tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Int J Infect Dis
. 2022 Jul 22;S1201-9712(22)00443-X.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.07.048. Online ahead of print.
Comparative effectiveness of adjuvanted versus high-dose seasonal influenza vaccines for older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Alexander Domnich[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Chiara de Waure[SUP] 2 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Objectives: MF59-adjuvanted standard-dose and non-adjuvanted high-dose seasonal influenza vaccines have been developed to protect older adults at high risk of severe complications. The aim of this study was to summarize the available evidence on the comparative efficacy/effectiveness of these two vaccines.
Methods: A systematic literature review (CRD42022313021) of experimental and observational studies was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. When possible, the extracted effect sizes were pooled in random-effects meta-analyses.
Results: Ten studies were identified. Of these, no head-to-head randomized controlled trials were identified. All available studies had retrospective cohort design and large sample sizes, were conducted in the United States between 2016/17 and 2019/20 seasons and were at moderate risk of bias. Relative effectiveness estimates were limited to non-laboratory-confirmed clinical endpoints, such as medical encounters including hospitalizations. While most pooled relative effectiveness estimates were close to null, few statistically significant pooled effect sizes were small in magnitude, moved in opposite directions and depended on both the study sponsor and specificity of influenza-related outcomes.
Conclusions: At current, MF59-adjuvanted standard-dose and non-adjuvanted high-dose vaccines appear to have similar effectiveness in preventing seasonal influenza in older adults and no conclusive recommendations on the preference of one vaccine over another could be drawn.
Keywords: Adjuvanted influenza vaccine; High-dose influenza vaccine; Influenza; Influenza vaccines; Older adults; Relative vaccine effectiveness; Systematic review.
. 2022 Jul 22;S1201-9712(22)00443-X.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.07.048. Online ahead of print.
Comparative effectiveness of adjuvanted versus high-dose seasonal influenza vaccines for older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Alexander Domnich[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Chiara de Waure[SUP] 2 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 35878803
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.07.048
Abstract
Objectives: MF59-adjuvanted standard-dose and non-adjuvanted high-dose seasonal influenza vaccines have been developed to protect older adults at high risk of severe complications. The aim of this study was to summarize the available evidence on the comparative efficacy/effectiveness of these two vaccines.
Methods: A systematic literature review (CRD42022313021) of experimental and observational studies was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. When possible, the extracted effect sizes were pooled in random-effects meta-analyses.
Results: Ten studies were identified. Of these, no head-to-head randomized controlled trials were identified. All available studies had retrospective cohort design and large sample sizes, were conducted in the United States between 2016/17 and 2019/20 seasons and were at moderate risk of bias. Relative effectiveness estimates were limited to non-laboratory-confirmed clinical endpoints, such as medical encounters including hospitalizations. While most pooled relative effectiveness estimates were close to null, few statistically significant pooled effect sizes were small in magnitude, moved in opposite directions and depended on both the study sponsor and specificity of influenza-related outcomes.
Conclusions: At current, MF59-adjuvanted standard-dose and non-adjuvanted high-dose vaccines appear to have similar effectiveness in preventing seasonal influenza in older adults and no conclusive recommendations on the preference of one vaccine over another could be drawn.
Keywords: Adjuvanted influenza vaccine; High-dose influenza vaccine; Influenza; Influenza vaccines; Older adults; Relative vaccine effectiveness; Systematic review.