• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Immunogenicity and Safety of Intradermal Influenza Vaccination in Healthy Older Adults

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Clin Infect Dis. 2010 Apr 8. [Epub ahead of print]
Immunogenicity and Safety of Intradermal Influenza Vaccination in Healthy Older Adults.

Chi RC, Rock MT, Neuzil KM.

Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Departments of 2Medicine and 3Global Health, University of Washington, and 4Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH), Seattle, Washington; and 5Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Abstract

Background. Influenza vaccine immunogenicity is suboptimal in older persons. Intradermal (ID) vaccination may be a promising alternative to intramuscular (IM) vaccination. Methods. This randomized trial compared the immunogenicity of 60% dose ID influenza vaccination to standard IM vaccination of full-dose or 60% dose vaccine. Pre- and postvaccination measurements in the hemagglutination inhibition antibody titer were compared. Participants who received reduced-dose vaccine were revaccinated with full-dose IM vaccine. Results. 257 healthy adults aged 65 years received 1 of the following trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines: standard-dose (15 mug each of 3 hemagglutinin vaccine antigens in 0.5 mL) IM injection, reduced-dose (9 mug, 0.3 mL) IM injection, reduced-dose (9 mug, 0.3 mL) ID injection, or 2 reduced-dose (4.5 mug, 0.15 mL) ID injections. Respective seroprotection rates were 65.6%, 57.8%, 68.9%, and 67.2% against A/H1N1; 76.6%, 75.0%, 75.4%, and 75.0% against A/H3N2; and 26.6%, 17.2%, 16.4%, and 25.0% against influenza B. Subsequent full-dose IM vaccination of participants randomized to reduced-dose vaccine by either IM or ID routes did not improve seroprotection rates. Local reactions of redness, swelling, and itching were significantly more frequent among recipients of ID injections. Conclusion. Influenza vaccine at 60% dose by either IM or ID route elicited antibody responses generally similar to full-dose IM vaccination among healthy elderly persons (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00504231).

PMID: 20377407 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20377407
 
Back
Top Bottom