Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28262588›Full record

ArticleEpidemics2017

Population effect of influenza vaccination under co-circulation of non-vaccine variants and the case for a bivalent A/H3N2 vaccine component.

Colin J Worby, Jacco Wallinga, Marc Lipsitch, Edward Goldstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Message in a bottle: mRNA vaccination for influenza.The Journal of general virology · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Colin J WorbyDepartment of Epidemiology, Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA. Electronic address: cworby@princeton.edu.
Jacco WallingaNational Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, 3721 MA Bilthoven, The Netherlands; Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Marc LipsitchDepartment of Epidemiology, Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Department of Immunology and Infectious Disease, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Edward GoldsteinDepartment of Epidemiology, Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

Funding

Understanding and controlling antibiotic resistanceU54GM088558 · NIGMS · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI HANAGE, WILLIAM · 2009 to 2018
$26.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM088558
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Some past epidemics of different influenza subtypes (particularly A/H3N2) in the US saw co-circulation of vaccine-type and variant strains. There is evidence that natural infection with one influenza subtype offers short-term protection against infection with another influenza subtype (henceforth, cross-immunity). This suggests that such cross-immunity for strains within a subtype is expected to be strong. Therefore, while vaccination effective against one strain may reduce transmission of that strain, this may also lead to a reduction of the vaccine-type strain's ability to suppress spread of a variant strain. It remains unclear what the joint effect of vaccination and cross-immunity is for co-circulating influenza strains within a subtype, and what is the potential benefit of a bivalent vaccine that protects against both strains. We simulated co-circulation of vaccine-type and variant strains under a variety of scenarios. In each scenario, we considered the case when the vaccine efficacy against the variant strain is lower than the efficacy against the vaccine-type strain (monovalent vaccine), as well the case when vaccine is equally efficacious against both strains (bivalent vaccine). Administration of a bivalent vaccine results in a significant reduction in the overall incidence of infection compared to administration of a monovalent vaccine, even with lower coverage by the bivalent vaccine. Additionally, we found that with greater cross-immunity, increasing coverage levels for the monovalent vaccine becomes less beneficial, while introducing the bivalent vaccine becomes more beneficial. Our work exhibits the limitations of influenza vaccines that have low efficacy against non-vaccine strains, and demonstrates the benefits of vaccines that offer good protection against multiple influenza strains. The results elucidate the need for guarding against the potential co-circulation of non-vaccine strains for an influenza subtype, at least during select seasons, possibly through inclusion of multiple strains within a subtype (particularly A/H3N2) in a vaccine.

Indexed as

Influenza A Virus, H3N2 SubtypeAdultChildHumansInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesInfluenza VaccinesBivalent vaccineCo-circulating strainsCross-immunityInfluenzaMonovalent vaccine

Identifiers

PMID28262588
PMCPMC5533618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.