before onset), while it was 59% (95% CI: 51-66) after addition of one booster dose. The VE was 85% (95% CI: 78-89), 70% (95% CI: 61-77) and 36% (95% CI: 17-51) for those with onset 14-59 days, 60-119 days and 120-179 days after booster vaccination, respectively.ConclusionsOur results suggest that, during the Omicron period, observed VE against SARI hospitalisation improved with first mRNA booster dose, particularly for those having symptom onset < 120 days after first booster dose.

Characteristics of the Third COVID-19 Pandemic Wave with Special Focus on Socioeconomic Inequalities in Morbidity, Mortality and the Uptake of COVID-19 Vaccination in Hungary.

Governments are increasingly looking to vaccination to provide a path out of the COVID-19 pandemic. Hungary offers an example to investigate whether social inequalities compromise what a successful vaccine program can achieve. COVID-19 morbidity, mortality, and vaccination coverage were characterized by calculation of indirectly standardized ratios in the Hungarian population during the third pandemic wave at the level of municipalities, classified into deprivation quintiles. Then, their association with socioeconomic deprivation was assessed using ecological regression. Compared to the national average, people living in the most deprived municipalities had a 15-24% lower relative incidence of confirmed COVID-19 cases, but a 17-37% higher relative mortality and a 38% lower vaccination coverage. At an ecological level, COVID-19 mortality showed a strong positive association with deprivation and an inverse association with vaccination coverage (RRVaccination = 0.86 (0.75-0.98)), but the latter became non-significant after adjustment for deprivation (RRVaccination = 0.95 (0.84-1.09), RRDeprivation = 1.10 (1.07-1.14)). Even what is widely viewed as one of the more successful vaccine roll outs was unable to close the gap in COVID-19 mortality during the third pandemic wave in Hungary. This is likely to be due to the challenges of reaching those living in the most deprived municipalities who experienced the highest mortality rates during the third wave.

Unequal burden of COVID-19 in Hungary: a geographical and socioeconomic analysis of the second wave of the pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: We describe COVID-19 morbidity, mortality, case fatality and excess death in a country-wide study of municipalities in Hungary, exploring the association with socioeconomic status. METHODS: The spatial distribution of morbidity, mortality and case fatality was mapped using hierarchical Bayesian smoothed indirectly standardised ratios. Indirectly standardised ratios were used to evaluate the association between deprivation and the outcome measures. We looked separately at morbidity and mortality in the 10 districts with the highest and 10 districts with the lowest share of Roma population. RESULTS: Compared with the national average, the relative incidence of cases was 30%-36% lower in the most deprived quintile but the relative mortality and case fatality were 27%-32% higher. Expressed as incidence ratios relative to the national average, the most deprived municipalities had a relative incidence ratio of 0.64 (CI: 0.62 to 0.65) and 0.70 (CI: 0.69 to 0.72) for males and females, respectively. The corresponding figures for mortality were 1.32 (CI: 1.20 to 1.44) for males and 1.27 (CI: 1.16 to 1.39) for females and for case fatality 1.27 (CI: 1.16 to 1.39) and 1.32 (CI: 1.20 to 1.44) for males and females, respectively. The excess death rate (per 100 000) increased with deprivation levels (least deprived: 114.12 (CI: 108.60 to 119.84) and most deprived: 158.07 (CI: 149.30 to 167.23)). The 10 districts where Roma formed the greatest share of the population had an excess mortality rate 17.46% higher than the average for the most deprived quintile. CONCLUSIONS: Those living in more deprived municipalities had a lower risk of being identified as a confirmed COVID-19 case but had a higher risk of death. An inverse association between trends in morbidity and mortality by socioeconomic conditions should be a cause for concern and points to the need for responses, including those involving vaccination, to pay particular attention to inequalities and their causes.

Effectiveness of influenza vaccine against influenza A in Europe in seasons of different A(H1N1)pdm09 and the same A(H3N2) vaccine components (2016-17 and 2017-18).

