• 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.

JAMA Netw Open . Immunogenicity and Safety of Reduced-Dose Intradermal vs Intramuscular Influenza Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
JAMA Netw Open


. 2021 Feb 1;4(2):e2035693.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.35693.
Immunogenicity and Safety of Reduced-Dose Intradermal vs Intramuscular Influenza Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis


Oluwaseun Egunsola[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Fiona Clement[SUP] 1 [/SUP], John Taplin[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Liza Mastikhina[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Joyce W Li[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Diane L Lorenzetti[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Laura E Dowsett[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Tom Noseworthy[SUP] 1 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Importance: Low-dose intradermal influenza vaccines could be a suitable alternative to full intramuscular dose during vaccine shortages.
Objective: To compare the immunogenicity and safety of the influenza vaccine at reduced or full intradermal doses with full intramuscular doses to inform policy design in the event of vaccine shortages.
Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for studies published from 2010 until June 5, 2020.
Study selection: All comparative studies across all ages assessing the immunogenicity or safety of intradermal and intramuscular influenza vaccinations were included.
Data extraction and synthesis: Data were extracted by a single reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. Discrepancies between reviewers were resolved through consensus. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted.
Main outcomes and measures: Primary outcomes included geometric mean titer, seroconversion, seroprotection, and adverse events.
Results: A total of 30 relevant studies were included; 29 studies were randomized clinical trials with 13 759 total participants, and 1 study was a cohort study of 164 021 participants. There was no statistically significant difference in seroconversion rates between the 3-?g, 6-?g, 7.5-?g, and 9-?g intradermal vaccine doses and the 15-?g intramuscular vaccine dose for each of the H1N1, H3N2, and B strains, but rates were significantly higher with the 15-?g intradermal dose compared with the 15-?g intramuscular dose for the H1N1 strain (rate ratio [RR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.01-1.20) and B strain (RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.13-1.73). Seroprotection rates for the 9-?g and 15-?g intradermal doses did not vary significantly compared with the 15-?g intramuscular dose for all the 3 strains, except for the 15-?g intradermal dose for the H1N1 strain, for which rates were significantly higher (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09). Local adverse events were significantly higher with intradermal doses than with the 15-?g intramuscular dose, particularly erythema (3-?g dose: RR, 9.62; 95% CI, 1.07-86.56; 6-?g dose: RR, 23.79; 95% CI, 14.42-39.23; 9-?g dose: RR, 4.56; 95% CI, 3.05-6.82; 15-?g dose: RR, 3.68; 95% CI, 3.19-4.25) and swelling (3-?g dose: RR, 20.16; 95% CI, 4.68-86.82; 9-?g dose: RR, 5.23; 95% CI, 3.58-7.62; 15-?g dose: RR, 3.47 ; 95% CI, 2.21-5.45). Fever and chills were significantly more common with the 9-?g intradermal dose than the 15-?g intramuscular dose (fever: RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.03-1.80; chills: RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) while all other systemic adverse events were not statistically significant for all other doses.
Conclusions and relevance: These findings suggest that reduced-dose intradermal influenza vaccination could be a reasonable alternative to standard dose intramuscular vaccination.
 
Back
Top Bottom