Cluster-randomized Trial of Adjuvanted Versus Nonadjuvanted Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in 823 US Nursing Homes

Abstract Background Influenza leads in preventable infection-related hospitalization in nursing home (NH) residents. The adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) is more immunogenic than similarly dosed nonadjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV), and observational studies suggest aTIV bett...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical infectious diseases 2021-12, Vol.73 (11), p.e4237-e4243
Hauptverfasser: McConeghy, Kevin W, Davidson, H Edward, Canaday, David H, Han, Lisa, Saade, Elie, Mor, Vince, Gravenstein, Stefan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e4243
container_issue 11
container_start_page e4237
container_title Clinical infectious diseases
container_volume 73
creator McConeghy, Kevin W
Davidson, H Edward
Canaday, David H
Han, Lisa
Saade, Elie
Mor, Vince
Gravenstein, Stefan
description Abstract Background Influenza leads in preventable infection-related hospitalization in nursing home (NH) residents. The adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) is more immunogenic than similarly dosed nonadjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV), and observational studies suggest aTIV better prevents hospitalizations in older adults. We prospectively tested this in an NH setting. Methods NHs with ≥50 long-stay residents aged ≥65 years were randomized to offer aTIV or TIV for residents for the 2016–2017 influenza season. Using intent-to-treat resident-level analysis with Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for clustering by facility and a priori baseline covariates (eg, age, heart failure, and facility-level characteristics), we assessed relative aTIV:TIV effectiveness for hospitalization (ie, all-cause, respiratory, and pneumonia and influenza [P&I]). Results We randomized 823 NHs, housing 50 012 eligible residents, to aTIV or TIV. Residents were similar between groups by age (mean, ~79 years), heart failure, lung disease, and influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptake, except aTIV homes housed fewer Black residents (14.5 vs 18.9%). Staff vaccine uptake was similar (~55%). P&I and all-cause resident hospitalization rates were lower (adjusted HR [aHR], .80 [95% CI, .66–.98; P = .03] and .94 [.89–.99; P = .02], respectively) for aTIV versus TIV, while the respiratory hospitalization rate was similar, in a season where vaccine effectiveness was considered poor. Conclusions aTIV was more effective than TIV in preventing all-cause and P&I hospitalization from NHs during an A/H3N2-predominant season when TIV was relatively ineffective. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02882100. This trial evaluates adjuvanted influenza vaccine (aTIV) and hospitalization using an innovative pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial design in a high-risk nursing home population. aTIV was more effective than standard influenza vaccine in preventing all-cause hospitalization from US nursing homes.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/cid/ciaa1233
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2440473887</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/cid/ciaa1233</oup_id><sourcerecordid>2440473887</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-cd82b8eb3a58c51f83238a89f324b0aa847c253cef5bd46e713438a4f02747c23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1PAjEURRujEUR3rk13unC0n0xZGqJCYnAhsJ10Oh1TMtNiOyWRX28JoDsXL-_lvpO7OABcY_SA0Yg-KlOlkRITSk9AH3OaZ0M-wqfpRlxkTFDRAxchrBDCWCB-DnqUCEFyjPrAjZsYOu0zL23lWrPVFZx7IxvoavhUreJG2i5lS-1DDHDmrPwLE7iRjbYdnNq6idpuJVxKpYzV0FgoCIWLDziLPhj7CSeu1eESnNWyCfrqsAdg8fI8H0-yt_fX6fjpLVN0iLtMVYKUQpdUcqE4rgUlVEgxqilhJZJSsFwRTpWueVmxoc4xZQlgNSL57kUH4G7fu_buK-rQFa0JSjeNtNrFUBDGEMupEHlC7_eo8i4Er-ti7U0r_XeBUbFTXCTFxVFxwm8OzbFsdfULH50m4HYPuLj-v-oH3zuFkQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2440473887</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cluster-randomized Trial of Adjuvanted Versus Nonadjuvanted Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in 823 US Nursing Homes</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>McConeghy, Kevin W ; Davidson, H Edward ; Canaday, David H ; Han, Lisa ; Saade, Elie ; Mor, Vince ; Gravenstein, Stefan</creator><creatorcontrib>McConeghy, Kevin W ; Davidson, H Edward ; Canaday, David H ; Han, Lisa ; Saade, Elie ; Mor, Vince ; Gravenstein, Stefan</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background Influenza leads in preventable infection-related hospitalization in nursing home (NH) residents. The adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) is more immunogenic than similarly dosed nonadjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV), and observational studies suggest aTIV better prevents hospitalizations in older adults. We prospectively tested this in an NH setting. Methods NHs with ≥50 long-stay residents aged ≥65 years were randomized to offer aTIV or TIV for residents for the 2016–2017 influenza season. Using intent-to-treat resident-level analysis with Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for clustering by facility and a priori baseline covariates (eg, age, heart failure, and facility-level characteristics), we assessed relative aTIV:TIV effectiveness for hospitalization (ie, all-cause, respiratory, and pneumonia and influenza [P&amp;I]). Results We randomized 823 NHs, housing 50 012 eligible residents, to aTIV or TIV. Residents were similar between groups by age (mean, ~79 years), heart failure, lung disease, and influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptake, except aTIV homes housed fewer Black residents (14.5 vs 18.9%). Staff vaccine uptake was similar (~55%). P&amp;I and all-cause resident hospitalization rates were lower (adjusted HR [aHR], .80 [95% CI, .66–.98; P = .03] and .94 [.89–.99; P = .02], respectively) for aTIV versus TIV, while the respiratory hospitalization rate was similar, in a season where vaccine effectiveness was considered poor. Conclusions aTIV was more effective than TIV in preventing all-cause and P&amp;I hospitalization from NHs during an A/H3N2-predominant season when TIV was relatively ineffective. