Suchergebnisse

In Europe, annual influenza vaccination is recommended to elderly. From 2011 to 2014 and in 2015-16, we conducted a multicentre test negative case control study in hospitals of 11 European countries to measure influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against laboratory confirmed hospitalised influenza among people aged ≥65years. We pooled four seasons data to measure IVE by past exposures to influenza vaccination. We swabbed patients admitted for clinical conditions related to influenza with onset of severe acute respiratory infection ≤7days before admission. Cases were patients RT-PCR positive for influenza virus and controls those negative for any influenza virus. We documented seasonal vaccination status for the current season and the two previous seasons. We recruited 5295 patients over the four seasons, including 465A(H1N1)pdm09, 642A(H3N2), 278 B case-patients and 3910 controls. Among patients unvaccinated in both previous two seasons, current seasonal IVE (pooled across seasons) was 30% (95%CI: -35 to 64), 8% (95%CI: -94 to 56) and 33% (95%CI: -43 to 68) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B respectively. Among patients vaccinated in both previous seasons, current seasonal IVE (pooled across seasons) was -1% (95%CI: -80 to 43), 37% (95%CI: 7-57) and 43% (95%CI: 1-68) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B respectively. Our results suggest that, regardless of patients' recent vaccination history, current seasonal vaccine conferred some protection to vaccinated patients against hospitalisation with influenza A(H3N2) and B. Vaccination of patients already vaccinated in both the past two seasons did not seem to be effective against A(H1N1)pdm09. To better understand the effect of repeated vaccination, engaging in large cohort studies documenting exposures to vaccine and natural infection is needed. ; The Lithuanian I-MOVE + study sites were supported by a grant from the Research Council of Lithuania (SEN-03/2015). The I-MOVE + project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 634446. GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi Pasteur and Sanofi Pasteur MSD financially supported the InNHOVE network. ; Sí

Influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1)pdm09 and B viruses co-circulated in Europe in 2017-18, predominated by influenza B. WHO-recommended, trivalent vaccine components were lineage-mismatched for B. The I-MOVE hospital network measured 2017-18 seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against influenza A(H3N2) and B among hospitalised patients (≥65 years) in Europe. Following the same generic protocol for test-negative design, hospital teams in nine countries swabbed patients ≥65 years with recent onset (≤7 days) severe acute respiratory infection (SARI), collecting information on demographics, vaccination status and underlying conditions. Cases were RT-PCR positive for influenza A(H3N2) or B; controls: negative for any influenza. "Vaccinated" patients had SARI onset >14 days after vaccination. We measured pooled IVE against influenza, adjusted for study site, age, sex, onset date and chronic conditions. We included 3483 patients: 376 influenza A(H3N2) and 928 B cases, and 2028 controls. Most (>99%) vaccinated patients received the B lineage-mismatched trivalent vaccine. IVE against influenza A(H3N2) was 24% (95% CI: 2 to 40); 35% (95% CI: 6 to 55) in 65- to 79-year-olds and 14% (95% CI: -22 to 39) in ≥80-year-olds. Against influenza B, IVE was 30% (95% CI: 16 to 41); 37% (95% CI: 19 to 51) in 65- to 79-year-olds and 19% (95% CI: -7 to 38) in ≥80-year-olds. IVE against influenza B was similar to A(H3N2) in hospitalised older adults, despite trivalent vaccine and circulating B lineage mismatch, suggesting some cross-protection. IVE was lower in those ≥80 than 65-79 years. We reinforce the importance of influenza vaccination in older adults as, even with a poorly matched vaccine, it still protects one in three to four of this population from severe influenza. ; This study received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 634446. The I‐MOVE study team is very grateful to all patients, hospital teams, laboratory teams and regional epidemiologists who ...

