Cargando…
Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with the trivalent vaccine for influenza infection: an overview of systematic reviews
BACKGROUND: Influenza infection is a highly preventable transmissible viral disease associated with mild upper respiratory symptoms and more severe conditions such as lethal pneumonia. Studies have shown that a broader spectrum influenza vaccine could reduce influenza’s burden of disease in low- and...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10463610/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37644401 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08541-0 |
_version_ | 1785098271706841088 |
---|---|
author | Carregaro, Rodrigo Luiz Roscani, Alessandra N. C. P. Raimundo, Augusto Cesar Sousa Ferreira, Larissa Vanni, Tazio da Graça Salomão, Maria Probst, Livia Fernandes Viscondi, Juliana Yukari K. |
author_facet | Carregaro, Rodrigo Luiz Roscani, Alessandra N. C. P. Raimundo, Augusto Cesar Sousa Ferreira, Larissa Vanni, Tazio da Graça Salomão, Maria Probst, Livia Fernandes Viscondi, Juliana Yukari K. |
author_sort | Carregaro, Rodrigo Luiz |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Influenza infection is a highly preventable transmissible viral disease associated with mild upper respiratory symptoms and more severe conditions such as lethal pneumonia. Studies have shown that a broader spectrum influenza vaccine could reduce influenza’s burden of disease in low- and middle-income countries. A considerable number of systematic reviews reported that quadrivalent influenza vaccines are considered more effective compared to trivalent vaccines, hence, there is a need for an overview in order to synthesize the current evidence pertaining to the comparison between quadrivalent and trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines. Objective: The aim was to summarize the evidence from systematic reviews that investigated the immunogenicity and safety of the Influenza’s inactivated quadrivalent vaccine (QIV) compared to the trivalent vaccine (TIV), in the general population. METHODS: We searched articles up to December 2022 at: Web of Science, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS. The search strategy was conducted following the PICO model. We included systematic reviews comparing the primary outcomes of immunogenicity (seroprotection rate and seroconversion rate) and adverse events using risk ratios. The AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS were used for quality assessments, and GRADE was used for evidence certainty assessments. FINDINGS: We included five systematic reviews, totalling 47,740 participants. The Quadrivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine (QIV) exhibited enhanced immunogenicity in the context of B-lineage mismatch when compared to the Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine (TIV). While the safety profile of QIV was found to be comparable to that of TIV, the QIV showed a higher incidence of solicited local pain among children and adolescents, as well as an increased frequency of local adverse events within the adult population. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the QIV provides a superior immunogenicity response compared to the TIV in all age groups evaluated, especially when a lineage mismatch occurred. The safety of QIV was considered similar to the TIV, with no serious or systemic solicited or unsolicited adverse events; tough pain at the injection site was greater for QIV. We recommend caution owing to the high risk of bias in the selection process and no protocol registration. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-023-08541-0. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10463610 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104636102023-08-30 Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with the trivalent vaccine for influenza infection: an overview of systematic reviews Carregaro, Rodrigo Luiz Roscani, Alessandra N. C. P. Raimundo, Augusto Cesar Sousa Ferreira, Larissa Vanni, Tazio da Graça Salomão, Maria Probst, Livia Fernandes Viscondi, Juliana Yukari K. BMC Infect Dis Research BACKGROUND: Influenza infection is a highly preventable transmissible viral disease associated with mild upper respiratory symptoms and more severe conditions such as lethal pneumonia. Studies have shown that a broader spectrum influenza vaccine could reduce influenza’s burden of disease in low- and middle-income countries. A considerable number of systematic reviews reported that quadrivalent influenza vaccines are considered more effective compared to trivalent vaccines, hence, there is a need for an overview in order to synthesize the current evidence pertaining to the comparison between quadrivalent and trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines. Objective: The aim was to summarize the evidence from systematic reviews that investigated the immunogenicity and safety of the Influenza’s inactivated quadrivalent vaccine (QIV) compared to the trivalent vaccine (TIV), in the general population. METHODS: We searched articles up to December 2022 at: Web of Science, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS. The search strategy was conducted following the PICO model. We included systematic reviews comparing the primary outcomes of immunogenicity (seroprotection rate and seroconversion rate) and adverse events using risk ratios. The AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS were used for quality assessments, and GRADE was used for evidence certainty assessments. FINDINGS: We included five systematic reviews, totalling 47,740 participants. The Quadrivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine (QIV) exhibited enhanced immunogenicity in the context of B-lineage mismatch when compared to the Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine (TIV). While the safety profile of QIV was found to be comparable to that of TIV, the QIV showed a higher incidence of solicited local pain among children and adolescents, as well as an increased frequency of local adverse events within the adult population. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the QIV provides a superior immunogenicity response compared to the TIV in all age groups evaluated, especially when a lineage mismatch occurred. The safety of QIV was considered similar to the TIV, with no serious or systemic solicited or unsolicited adverse events; tough pain at the injection site was greater for QIV. We recommend caution owing to the high risk of bias in the selection process and no protocol registration. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-023-08541-0. BioMed Central 2023-08-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10463610/ /pubmed/37644401 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08541-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Carregaro, Rodrigo Luiz Roscani, Alessandra N. C. P. Raimundo, Augusto Cesar Sousa Ferreira, Larissa Vanni, Tazio da Graça Salomão, Maria Probst, Livia Fernandes Viscondi, Juliana Yukari K. Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with the trivalent vaccine for influenza infection: an overview of systematic reviews |
title | Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with the trivalent vaccine for influenza infection: an overview of systematic reviews |
title_full | Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with the trivalent vaccine for influenza infection: an overview of systematic reviews |
title_fullStr | Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with the trivalent vaccine for influenza infection: an overview of systematic reviews |
title_full_unstemmed | Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with the trivalent vaccine for influenza infection: an overview of systematic reviews |
title_short | Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with the trivalent vaccine for influenza infection: an overview of systematic reviews |
title_sort | immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with the trivalent vaccine for influenza infection: an overview of systematic reviews |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10463610/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37644401 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08541-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT carregarorodrigoluiz immunogenicityandsafetyofinactivatedquadrivalentinfluenzavaccinecomparedwiththetrivalentvaccineforinfluenzainfectionanoverviewofsystematicreviews AT roscanialessandrancp immunogenicityandsafetyofinactivatedquadrivalentinfluenzavaccinecomparedwiththetrivalentvaccineforinfluenzainfectionanoverviewofsystematicreviews AT raimundoaugustocesarsousa immunogenicityandsafetyofinactivatedquadrivalentinfluenzavaccinecomparedwiththetrivalentvaccineforinfluenzainfectionanoverviewofsystematicreviews AT ferreiralarissa immunogenicityandsafetyofinactivatedquadrivalentinfluenzavaccinecomparedwiththetrivalentvaccineforinfluenzainfectionanoverviewofsystematicreviews AT vannitazio immunogenicityandsafetyofinactivatedquadrivalentinfluenzavaccinecomparedwiththetrivalentvaccineforinfluenzainfectionanoverviewofsystematicreviews AT dagracasalomaomaria immunogenicityandsafetyofinactivatedquadrivalentinfluenzavaccinecomparedwiththetrivalentvaccineforinfluenzainfectionanoverviewofsystematicreviews AT probstliviafernandes immunogenicityandsafetyofinactivatedquadrivalentinfluenzavaccinecomparedwiththetrivalentvaccineforinfluenzainfectionanoverviewofsystematicreviews AT viscondijulianayukarik immunogenicityandsafetyofinactivatedquadrivalentinfluenzavaccinecomparedwiththetrivalentvaccineforinfluenzainfectionanoverviewofsystematicreviews |