INTRODUCTION: Influenza A(H3N2) viruses predominated in Europe in 2016-17. In 2017-18 A(H3N2) and A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses co-circulated. The A(H3N2) vaccine component was the same in both seasons; while the A(H1N1)pdm09 component changed in 2017-18. In both seasons, vaccine seed A(H3N2) viruses developed adaptations/alterations during propagation in eggs, impacting antigenicity. METHODS: We used the test-negative design in a multicentre primary care case-control study in 12 European countries to measure 2016-17 and 2017-18 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2) overall and by age group. RESULTS: During the 2017-18 season, the overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 59% (95% CI: 47-69). Among those aged 0-14, 15-64 and ≥65 years, VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 64% (95% CI: 37-79), 50% (95% CI: 28-66) and 66% (95% CI: 42-80), respectively. Overall VE against influenza A(H3N2) was 28% (95% CI: 17-38) in 2016-17 and 13% (95% CI: -15 to 34) in 2017-18. Among 0-14-year-olds VE against A(H3N2) was 28% (95%CI: -10 to 53) and 29% (95% CI: -87 to 73), among 15-64-year-olds 34% (95% CI: 18-46) and 33% (95% CI: -3 to 56) and among those aged ≥65 years 15% (95% CI: -10 to 34) and -9% (95% CI: -74 to 32) in 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests the new A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine component conferred good protection against circulating strains, while VE against A(H3N2) was <35% in 2016-17 and 2017-18. The egg propagation derived antigenic mismatch of the vaccine seed virus with circulating strains may have contributed to this low effectiveness. A(H3N2) seed viruses for vaccines in subsequent seasons may be subject to the same adaptations; in years with lower than expected VE, recommendations of preventive measures other than vaccination should be given in a timely manner.

Exploring the effect of previous inactivated influenza vaccination on seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness against medically attended influenza: Results of the European I-MOVE multicentre test-negative case-control study, 2011/2012-2016/2017.

BACKGROUND: Results of previous influenza vaccination effects on current season influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) are inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: To explore previous influenza vaccination effects on current season VE among population targeted for vaccination. METHODS: We used 2011/2012 to 2016/2017 I-MOVE primary care multicentre test-negative data. For each season, we compared current season adjusted VE (aVE) between individuals vaccinated and unvaccinated in previous season. Using unvaccinated in both seasons as a reference, we then compared aVE between vaccinated in both seasons, current only, and previous only. RESULTS: We included 941, 2645 and 959 influenza-like illness patients positive for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B, respectively, and 5532 controls. In 2011/2012, 2014/2015 and 2016/2017, A(H3N2) aVE point estimates among those vaccinated in previous season were -68%, -21% and -19%, respectively; among unvaccinated in previous season, these were 33%, 48% and 46%, respectively (aVE not computable for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B). Compared to current season vaccination only, VE for both seasons' vaccination was (i) similar in two of four seasons for A(H3N2) (absolute difference [ad] 6% and 8%); (ii) lower in three of four seasons for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (ad 18%, 26% and 29%), in two seasons for influenza A(H3N2) (ad 27% and 39%) and in two of three seasons for influenza B (ad 26% and 37%); (iii) higher in one season for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (ad 20%) and influenza B (ad 24%). CONCLUSIONS: We did not identify any pattern of previous influenza vaccination effect. Prospective cohort studies documenting influenza infections, vaccinations and vaccine types are needed to understand previous influenza vaccinations' effects.

2015/16 I-MOVE/I-MOVE+ multicentre case-control study in Europe: Moderate vaccine effectiveness estimates against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and low estimates against lineage-mismatched influenza B among children.

BACKGROUND: During the 2015/16 influenza season in Europe, the cocirculating influenza viruses were A(H1N1)pdm09 and B/Victoria, which was antigenically distinct from the B/Yamagata component in the trivalent influenza vaccine. METHODS: We used the test-negative design in a multicentre case-control study in twelve European countries to measure 2015/16 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. General practitioners swabbed a systematic sample of consulting ILI patients and a random sample of influenza-positive swabs was sequenced. We calculated adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic group 6B.1 and influenza B overall and by age group. RESULTS: We included 11 430 ILI patients, of which 2272 were influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and 2901 were influenza B cases. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 32.9% (95% CI: 15.5-46.7). Among those aged 0-14, 15-64 and ≥65 years, VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 31.9% (95% CI: -32.3 to 65.0), 41.4% (95% CI: 20.5-56.7) and 13.2% (95% CI: -38.0 to 45.3), respectively. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic group 6B.1 was 32.8% (95% CI: -4.1 to 56.7). Among those aged 0-14, 15-64 and ≥65 years, VE against influenza B was -47.6% (95% CI: -124.9 to 3.1), 27.3% (95% CI: -4.6 to 49.4) and 9.3% (95% CI: -44.1 to 42.9), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and its genetic group 6B.1 was moderate in children and adults, and low among individuals ≥65 years. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza B was low and heterogeneous among age groups. More information on effects of previous vaccination and previous infection is needed to understand the VE results against influenza B in the context of a mismatched vaccine.

I-MOVE multicentre case-control study 2010/11 to 2014/15: Is there within-season waning of influenza type/subtype vaccine effectiveness with increasing time since vaccination?

