Genevieve Meier

Comparing influenza vaccine efficacy against mismatched and matched strains: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundInfluenza vaccines are most effective when the antigens in the vaccine match those of circulating strains. However, antigens contained in the vaccines do not always match circulating strains. In the present work we aimed to examine the vaccine efficacy (VE) afforded by influenza vaccines when they are not well matched to circulating strains.MethodsWe identified randomized clinical trials (RCTs) through MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and references of included RCTs. RCTs reporting laboratory-confirmed influenza among healthy participants vaccinated with antigens of matching and non-matching influenza strains were included. Two independent reviewers screened citations/full-text articles, abstracted data, and appraised risk of bias. Conflicts were resolved by discussion. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted. VE was calculated using the following formula: (1 - relative risk × 100%).ResultsWe included 34 RCTs, providing data on 47 influenza seasons and 94,821 participants. The live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) showed significant protection against mismatched (six RCTs, VE 54%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 28% to 71%) and matched (seven RCTs, VE 83%, 95% CI 75% to 88%) influenza strains among children aged 6 to 36 months. Differences were observed between the point estimates for mismatched influenza A (five RCTs, VE 75%, 95% CI 41% to 90%) and mismatched influenza B (five RCTs, VE 42%, 95% CI 22% to 56%) estimates among children aged 6 to 36 months. The trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV) also afforded significant protection against mismatched (nine RCTs, VE 52%, 95% CI 37% to 63%) and matched (eight RCTs, VE 65%, 95% CI 54% to 73%) influenza strains among adults. Numerical differences were observed between the point estimates for mismatched influenza A (five RCTs, VE 64%, 95% CI 23% to 82%) and mismatched influenza B (eight RCTs, VE 52%, 95% CI 19% to 72%) estimates among adults. Statistical heterogeneity was low (I2 <50%) across all meta-analyses, except for the LAIV meta-analyses among children (I2 = 79%).ConclusionsThe TIV and LAIV vaccines can provide cross protection against non-matching circulating strains. The point estimates for VE were different for matching versus non-matching strains, with overlapping CIs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of universal influenza vaccination with quadrivalent inactivated vaccine in the United States

To address influenza B lineage mismatch and co-circulation, several quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s) containing two type A strains and both type B lineages have recently been approved in the United States. Currently available trivalent inactivated vaccines (IIV3s) or trivalent live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIV3s) comprise two influenza A strains and one of the two influenza B lineages that have co-circulated in the United States since 2001. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a policy of universal vaccination with IIV4 vs. IIV3/LAIV3 during 1 year in the United States. On average per influenza season, IIV4 was predicted to result in 30 251 fewer influenza cases, 3512 fewer hospitalizations, 722 fewer deaths, 4812 fewer life-years lost, and 3596 fewer quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) lost vs. IIV3/LAIV3. Using the Fluarix QuadrivalentTM (GlaxoSmithKline) prices and the weighted average IIV3/LAIV3 prices, the model predicts that the vaccination program costs would increase by

The Potential Cost-Effectiveness of Quadrivalent versus Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in Elderly People and Clinical Risk Groups in the UK: A Lifetime Multi-Cohort Model

452.2 million, while direct medical and indirect costs would decrease by

Cost-effectiveness analysis of quadrivalent influenza vaccination in at-risk adults and the elderly: an updated analysis in the U.K.

111.6 million and

Influenza-related health care utilization and productivity losses during seasons with and without a match between the seasonal and vaccine virus B lineage

218.7 million, respectively, with IIV4. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) comparing IIV4 to IIV3/LAIV3 is predicted to be

An approximation of herd effect due to vaccinating children against seasonal influenza – a potential solution to the incorporation of indirect effects into static models

90 301/QALY gained. Deterministic sensitivity analyses found that influenza B vaccine-matched and mismatched efficacies among adults aged ≥65 years had the greatest impact on the ICER. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the cost per QALY remained below

Effect of influenza vaccines against mismatched strains: a systematic review protocol

100 000 for 61% of iterations. In conclusion, vaccination with IIV4 in the US is predicted to reduce morbidity and mortality. This strategy is also predicted to be cost-effective vs. IIV3/LAIV3 at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds.

