-
- Jessie R. Chung
- Atlanta Research and Education Foundation, Inc, Atlanta, Georgia;
-
- Brendan Flannery
- Influenza Division, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia;
-
- Mark G. Thompson
- Influenza Division, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia;
-
- Manjusha Gaglani
- Baylor Scott and White Health, Texas A&M University Health Science Center College of Medicine, Temple, Texas;
-
- Michael L. Jackson
- Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington;
-
- Arnold S. Monto
- University of Michigan School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Ann Arbor, Michigan;
-
- Mary Patricia Nowalk
- University of Pittsburgh Schools of Health Sciences and UPMC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania;
-
- H. Keipp Talbot
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee;
-
- John J. Treanor
- Department of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York; and
-
- Edward A. Belongia
- Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, Marshfield, Wisconsin
-
- Kempapura Murthy
- Baylor Scott and White Health, Texas A&M University Health Science Center College of Medicine, Temple, Texas;
-
- Lisa A. Jackson
- Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington;
-
- Joshua G. Petrie
- University of Michigan School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Ann Arbor, Michigan;
-
- Richard K. Zimmerman
- University of Pittsburgh Schools of Health Sciences and UPMC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania;
-
- Marie R. Griffin
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee;
-
- Huong Q. McLean
- Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, Marshfield, Wisconsin
-
- Alicia M. Fry
- Influenza Division, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia;
抄録
<jats:sec> <jats:title>BACKGROUND:</jats:title> <jats:p>Few observational studies have evaluated the relative effectiveness of live attenuated (LAIV) and inactivated (IIV) influenza vaccines against medically attended laboratory-confirmed influenza.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>METHODS:</jats:title> <jats:p>We analyzed US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network data from participants aged 2 to 17 years during 4 seasons (2010–2011 through 2013–2014) to compare relative effectiveness of LAIV and IIV against influenza-associated illness. Vaccine receipt was confirmed via provider/electronic medical records or immunization registry. We calculated the ratio (odds) of influenza-positive to influenza-negative participants among those age-appropriately vaccinated with either LAIV or IIV for the corresponding season. We examined relative effectiveness of LAIV and IIV by using adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from logistic regression.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>RESULTS:</jats:title> <jats:p>Of 6819 participants aged 2 to 17 years, 2703 were age-appropriately vaccinated with LAIV (n = 637) or IIV (n = 2066). Odds of influenza were similar for LAIV and IIV recipients during 3 seasons (2010–2011 through 2012–2013). In 2013–2014, odds of influenza were significantly higher among LAIV recipients compared with IIV recipients 2 to 8 years old (OR 5.36; 95% CI, 2.37 to 12.13). Participants vaccinated with LAIV or IIV had similar odds of illness associated with influenza A/H3N2 or B. LAIV recipients had greater odds of illness due to influenza A/H1N1pdm09 in 2010–2011 and 2013–2014.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>CONCLUSIONS:</jats:title> <jats:p>We observed lower effectiveness of LAIV compared with IIV against influenza A/H1N1pdm09 but not A(H3N2) or B among children and adolescents, suggesting poor performance related to the LAIV A/H1N1pdm09 viral construct.</jats:p> </jats:sec>
収録刊行物
-
- Pediatrics
-
Pediatrics 137 (2), e20153279-, 2016-02-01
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)