Search

One of the aims of the WHO Global Action Plan for Influenza Vaccines (GAP) was to transfer influenza vaccine production technology to interested manufacturers and governments in developing countries, to enable greater influenza vaccine manufacturing capacity against any pandemic threat or pandemic. For this objective, the GAP was supported by an independent Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to assist WHO to select vaccine manufacturing proposals for funding and to provide programmatic support for successful grantees. While there were many challenges, for both the TAG and grantees, there were also notable successes with an additional capacity of 338–600 million pandemic vaccine doses being made possible by the programme between 2007 and 2015, and a potential capacity of more than 600 million by 2016/17 with up to one billion doses expected by 2018/19. Seasonal vaccine production was also developed in 4 countries with another 4–5 countries expected to be producing seasonal vaccine by 2018/19. The relatively small WHO investments – in time and funding – made in these companies to develop their own influenza vaccine production facilities have had quite dramatic results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In high-income countries, there is an increased tendency to replace inactivated seasonal trivalent influenza (TIV) vaccines with quadrivalent (QIV) vaccines as these are considered to give a greater public health benefit. In addition, several recent studies from the USA and Europe indicate that replacement with QIV might also be cost-effective; however, the situation in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) is less clear as few studies have investigated this aspect. The paper by de Boer et al. (2008) describes a dynamic modelling study commissioned by WHO that suggests that in LMICs, under certain conditions, QIV might also be more cost-effective than TIV. In this commentary, we discuss some important aspects that policymakers in LMICs might wish to take into account when considering replacing TIV by QIV. Indeed, from the data presented in the paper by de Boer et al. it can be inferred that replacing QIV for TIV would mean a 25–29% budget increase for seasonal influenza vaccination in South Africa and Vietnam, resulting in an incremental influenza-related health impact reduction of only 7–8% when a 10% symptomatic attack rate is assumed. We argue that national health budget considerations in LMIC might lead decision-makers to choose other investments with higher health impact for a budget equivalent to roughly a quarter of the yearly TIV immunization costs. In addition to an increased annual cost that would be associated with a decision to replace TIV with QIV, there would be an increased pressure on manufacturers to produce QIV in time for the influenza season requiring manufacturers to produce some components of the seasonal vaccine at risk prior to the WHO recommendations for influenza vaccines. Unless the current uncertainties, impracticalities and increased costs associated with QIVs are resolved, TIVs are likely to remain the more attractive option for many LMICs. Each country should establish its context-specific process for decision-making based on national data on disease burden and costs in order to determine whether the health gains out-weigh the additional cost of moving to QIV. For example, immunizing more people in the population, especially those in higher risk groups, with TIV might not only provide better value for money but also deliver better health outcomes in LMICs. Countries with local influenza vaccine manufacturing capacity should include in their seasonal influenza vaccine procurement process an analysis of the pros- and cons- of TIV versus QIV, to ensure both feasibility and sustainability of local manufacturing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In May 2006, the WHO published a Global Pandemic Influenza Action Plan. A significant part of that plan involves the transfer of technology necessary to build production capacity in developing countries. The WHO influenza technology transfer initiative has been successful. Clearly the relatively small WHO investments made in these companies to develop their own influenza vaccine production facilities have had quite dramatic results. A few companies are already producing large amounts of influenza vaccine. Others will soon follow. Whether they are developing egg-based or planning non-egg based influenza vaccine production, all companies are optimistic that their efforts will come to fruition. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Despite long-recognized challenges and constraints associated with their updating and manufacture, influenza vaccines remain at the heart of public health preparedness and response efforts against both seasonal and potentially pandemic influenza viruses. Globally coordinated virological and epidemiological surveillance is the foundation of the influenza vaccine virus selection and development process. Although national influenza surveillance and reporting capabilities are being strengthened and expanded, sustaining and building upon recent gains has become a major challenge. Strengthening the vaccine virus selection process additionally requires the continuation of initiatives to improve the timeliness and representativeness of influenza viruses shared by countries for detailed analysis by the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System (GISRS). Efforts are also continuing at the national, regional, and global levels to better understand the dynamics of influenza transmission in both temperate and tropical regions. Improved understanding of the degree of influenza seasonality in tropical countries of the world should allow for the