• 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.

Safety assessment and immunogenicity of a cell-culture-derived influenza vaccine in adults and elderly subjects over three successive influenza season

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2012 May 1;8(5). [Epub ahead of print]
Safety assessment and immunogenicity of a cell-culture-derived influenza vaccine in adults and elderly subjects over three successive influenza seasons.
Szymczakiewicz-Multanowska A, Lattanzi M, Izu A, Casula D, Sparacio M, Kovacs C, Groth N.
Source

Early Development Services CEE, PRA International, Warszawa, Poland.
Abstract

Background Adult and elderly subjects previously immunized with cell culture-derived (CCIV; Optaflu (?) ) or egg-derived (TIV; Agrippal (?) ) trivalent influenza vaccines were enrolled in two extension studies (E1 and E2) to evaluate safety and immunogenicity after revaccination with CCIV/TIV alone or in combination with concomitant pneumococcal vaccine (PV). Methods Adults and elderly subjects (n = 2609) were randomized 1:1 in E1 and allocated 3:1 in E2 to receive CCIV/TIV. In E2, a subset of elderly subjects was randomized to receive CCIV/TIV, with or without PV. Adverse reactions were monitored for six months and immunogenicity was assessed by hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay using CHMP criteria. Results Overall, the safety profile of both vaccines was similar, no serious adverse events related to either vaccine occurred. Mild or moderate pain was the most commonly reported reaction. Reactogenicity was slightly higher in elderly subjects receiving CCIV/TIV concomitantly with PV (46% vs. 37%; p = non-significant (NS)) .Both vaccines met CHMP licensure criteria for adults and elderly subjects. With concomitant CCIV and PV, all three CHMP criteria were met for A/H1N1 and A/H3N2, whereas the B strain only met seroprotection and GMR criteria. Conclusions Safety and immunogenicity of CCIV was not influenced by the type of vaccine received previously or by concomitant PV administration.

PMID:
22418809
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22418809
 
Back
Top Bottom