We conducted a multicentre test-negative case-control study in 27 hospitals of 11 European countries to measure 2015/16 influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalised influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B among people aged ≥ 65 years. Patients swabbed within 7 days after onset of symptoms compatible with severe acute respiratory infection were included. Information on demographics, vaccination and underlying conditions was collected. Using logistic regression, we measured IVE adjusted for potential confounders. We included 355 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 cases, 110 influenza B cases, and 1,274 controls. Adjusted IVE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 42% (95% confidence interval (CI): 22 to 57). It was 59% (95% CI: 23 to 78), 48% (95% CI: 5 to 71), 43% (95% CI: 8 to 65) and 39% (95% CI: 7 to 60) in patients with diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung and heart disease, respectively. Adjusted IVE against influenza B was 52% (95% CI: 24 to 70). It was 62% (95% CI: 5 to 85), 60% (95% CI: 18 to 80) and 36% (95% CI: -23 to 67) in patients with diabetes mellitus, lung and heart disease, respectively. 2015/16 IVE estimates against hospitalised influenza in elderly people was moderate against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B, including among those with diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung or heart diseases. ; The I-MOVE+ project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 634446. The Lithuanian I-MOVE+ study sites were supported by a grant from the Research Council of Lithuania (SEN-03/2015). We are grateful to all patients, medical staff, study nurses and epidemiologists from the 12 study sites who actively participated in the study. ; Sí

Members of the I-MOVE+ project - Portugal: Baltazar Nunes, Ana Paula Rodrigues, Raquel Guiomar (Infectious Diseases Department, National Health Institute Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal), Victor Gomes, Filipa Quaresma, Luis Vale, Teresa Garcia, Teresa Bernardo, Liliana Dias, Paula Fonseca, Helena Amorim, João Rolo, Helena Pacheco, Paula Branquinho, Rita Côrte-Real (Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Central, Lisbon, Portugal),José Poças, Paula Lopes, Maria João Peres, Rosa Ribeiro, Paula Duarte, Ermelinda Pedroso, Sara Rodrigues, Ana Rita Silvério, Diana Gomes Pedreira, Marta Ferreira Fonseca, (Centro Hospitalar de Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal). ; We conducted a multicentre test-negative case-control study in 27 hospitals of 11 European countries to measure 2015/16 influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalised influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B among people aged ≥ 65 years. Patients swabbed within 7 days after onset of symptoms compatible with severe acute respiratory infection were included. Information on demographics, vaccination and underlying conditions was collected. Using logistic regression, we measured IVE adjusted for potential confounders. We included 355 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 cases, 110 influenza B cases, and 1,274 controls. Adjusted IVE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 42% (95% confidence interval (CI): 22 to 57). It was 59% (95% CI: 23 to 78), 48% (95% CI: 5 to 71), 43% (95% CI: 8 to 65) and 39% (95% CI: 7 to 60) in patients with diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung and heart disease, respectively. Adjusted IVE against influenza B was 52% (95% CI: 24 to 70). It was 62% (95% CI: 5 to 85), 60% (95% CI: 18 to 80) and 36% (95% CI: -23 to 67) in patients with diabetes mellitus, lung and heart disease, respectively. 2015/16 IVE estimates against hospitalised influenza in elderly people was moderate against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B, including among those with diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung or heart diseases. ; The I-MOVE+ project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 634446. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

