Estimation of influenza vaccine effectiveness from routine surveillance data

Heath Kelly, Kylie Carville, Kristina Grant, Peter Jacoby, Thomas Tran, Ian Barr, Heath Kelly, Kylie Carville, Kristina Grant, Peter Jacoby, Thomas Tran, Ian Barr

Abstract

Background: Influenza vaccines are reviewed each year, and often changed, in an effort to maintain their effectiveness against drifted influenza viruses. There is however no regular review of influenza vaccine effectiveness during, or at the end of, Australian influenza seasons. It is possible to use a case control method to estimate vaccine effectiveness from surveillance data when all patients in a surveillance system are tested for influenza and their vaccination status is known.

Methodology/principal findings: Influenza-like illness (ILI) surveillance is conducted during the influenza season in sentinel general practices scattered throughout Victoria, Australia. Over five seasons 2003-7, data on age, sex and vaccination status were collected and nose and throat swabs were offered to patients presenting within three days of the onset of their symptoms. Swabs were tested using a reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. Those positive for influenza were sent to the World Health Organization (WHO) Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Influenza where influenza virus culture and strain identification was attempted. We used a retrospective case control design in five consecutive influenza seasons, and estimated influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) for patients of all ages to be 53% (95% CI 38-64), but 41% (95% CI 19-57) adjusted for age group and year. The adjusted VE for all adults aged at least 20 years, the age groups for whom a benefit of vaccination could be shown, was 51% (95% CI 34-63). Comparison of VE estimates with vaccine and circulating strain matches across the years did not reveal any significant differences.

Conclusions/significance: These estimates support other field studies of influenza vaccine effectiveness, given that theoretical considerations suggest that these values may underestimate true effectiveness, depending on test specificity and the ratio of the influenza ILI attack rate to the non-influenza ILI attack rate. Incomplete recording of vaccination status and under-representation of children in patients from whom a swab was collected limit the data. Improvements have been implemented for prospective studies.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. Influenza-like illness 1997 to 2007…
Figure 1. Influenza-like illness 1997 to 2007 from general practice sentinel surveillance.
Figure 2. Laboratory confirmed influenza and ILI…
Figure 2. Laboratory confirmed influenza and ILI cases by proportion of age group, 2003–2007.

References

    1. Legrand J, Vergu E, Flahault A. Real-time monitoring of the influenza vaccine field effectiveness. Vaccine. 2006;24:6605–6611.
    1. Skowronski DM, Masaro C, Kwindt TL, Mak A, Petric M, et al. Estimating vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza using a sentinel physician network: results from the 2005–2006 season of dual A and B vaccine mismatch in Canada. Vaccine. 2007;25:2842–2851.
    1. Zangwill KM, Belshe RB. Safety and efficacy of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in young children: a summary for the new era of routine vaccination. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2004;23:189–197.
    1. Jefferson TO, Rivetti D, Di Pietrantonj C, Rivetti A, Demicheli V. Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007:CD001269.
    1. Govaert TM, Thijs CT, Masurel N, Sprenger MJ, Dinant GJ, et al. The efficacy of influenza vaccination in elderly individuals. A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. JAMA. 1994;272:1661–1665.
    1. Jefferson T, Rivetti D, Rivetti A, Rudin M, Di Pietrantonj C, et al. Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines in elderly people: a systematic review. Lancet. 2005;366:1165–1174.
    1. Orenstein WA, Bernier RH, Hinman AR. Assessing vaccine efficacy in the field. Further observations. Epidemiol Rev. 1988;10:212–241.
    1. Orenstein EW, De Serres G, Haber MJ, Shay DK, Bridges CB, et al. Methodologic issues regarding the use of three observational study designs to assess influenza vaccine effectiveness. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36:623–631.
    1. Kelly H, Murphy A, Leong W, Leydon J, Tresise P, et al. Laboratory-supported influenza surveillance in Victorian sentinel general practices. Communicable Disease Intelligence. 2000;24:379–383.
    1. Thursky K, Cordova SP, Smith D, Kelly H. Working towards a simple case definition for influenza surveillance. Journal of Clinical Virology. 2003;27:170–179.
    1. Druce JD, Tran T, Kelly H, Kaye M, Chibo D, et al. Laboratory diagnosis and surveillance of human respiratory viruses by PCR in Victoria, Australia, 2002–2003. Journal of Medical Virology. 2005;75:122–129.
    1. Watts CG, Andrews RM, Druce JD, Kelly HA. Establishing thresholds for influenza surveillance in Victoria. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health. 2003;27:409–412.
    1. StataCorp. Statistical Software: Release 10.0. College Station, TX 77845 USA: Stata Corporation; 2008.
    1. Concepts and procedures for laboratory-based influenza surveillance. 1982. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Pan-American Health Organization, Atlanta.
    1. Newall AT, Scuffham PA, Kelly H, Harsley S, Macintyre CR. The cost-effectiveness of a universal influenza vaccination program for adults aged 50–64 years in Australia. Vaccine. 2008;26:2142–2153.
    1. Prosser LA, O'Brien MA, Molinari NA, Hohman KH, Nichol KL, et al. Non-traditional settings for influenza vaccination of adults: costs and cost effectiveness. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26:163–178.
    1. Clothier H, Turner J, Hampson A, Kelly H. Geographic representativeness for sentinel influenza surveillance: implications for routine surveillance and pandemic preparedness. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2006;30:337–341.
    1. Monto AS. Occurrence of respiratory virus: time, place and person. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2004;23:S58–64.
    1. Monto AS, Koopman JS, Longini IM., Jr Tecumseh study of illness. XIII. Influenza infection and disease, 1976–1981. Am J Epidemiol. 1985;121:811–822.
    1. Wright PF, Thompson J, Karzon DT. Differing virulence of H1N1 and H3N2 influenza strains. Am J Epidemiol. 1980;112:814–819.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner