Trial reportClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2008
Safety and immunogenicity of two influenza virus subunit vaccines, with or without MF59 adjuvant, administered to human immunodeficiency virus type 1-seropositive and -seronegative adults.
Trial report in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relative Efficacy, Effectiveness and Safety of Newer and/or Enhanced Seasonal Influenza Vaccines for the Prevention of Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza in Individuals Aged 18 years and Over: Update of a Systematic Review.Reviews in medical virology · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Adjuvanted-influenza vaccination in patients infected with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis of immunogenicity and safety.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2020Pooled it
- Influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients: systematic review and meta-analysis from a public health policy perspective.PloS one · 2011Pooled it
- Immunogenicity and safety of different dosing schedules of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in pregnant women with HIV: a randomised controlled trial.The lancet. HIV · 2020Trial
- Safety and immunogenicity of influenza vaccine among HIV-infected adults: Conventional vaccine vs. intradermal vaccine.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2016Trial
- High level antibody avidity is achieved in HIV-seropositive recipients of an inactivated split adjuvanted (AS03A) influenza vaccine.Journal of clinical immunology · 2014Trial
- Phase 4 randomized trial of intradermal low-antigen-content inactivated influenza vaccine versus standard-dose intramuscular vaccine in HIV-1-infected adults.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2012Trial
- Long-term immunogenicity after one and two doses of a monovalent MF59-adjuvanted A/H1N1 Influenza virus vaccine coadministered with the seasonal 2009-2010 nonadjuvanted Influenza virus vaccine in HIV-infected children, adolescents, and young adults in a randomized controlled trial.Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI · 2011Trial
- Safety and immunogenicity of a monovalent 2009 influenza A/H1N1v vaccine adjuvanted with AS03A or unadjuvanted in HIV-infected adults: a randomized, controlled trial.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2011Trial
- Virus Biomimetic-Delivery Systems for the Production of Vaccines.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Immunological and Clinical Responses to Vaccinations among Adults Living with HIV.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Immune response to the recombinant herpes zoster vaccine in people living with HIV over 50 years of age compared to non-HIV age-/gender-matched controls (SHINGR'HIV): a multicenter, international, non-randomized clinical trial study protocol.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- A Biomimetic, Silaffin R5-Based Antigen Delivery Platform.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Serological Responses to Influenza Vaccination during Pregnancy.Microorganisms · 2021Review
- Antibody Responsiveness to Influenza: What Drives It?Viruses · 2021Review
- Influenza vaccination in healthcare workers: A comprehensive critical appraisal of the literature.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2018Review
- Vaccines for the prevention against the threat of MERS-CoV.Expert review of vaccines · 2016Review
- Immunogenicity of Licensed Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccines in HIV-Infected Children and Youth.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2013Article
- A multi-peptide, dual-adjuvant telomerase vaccine (GX301) is highly immunogenic in patients with prostate and renal cancer.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare both the safety and tolerability and the humoral and cell-mediated immune responses for two influenza virus subunit vaccines, one with MF59 adjuvant (Fluad) and one without an adjuvant (Agrippal), in healthy and in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-infected adult individuals. To achieve this aim, an open, randomized, comparative clinical trial was performed during the 2005-2006 season. A total of 256 subjects were enrolled to receive one dose of vaccine intramuscularly. Blood samples were taken at the time of vaccination and at 1 and 3 months postvaccination. A good humoral antibody response was detected for both vaccines, meeting all the criteria of the Committee for Medical Products for Human Use. After Beyer's correction for prevaccination status, Fluad exhibited better immunogenicity than Agrippal, as shown from the analysis of the geometric mean titers, with significant differences for some virus strains; however, no definitive conclusions on the clinical significance of such results can be drawn, because the method used to estimate antibody response is currently nonstandard for influenza virus vaccines. Significant induction of an antigen-specific CD4+ T-lymphocyte proliferative response was detected at all time points after immunization, for both the vaccines, among HIV-1-seronegative subjects. This was different from what was observed for HIV-1-infected individuals. In this group, significance was not reached at 30 days postvaccination (T30) for those immunized with Agrippal. Also when data were compared between treatment groups, a clear difference in the response at T30 was observed in favor of Fluad (P = 0.0002). The safety profiles of both vaccines were excellent. For HIV-1-infected individuals, no significant changes either in viremia or in the CD4+ cell count were observed at any time point. The results showed good safety and immunogenicity for both vaccines under study for both uninfected and HIV-1-infected adults, confirming current recommendations for immunization of this high-risk category.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.