RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Comparing trivalent and quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine efficacy in persons 60 years of age and older: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.11.29.23299123
DO 10.1101/2023.11.29.23299123
A1 Veroniki, Areti Angeliki
A1 Thirugnanasampanthar, Sai Surabi
A1 Konstantinidis, Menelaos
A1 Dourka, Jasmeen
A1 Ghassemi, Marco
A1 Neupane, Dipika
A1 Khan, Paul A.
A1 Nincic, Vera
A1 Corry, Margarita
A1 Robson, Reid
A1 Parker, Amanda
A1 Soobiah, Charlene
A1 Sinilaite, Angela
A1 Doyon-Plourde, Pamela
A1 Gil, Anabel
A1 Siu, Winnie
A1 Moqueet, Nasheed
A1 Stevens, Adrienne
A1 English, Kelly
A1 Florez, Ivan D.
A1 Yepes-Nuñez, Juan J.
A1 Hutton, Brian
A1 Muller, Matthew
A1 Moja, Lorenzo
A1 Straus, Sharon E.
A1 Tricco, Andrea C.
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/11/29/2023.11.29.23299123.abstract
AB Objectives To compare the efficacy of influenza vaccines of any valency for adults 60 years and older.Design Systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA)Information sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, JBI Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Database, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Evidence Based Medicine database from inception to June 20, 2022.Eligibility criteria Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including older adults (≥60 years old) receiving an influenza vaccine licensed in Canada or the United States (versus placebo, no vaccine, or any other licensed vaccine), at any dose.Outcome measures Primary outcomes: Laboratory-confirmed influenza (LCI) and influenza-like illness (ILI). Secondary outcomes: number of vascular adverse events, hospitalization for acute respiratory infection (ARI) and ILI, inpatient hospitalization, emergency room (ER) visit for ILI, outpatient visit, and mortality, among others.Data extraction, risk of bias (ROB), and certainty of evidence assessment Two reviewers screened, abstracted, and appraised articles (Cochrane ROB 2 tool) independently. We assessed certainty of findings using CINeMA and GRADE approaches.Data synthesis We performed random-effects meta-analysis and NMA, and estimated odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for count outcomes along with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) and prediction intervals.Results We included 41 RCTs and 15 companion reports comprising eight vaccine types and 206,032 participants. Vaccines prevented LCI compared with placebo, with high-dose trivalent (IIV3-HD) (NMA, nine RCTs, 52,202 participants, OR 0.23, 95%CI [0.11 to 0.51], low certainty of evidence) and RIV (OR 0.25, 95%CI [0.08 to 0.73], low certainty of evidence) among the most efficacious vaccines. Standard dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3-SD) prevented ILI compared with placebo, but the result was imprecise (meta-analysis, two RCTs, 854 participants, OR 0.39, 95%CI [0.15 to 1.02], low certainty of evidence). Any high dose (HD) prevented ILI compared with placebo (NMA, nine RCTs, 65,658 participants, OR 0.38, 95%CI [0.15 to 0.93]). Adjuvanted quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV4-Adj) was associated with the least vascular adverse events (NMA: eight RCTs, 57,677 participants, IRR 0.18, 95%CI [0.07 to 0.43], very low certainty of evidence). RIV on all-cause mortality was comparable to placebo (NMA: 20 RCTs, 140,577 participants, OR 1.01, 95%CI [0.23 to 4.49], low certainty of evidence).Conclusions This systematic review demonstrated high efficacy associated with IIV3-HD and RIV vaccines in protecting elderly persons against LCI, and RIV vaccine minimizing all-cause mortality when compared with other vaccines. However, differences in efficacy between these vaccines remain uncertain with very low to moderate certainty of evidence.Funding Canadian Institutes of Health Research Drug Safety and Effectiveness Network (No. DMC – 166263)Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020177357What is already known on this topicSeasonal influenza vaccination of older adults (≥60 years old) is an important societal, cost-effective means of reducing morbidity and mortality.A multitude of licensed seasonal influenza vaccines for older adults are available in a variety of formulations (such as IIV3, IIV4; prepared in standard and high doses; with and without an adjuvant) relying on production methods including those based on embryonated chicken eggs, or mammalian cell cultures and comprising seasonally selected viral strains or recombinant constructs.Lack of high-quality analysis of randomized control trial (RCT) data pertaining to influenza vaccine production and composition poses challenges for public health clinicians and policy makers who are tasked with making evidence-based decisions regarding recommendations about choosing optimally efficacious and safe influenza vaccines for older adults.What this study addsThis systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCT data found that recombinant influenza vaccines (RIV) are among the most effective (lowest odds of laboratory-confirmed influenza [LCI]) and safest (lowest odds of all-cause mortality) of any licensed influenza vaccine type administered to older adults.How this study might affect research, practice or policyOur review points to a potential safety concern regarding increased odds of all-cause mortality associated with older adults receiving adjuvanted influenza vaccines (IIV3-adj and IIV4-adj).Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was funded by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Drug Safety and Effectiveness Network (No. DMC – 166263). SES is funded by a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Translation and Quality of Care, the Mary Trimmer Chair in Geriatric Medicine, and a Foundation Grant (Canadian Institutes of Health Research). ACT holds a Tier 2 Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Synthesis. MC was part supported by the Health Research Board (Ireland) and the HSC Public Health Agency (Grant number CBES-2018-001) through Evidence Synthesis Ireland/Cochrane Ireland.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe full dataset and statistical code are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.