strengthening of national vaccination policies and use of the most appropriate available vaccines. There remain a number of limitations and difficulties associated with the use of HAI assays for the antigenic characterization and selection of influenza vaccine viruses by WHOCCs. Current approaches to improving the situation include the more-optimal use of HAI and other assays; improved understanding of the data produced by neutralization assays; and increased standardization of serological testing methods. A number of new technologies and associated tools have the potential to revolutionize influenza surveillance and response activities. These include the increasingly routine use of whole genome next-generation sequencing and other high-throughput approaches. Such approaches could not only become key elements in outbreak investigations but could drive a new surveillance paradigm. However, despite the advances made, significant challenges will need to be addressed before next-generation technologies become routine, particularly in low-resource settings. Emerging approaches and techniques such as synthetic genomics, systems genetics, systems biology and mathematical modelling are capable of generating potentially huge volumes of highly complex and diverse datasets. Harnessing the currently theoretical benefits of such bioinformatics (“big data”) concepts for the influenza vaccine virus selection and development process will depend upon further advances in data generation, integration, analysis and dissemination. Over the last decade, growing awareness of influenza as an important global public health issue has been coupled to ever-increasing demands from the global community for more-equitable access to effective and affordable influenza vaccines. The current influenza vaccine landscape continues to be dominated by egg-based inactivated and live attenuated vaccines, with a small number of cell-based and recombinant vaccines. Successfully completing each step in the annual influenza vaccine manufacturing cycle will continue to rely upon timely and regular communication between the WHO GISRS, manufacturers and regulatory authorities. While the pipeline of influenza vaccines appears to be moving towards a variety of niche products in the near term, it is apparent that the ultimate aim remains the development of effective “universal” influenza vaccines that offer longer-lasting immunity against a broad range of influenza A subtypes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In February the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends influenza viruses to be included in influenza vaccines for the forthcoming winter in the Northern Hemisphere. These recommendations are based on data collected by National Influenza Centres (NICs) through the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System (GISRS) and a more detailed analysis of representative and potential antigenically variant influenza viruses from the WHO Collaborating Centres for Influenza (WHO CCs) and Essential Regulatory Laboratories (ERLs). This article provides a detailed summary of the antigenic and genetic properties of viruses and additional background data used by WHO experts during development of the recommendations of the 2013-2014 Northern Hemisphere influenza vaccine composition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In February and September each year the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends influenza viruses to be included in influenza vaccines for the forthcoming winters in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres respectively. These recommendations are based on data collected by National Influenza Centres (NIC) through the Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System (GISRS) and a more detailed analysis of representative and potential antigenically variant influenza viruses from the WHO Collaborating Centres for Influenza (WHO CCs) and Essential Regulatory Laboratories (ERLs). This article provides a detailed summary of the antigenic and genetic properties of viruses and additional background data used by WHO experts during development of the recommendations for the 2012 Southern Hemisphere influenza vaccine composition. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Influenza vaccines form an important component of the global response against infections and subsequent illness caused in man by influenza viruses. Twice a year, in February and September, the World Health Organisation through its Global Influenza Surveillance Network (GISN), recommends appropriate influenza viruses to be included in the seasonal influenza vaccine for the upcoming Northern and Southern Hemisphere winters. This recommendation is based on the latest data generated from many sources and the availability of viruses that are suitable for vaccine manufacture. This article gives a summary of the data and background to the recommendations for the 2009–2010 Northern Hemisphere influenza vaccine formulation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

In 1997, we were ill prepared to produce vaccines in response to the sudden emergence of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza. This experience stimulated efforts to improve technical and regulatory procedures for pandemic vaccine virus development and, in February 2003, when highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza re-appeared in man, we were able to produce H5N1 vaccine strains by reverse genetics within the space of 3 months. The technical and regulatory progress which made this possible is reviewed and newly developed WHO biosafety risk assessment for vaccine production is described. Recommendations are made for the significant challenges that lie ahead. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]