I-MOVE/I-MOVE+ study team - Portugal: Verónica Gomez, Ana Paula Rodrigues, Baltazar Nunes (Departamento de Epidemiologia, Instituto Nacional de Saúde Dr. Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal); Pedro Pechirra, Paula Cristóvão, Patrícia Conde, Inês Costa (Departamento de Doenças Infeciosas, Instituto Nacional de Saúde Dr. Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal). ; Background:During the 2015/16 influenza season in Europe, the co-circulating influenza viruses were A(H1N1)pdm09 and B/Victoria, which was antigenically distinct from the B/Yamagata component in the trivalent influenza vaccine. Methods:We used the test negative design in a multicentre case–control study in twelve European countries to measure 2015/16 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. General practitioners swabbed a systematic sample of consulting ILI patients ainfluenza Vaccinend a random sample of influenza positive swabs were sequenced. We calculated adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic group 6B.1 and influenza B overall and by age group. Results: We included 11,430 ILI patients, of which 2272 were influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and 2901 were influenza B cases. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 32.9% (95% CI: 15.5-46.7). Among those aged 0–14, 15–64 and ≥65 years VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 31.9% (95% CI: -32.3-65.0), 41.4% (95%CI: 20.5-56.7) and 13.2% (95% CI: -38.0-45.3) respectively. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic group 6B.1 was 32.8% (95%CI: -4.1-56.7). Among those aged 0–14, 15–64 and ≥65 years VE against influenza B was -47.6% (95%CI: -124.9-3.1), 27.3% (95%CI: -4.6-49.4), and 9.3% (95%CI: -44.1-42.9) respectively. Conclusions: VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and its genetic group 6B.1 was moderate in children and adults, and low among individuals ≥65 years. VE against influenza B was low and heterogeneous among age groups. More information on effects of previous vaccination and previous infection are needed to understand the VE results against influenza B in the context of a mismatched vaccine. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 634446 to conduct the study in individuals aged 65 years or more. Framework contract No ECDC/2014/026 ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Free PMC article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6807025/pdf/main.pdf ; Introduction: Influenza A(H3N2) viruses predominated in Europe in 2016–17. In 2017–18 A(H3N2) and A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses co-circulated. The A(H3N2) vaccine component was the same in both seasons; while the A(H1N1)pdm09 component changed in 2017–18. In both seasons, vaccine seed A(H3N2) viruses developed adaptations/alterations during propagation in eggs, impacting antigenicity. Methods: We used the test-negative design in a multicentre primary care case-control study in 12 European countries to measure 2016–17 and 2017–18 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2) overall and by age group. Results: During the 2017–18 season, the overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 59% (95% CI: 47–69). Among those aged 0–14, 15–64 and ≥65 years, VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 64% (95% CI: 37–79), 50% (95% CI: 28–66) and 66% (95% CI: 42–80), respectively. Overall VE against influenza A(H3N2) was 28% (95% CI: 17–38) in 2016–17 and 13% (95% CI: -15 to 34) in 2017–18. Among 0–14-year-olds VE against A(H3N2) was 28% (95%CI: -10 to 53) and 29% (95% CI: -87 to 73), among 15–64-year-olds 34% (95% CI: 18–46) and 33% (95% CI: -3 to 56) and among those aged ≥65 years 15% (95% CI: -10 to 34) and -9% (95% CI: -74 to 32) in 2016–17 and 2017–18, respectively. Conclusions: Our study suggests the new A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine component conferred good protection against circulating strains, while VE against A(H3N2) was <35% in 2016–17 and 2017–18. The egg propagation derived antigenic mismatch of the vaccine seed virus with circulating strains may have contributed to this low effectiveness. A(H3N2) seed viruses for vaccines in subsequent seasons may be subject to the same adaptations; in years with lower than expected VE, recommendations of preventive measures other than vaccination should be given in a timely manner. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 634446 to conduct the study in individuals aged 65 years or more. ECDC has contributed funds for the coordination and some study sites under the Framework contract no. ECDC/2014/026 for the individuals aged less than 65 years. The WHO Regional office for Europe has contributed funds for the Romanian study site ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Introduction Sequence-based typing of hepatitis A virus (HAV) is important for outbreak detection, investigation and surveillance. In 2013, sequencing was central to resolving a large European Union (EU)-wide outbreak related to frozen berries. However, as the sequenced HAV genome regions were only partly comparable between countries, results were not always conclusive. Aim The objective was to gather information on HAV surveillance and sequencing in EU/European Economic Area (EEA) countries to find ways to harmonise their procedures, for improvement of cross-border outbreak responses. Methods In 2014, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) conducted a survey on HAV surveillance practices in EU/EEA countries. The survey enquired whether a referral system for confirming primary diagnostics of hepatitis A existed as well as a central collection/storage of hepatitis A cases' samples for typing. Questions on HAV sequencing procedures were also asked. Based on the results, an expert consultation proposed harmonised procedures for cross-border outbreak response, in particular regarding sequencing. In 2016, a follow-up survey assessed uptake of suggested methods. Results Of 31 EU/EEA countries, 23 (2014) and 27 (2016) participated. Numbers of countries with central collection and storage of HAV positive samples and of those performing sequencing increased from 12 to 15 and 12 to 14 respectively in 2016, with all countries typing an overlapping fragment of 218 nt. However, variation existed in the sequenced genomic regions and their lengths. Conclusions While HAV sequences in EU/EEA countries are comparable for surveillance, collaboration in sharing and comparing these can be further strengthened. ; Peer Reviewed