Cargando…

A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: Immunogenicity and Adverse Events

Please cite this paper as: Marra et al. (2012) A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: immunogenicity and adverse events. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 7(4), 584–603. Objective  To determine immunogenicity and safety of intradermal (ID) influenza vaccines co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Marra, Fawziah, Young, Flora, Richardson, Kathryn, Marra, Carlo A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5781005/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22974174
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/irv.12000
_version_ 1783294856362196992
author Marra, Fawziah
Young, Flora
Richardson, Kathryn
Marra, Carlo A.
author_facet Marra, Fawziah
Young, Flora
Richardson, Kathryn
Marra, Carlo A.
author_sort Marra, Fawziah
collection PubMed
description Please cite this paper as: Marra et al. (2012) A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: immunogenicity and adverse events. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 7(4), 584–603. Objective  To determine immunogenicity and safety of intradermal (ID) influenza vaccines compared with intramuscular (IM) administration and effect of dose and age. Design  Meta‐anlysis. Setting  Systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials on influenza vaccines. Sample  Randomized, controlled trials comparing ID seasonal split‐virus influenza vaccines with 15 μg IM control in subjects 18 years of age or older and assessed antibody response at 21–28 days post‐vaccination were considered for inclusion. Results  A total of 13 trials were included. The pooled immunogenicity outcomes did not differ significantly between the IM and ID vaccine groups for the H1N1 (ratio of GMTR: 0·92, 95% confidence interval 0·77–1·09; seroconversion: 0·94, 0·86–1·02; seroprotection: 0·97, 0·94–1·00) and B strains (GMTR: 0·93, 0·80–1·08; seroconversion: 0·91, 0·80–1·04; seroprotection: 0·97, 0·91–1·03). For the H3N2 strain, there was no significant difference in GMTR (0·97, 0·80–1·18); however, there was a lower pooled seroconversion (0·89, 0·80–0·99) and seroprotection rate (0·98, 0·96–0·99) for ID recipients. There was a statistically significant association between increasing doses of the ID vaccination with increasing immunogenicity response (P = 0·01). There were no differences in adverse event rates within 3 days post‐vaccination for ID versus IM. But for adverse events occurring 7 days post‐vaccination, ID vaccination was associated with a greater incidence of local events but not systemic events. Conclusions  There was no significant difference in immunologic response when comparing ID with IM administration of the influenza vaccination in the overall population, but higher doses of ID vaccine in the older adult population produced a better response.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5781005
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57810052018-02-06 A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: Immunogenicity and Adverse Events Marra, Fawziah Young, Flora Richardson, Kathryn Marra, Carlo A. Influenza Other Respir Viruses Original Articles Please cite this paper as: Marra et al. (2012) A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: immunogenicity and adverse events. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 7(4), 584–603. Objective  To determine immunogenicity and safety of intradermal (ID) influenza vaccines compared with intramuscular (IM) administration and effect of dose and age. Design  Meta‐anlysis. Setting  Systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials on influenza vaccines. Sample  Randomized, controlled trials comparing ID seasonal split‐virus influenza vaccines with 15 μg IM control in subjects 18 years of age or older and assessed antibody response at 21–28 days post‐vaccination were considered for inclusion. Results  A total of 13 trials were included. The pooled immunogenicity outcomes did not differ significantly between the IM and ID vaccine groups for the H1N1 (ratio of GMTR: 0·92, 95% confidence interval 0·77–1·09; seroconversion: 0·94, 0·86–1·02; seroprotection: 0·97, 0·94–1·00) and B strains (GMTR: 0·93, 0·80–1·08; seroconversion: 0·91, 0·80–1·04; seroprotection: 0·97, 0·91–1·03). For the H3N2 strain, there was no significant difference in GMTR (0·97, 0·80–1·18); however, there was a lower pooled seroconversion (0·89, 0·80–0·99) and seroprotection rate (0·98, 0·96–0·99) for ID recipients. There was a statistically significant association between increasing doses of the ID vaccination with increasing immunogenicity response (P = 0·01). There were no differences in adverse event rates within 3 days post‐vaccination for ID versus IM. But for adverse events occurring 7 days post‐vaccination, ID vaccination was associated with a greater incidence of local events but not systemic events. Conclusions  There was no significant difference in immunologic response when comparing ID with IM administration of the influenza vaccination in the overall population, but higher doses of ID vaccine in the older adult population produced a better response. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2012-09-13 2013-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5781005/ /pubmed/22974174 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/irv.12000 Text en © 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
spellingShingle Original Articles
Marra, Fawziah
Young, Flora
Richardson, Kathryn
Marra, Carlo A.
A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: Immunogenicity and Adverse Events
title A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: Immunogenicity and Adverse Events
title_full A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: Immunogenicity and Adverse Events
title_fullStr A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: Immunogenicity and Adverse Events
title_full_unstemmed A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: Immunogenicity and Adverse Events
title_short A Meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: Immunogenicity and Adverse Events
title_sort meta‐analysis of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccines: immunogenicity and adverse events
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5781005/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22974174
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/irv.12000
work_keys_str_mv AT marrafawziah ametaanalysisofintradermalversusintramuscularinfluenzavaccinesimmunogenicityandadverseevents
AT youngflora ametaanalysisofintradermalversusintramuscularinfluenzavaccinesimmunogenicityandadverseevents
AT richardsonkathryn ametaanalysisofintradermalversusintramuscularinfluenzavaccinesimmunogenicityandadverseevents
AT marracarloa ametaanalysisofintradermalversusintramuscularinfluenzavaccinesimmunogenicityandadverseevents
AT marrafawziah metaanalysisofintradermalversusintramuscularinfluenzavaccinesimmunogenicityandadverseevents
AT youngflora metaanalysisofintradermalversusintramuscularinfluenzavaccinesimmunogenicityandadverseevents
AT richardsonkathryn metaanalysisofintradermalversusintramuscularinfluenzavaccinesimmunogenicityandadverseevents
AT marracarloa metaanalysisofintradermalversusintramuscularinfluenzavaccinesimmunogenicityandadverseevents