Burden of Illness in UK Subjects with Reported Respiratory Infections Vaccinated or Unvaccinated against Influenza: A Retrospective Observational Study

Objective To estimate the potential cost-effectiveness of quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with trivalent influenza vaccine in the UK. Methods A lifetime, multi-cohort, static Markov model was constructed, with nine age groups each divided into healthy and at-risk categories. Influenza A and B were accounted for separately. The model was run in one-year cycles for a lifetime (maximum age: 100 years). The analysis was from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5%. 2010 UK vaccination policy (vaccination of people at risk and those aged ≥65 years) was applied. Herd effect was not included. Inputs were derived from national databases and published sources where possible. The quadrivalent influenza vaccine price was not available when the study was conducted. It was estimated at £6.72,15% above the trivalent vaccine price of £5.85. Sensitivity analyses used an incremental price of up to 50%. Results Compared with trivalent influenza vaccine, the quadrivalent influenza vaccine would be expected to reduce the numbers of influenza cases by 1,393,720, medical visits by 439,852 complications by 167,357, hospitalisations for complications by 26,424 and influenza deaths by 16,471. The estimated base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £5,299/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Sensitivity analyses indicated that the ICER was sensitive to changes in circulation of influenza virus subtypes and vaccine mismatch; all other parameters had little effect. In 96% of simulations the ICER was <£20,000/QALY. Since this analysis was completed, quadrivalent influenza vaccine has become available in the UK at a list price of £9.94. Using this price in the model, the estimated ICER for quadrivalent compared with trivalent vaccination was £27,378/QALY, still within the NICE cost-effectiveness threshold (£20,000-£30,000). Conclusions Quadrivalent influenza vaccine could reduce influenza disease burden and would be cost-effective compared with trivalent influenza vaccine in elderly people and clinical risk groups in the UK.

Cost-effectiveness of seasonal quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccination in the United States: A dynamic transmission modeling approach.

Abstract Objective: To update an earlier evaluation estimating the cost-effectiveness of quadrivalent influenza vaccination (QIV) compared with trivalent influenza vaccination (TIV) in the adult population currently recommended for influenza vaccination in the UK (all people aged ≥65 years and people aged 18–64 years with clinical risk conditions). Methods: This analysis takes into account updated vaccine prices, reference costs, influenza strain circulation, and burden of illness data. A lifetime, multi-cohort, static Markov model was constructed with seven age groups. The model was run in 1-year cycles for a lifetime, i.e., until the youngest patients at entry reached the age of 100 years. The base-case analysis was from the perspective of the UK National Health Service, with a secondary analysis from the societal perspective. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5%. Herd effects were not included. Inputs were derived from systematic reviews, peer-reviewed articles, and government publications and databases. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: In the base-case, QIV would be expected to avoid 1,413,392 influenza cases, 41,780 hospitalizations, and 19,906 deaths over the lifetime horizon, compared with TIV. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £14,645 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. From the societal perspective, the estimated ICER was £13,497/QALY. A strategy of vaccinating only people aged ≥65 years had an estimated ICER of £11,998/QALY. Sensitivity analysis indicated that only two parameters, seasonal variation in influenza B matching and influenza A circulation, had a substantial effect on the ICER. QIV would be likely to be cost-effective compared with TIV in 68% of simulations with a willingness-to-pay threshold of <£20,000/QALY and 87% with a willingness-to-pay threshold of <£30,000/QALY. Conclusions: In this updated analysis, QIV was estimated to be cost-effective compared with TIV in the UK.

Examining Ontario's universal influenza immunization program with a multi-strain dynamic model.

OBJECTIVE To assess and compare direct medical costs (incurred by payers) and indirect productivity losses (incurred by employers) associated with influenza seasons with matched or mismatched circulating and vaccine containing influenza B lineages. METHODS A retrospective analysis, using two MarketScan databases, for the years 2000-2009. Each influenza season was categorized as matched or mismatched after comparing that seasons circulating influenza B lineage and the vaccine influenza B lineage. Patients selected had at least one diagnosis claim for influenza (ICD-9-CM code 487.xx [influenza] or 488.1 [H1N1]) during an influenza season. We assessed the incidence of influenza (overall and influenza B), influenza-related medical utilization and associated costs, and productivity losses for each season. RESULTS The four matched seasons had lower average influenza incidence (overall incidence per 100,000 plan members: 509; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 505-512) than the five mismatched seasons (748; 95% CI: 745-751). The mismatched seasons had lower influenza B incidence (average incidence per 100,000 plan members: 126; 95% CI: 125-128) than the matched seasons (165; 95% CI: 163-167). The average, per-patient, total influenza-related medical costs in the mismatched seasons (