Since the 2008/9 influenza season, the I-MOVE multicentre case-control study measures influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like-illness (ILI) laboratory confirmed as influenza. In 2011/12, European studies reported a decline in VE against influenza A(H3N2) within the season. Using combined I-MOVE data from 2010/11 to 2014/15 we studied the effects of time since vaccination on influenza type/subtype-specific VE. We modelled influenza type/subtype-specific VE by time since vaccination using a restricted cubic spline, controlling for potential confounders (age, sex, time of onset, chronic conditions). Over 10,000 ILI cases were included in each analysis of influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1)pdm09 and B; with 4,759, 3,152 and 3,617 influenza positive cases respectively. VE against influenza A(H3N2) reached 50.6% (95% CI: 30.0-65.1) 38 days after vaccination, declined to 0% (95% CI: -18.1-15.2) from 111 days onwards. At day 54 VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 reached 55.3% (95% CI: 37.9-67.9) and remained between this value and 50.3% (95% CI: 34.8-62.1) until season end. VE against influenza B declined from 70.7% (95% CI: 51.3-82.4) 44 days after vaccination to 21.4% (95% CI: -57.4-60.8) at season end. To assess if vaccination campaign strategies need revising more evidence on VE by time since vaccination is urgently needed.

Vaccine effectiveness in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza in primary care patients in a season of co-circulation of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, B and drifted A(H3N2), I-MOVE Multicentre Case-Control Study, Europe 2014/15.

Influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1)pdm09 and B viruses co-circulated in Europe in 2014/15. We undertook a multicentre case-control study in eight European countries to measure 2014/15 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. General practitioners swabbed all or a systematic sample of ILI patients. We compared the odds of vaccination of ILI influenza positive patients to negative patients. We calculated adjusted VE by influenza type/subtype, and age group. Among 6,579 ILI patients included, 1,828 were A(H3N2), 539 A(H1N1)pdm09 and 1,038 B. VE against A(H3N2) was 14.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): -6.3 to 31.0) overall, 20.7% (95%CI: -22.3 to 48.5), 10.9% (95%CI -30.8 to 39.3) and 15.8% (95% CI: -20.2 to 41.0) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and  ≥60 years, respectively. VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 54.2% (95%CI: 31.2 to 69.6) overall, 73.1% (95%CI: 39.6 to 88.1), 59.7% (95%CI: 10.9 to 81.8), and 22.4% (95%CI: -44.4 to 58.4) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and  ≥60 years respectively. VE against B was 48.0% (95%CI: 28.9 to 61.9) overall, 62.1% (95%CI: 14.9 to 83.1), 41.4% (95%CI: 6.2 to 63.4) and 50.4% (95%CI: 14.6 to 71.2) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and ≥60 years respectively. VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 and B was moderate. The low VE against A(H3N2) is consistent with the reported mismatch between circulating and vaccine strains.

I-MOVE multi-centre case control study 2010-11: overall and stratified estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness in Europe.

BACKGROUND: In the third season of I-MOVE (Influenza Monitoring Vaccine Effectiveness in Europe), we undertook a multicentre case-control study based on sentinel practitioner surveillance networks in eight European Union (EU) member states to estimate 2010/11 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. METHODS: Using systematic sampling, practitioners swabbed ILI/ARI patients within seven days of symptom onset. We compared influenza-positive to influenza laboratory-negative patients among those meeting the EU ILI case definition. A valid vaccination corresponded to > 14 days between receiving a dose of vaccine and symptom onset. We used multiple imputation with chained equations to estimate missing values. Using logistic regression with study as fixed effect we calculated influenza VE adjusting for potential confounders. We estimated influenza VE overall, by influenza type, age group and among the target group for vaccination. RESULTS: We included 2019 cases and 2391 controls in the analysis. Adjusted VE was 52% (95% CI 30-67) overall (N = 4410), 55% (95% CI 29-72) against A(H1N1) and 50% (95% CI 14-71) against influenza B. Adjusted VE against all influenza subtypes was 66% (95% CI 15-86), 41% (95% CI -3-66) and 60% (95% CI 17-81) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and ≥60 respectively. Among target groups for vaccination (N = 1004), VE was 56% (95% CI 34-71) overall, 59% (95% CI 32-75) against A(H1N1) and 63% (95% CI 31-81) against influenza B. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest moderate protection from 2010-11 trivalent influenza vaccines against medically-attended ILI laboratory-confirmed as influenza across Europe. Adjusted and stratified influenza VE estimates are possible with the large sample size of this multi-centre case-control. I-MOVE shows how a network can provide precise summary VE measures across Europe.