Search

This study evaluated safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of intradermal (ID) trivalent inactivated split influenza vaccine, with a lower antigen content (9 mcg HA per strain) than the conventional intramuscular one (15 mcg), in HIV-1-infected adults younger than 60 years. A total of 54 HIV-1-positive participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive a single dose of either ID-administered low-antigen-content split inactivated vaccine or intramuscularly-administered (IM) standard-dose inactivated split vaccine. Subjects were provided with a diary to monitor any local and/or systemic reactions to the vaccine for 7 days following vaccination. Serum samples were collected before, 28 days and 90 days after immunization. The plasma HIV-RNA and CD4+ T-lymphocyte count were checked at day 0 and day 90. Serum hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) activity for the three influenza strains included in the vaccine composition was measured to assess the antibody response at one month and 3 months after vaccination. Both vaccines showed optimal safety and tolerability profiles. All the three Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use immunogenicity criteria for vaccine approval in adults younger than 60 were met by both vaccines against A(H1N1) and A(H3N2) viruses. Both vaccines met mean-fold-increase and seroprotection criteria but failed seroconversion criteria against B virus. No difference in terms of post-vaccination geometric mean titers, mean fold increase, seroprotection and seroconversion rates were found comparing ID and IM vaccines. In conclusion, the recently available low-antigen-content ID vaccine is safe, well-tolerated and as immunogenic as IM standard-dose influenza vaccine.

In the present study we first compare immunogenicity against vaccine and heterologous circulating A(H1N1)pdm09 strains, tolerability and safety of intradermal Intanza 15 μg and of virosomal adjuvanted, intramuscularly delivered influenza vaccine, Inflexal V, in healthy elderly volunteers. Five-hundred participants were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned to the two vaccine groups to receive either one dose of Intanza 15 μg or Inflexal V vaccine. All subjects reported solicited local and systemic reactions occurred within 7 d after vaccination and unsolicited adverse events up to 21 d post-immunization and any serious adverse event appeared during the study. A subset of 55 participants was randomly selected for immunogenicity and cross-protection evaluations. Serum samples were collected before and 1 and 3 mo after immunization. Antibody responses were measured using hemagglutination inhibition (HI) against all viruses used in the study and neutralization (NT) assays against A(H1N1)pdm09 strains. At least one of the CHMP criteria for influenza vaccine approval in the elderly was met by virosomal vaccine against all the tested viruses; intradermal vaccine met all criteria against all strains. Several parameters of immune response against strains with a different antigenic pattern from that of vaccine A/California/04/09(H1N1)pdm09 were significantly higher in the intradermal vaccine group compared with the virosomal group. Safety and systemic tolerability of both vaccines were excellent, but injection site reactions occurred significantly more frequently in the intradermal vaccination group. Immunogenicity of Intanza 15 μg intradermal vaccine tended to be higher than that of Inflexal V against heterologous strains in healthy elderly.

To analyze available evidence on vaccinations in paediatric patients with rheumatic and autoinflammatory diseases. This evidence formed the basis of the recently constructed European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for vaccination of these patients.A systematic literature review in the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was conducted using various terms for vaccinations, paediatric rheumatic and autoinflammatory diseases and immunosuppressive drugs. Only papers on paediatric patients (18 years of age) were selected. A panel of 13 experts in the field graded methodological quality and extracted data using predefined criteria.27 papers were available. No studies were found on autoinflammatory diseases. 14 studies considered live-attenuated vaccines. Evidence so far supports the safety and immunogenicity of non-live composite vaccines, although studies were underpowered to accurately assess safety. Live-attenuated vaccines did not cause disease flares or severe adverse events, not even in patients on methotrexate and low dose glucocorticosteroids. Seven patients on anti-TNFalpha therapy were described receiving the live-attenuated measles, mumps, rubella (n=5) or varicella (n=2) booster without severe adverse events.Data on safety and efficacy of vaccinations in paediatric patients with rheumatic diseases is reassuring, but too limited to draw definite conclusions. More research is needed on the safety and efficacy of especially live-attenuated vaccines in patients with rheumatic and autoinflammatory diseases using high dose immunosuppressive drugs.