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02882100. This trial evaluates adjuvanted influenza vaccine (aTIV) and hospitalization using an innovative pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial design in a high-risk nursing home population. aTIV was more effective than standard influenza vaccine in preventing all-cause hospitalization from US nursing homes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-4838</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-6591</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1233</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32882710</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>US: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Adjuvants, Immunologic ; Aged ; Humans ; Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype ; Influenza Vaccines ; Influenza, Human - drug therapy ; Influenza, Human - prevention &amp; control ; Nursing Homes ; Polysorbates ; Squalene</subject><ispartof>Clinical infectious diseases, 2021-12, Vol.73 (11), p.e4237-e4243</ispartof><rights>Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2020. 2020</rights><rights>Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2020.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-cd82b8eb3a58c51f83238a89f324b0aa847c253cef5bd46e713438a4f02747c23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-cd82b8eb3a58c51f83238a89f324b0aa847c253cef5bd46e713438a4f02747c23</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5056-0431</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,1579,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32882710$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>McConeghy, Kevin W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davidson, H Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Canaday, David H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Han, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saade, Elie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mor, Vince</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gravenstein, Stefan</creatorcontrib><title>Cluster-randomized Trial of Adjuvanted Versus Nonadjuvanted Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in 823 US Nursing Homes</title><title>Clinical infectious diseases</title><addtitle>Clin Infect Dis</addtitle><description>Abstract Background Influenza leads in preventable infection-related hospitalization in nursing home (NH) residents. The adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) is more immunogenic than similarly dosed nonadjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV), and observational studies suggest aTIV better prevents hospitalizations in older adults. We prospectively tested this in an NH setting. Methods NHs with ≥50 long-stay residents aged ≥65 years were randomized to offer aTIV or TIV for residents for the 2016–2017 influenza season. Using intent-to-treat resident-level analysis with Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for clustering by facility and a priori baseline covariates (eg, age, heart failure, and facility-level characteristics), we assessed relative aTIV:TIV effectiveness for hospitalization (ie, all-cause, respiratory, and pneumonia and influenza [P&amp;I]). Results We randomized 823 NHs, housing 50 012 eligible residents, to aTIV or TIV. Residents were similar between groups by age (mean, ~79 years), heart failure, lung disease, and influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptake, except aTIV homes housed fewer Black residents (14.5 vs 18.9%). Staff vaccine uptake was similar (~55%). P&amp;I and all-cause resident hospitalization rates were lower (adjusted HR [aHR], .80 [95% CI, .66–.98; P = .03] and .94 [.89–.99; P = .02], respectively) for aTIV versus TIV, while the respiratory hospitalization rate was similar, in a season where vaccine effectiveness was considered poor. Conclusions aTIV was more effective than TIV in preventing all-cause and P&amp;I hospitalization from NHs during an A/H3N2-predominant season when TIV was relatively ineffective. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02882100. This trial evaluates adjuvanted influenza vaccine (aTIV) and hospitalization using an innovative pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial design in a high-risk nursing home population. aTIV was more effective than standard influenza vaccine in preventing all-cause hospitalization from US nursing homes.</description><subject>Adjuvants, Immunologic</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype</subject><subject>Influenza Vaccines</subject><subject>Influenza, Human - drug therapy</subject><subject>Influenza, Human - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Nursing Homes</subject><subject>Polysorbates</subject><subject>Squalene</subject><issn>1058-4838</issn><issn>1537-6591</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1PAjEURRujEUR3rk13unC0n0xZGqJCYnAhsJ10Oh1TMtNiOyWRX28JoDsXL-_lvpO7OABcY_SA0Yg-KlOlkRITSk9AH3OaZ0M-wqfpRlxkTFDRAxchrBDCWCB-DnqUCEFyjPrAjZsYOu0zL23lWrPVFZx7IxvoavhUreJG2i5lS-1DDHDmrPwLE7iRjbYdnNq6idpuJVxKpYzV0FgoCIWLDziLPhj7CSeu1eESnNWyCfrqsAdg8fI8H0-yt_fX6fjpLVN0iLtMVYKUQpdUcqE4rgUlVEgxqilhJZJSsFwRTpWueVmxoc4xZQlgNSL57kUH4G7fu_buK-rQFa0JSjeNtNrFUBDGEMupEHlC7_eo8i4Er-ti7U0r_XeBUbFTXCTFxVFxwm8OzbFsdfULH50m4HYPuLj-v-oH3zuFkQ</recordid><startdate>20211206</startdate><enddate>20211206</enddate><creator>McConeghy, Kevin W</creator><creator>Davidson, H Edward</creator><creator>Canaday, David H</creator><creator>Han, Lisa</creator><creator>Saade, Elie</creator><creator>Mor, Vince</creator><creator>Gravenstein, Stefan</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5056-0431</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20211206</creationdate><title>Cluster-randomized Trial of Adjuvanted Versus Nonadjuvanted Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in 823 US Nursing Homes</title><author>McConeghy, Kevin W ; Davidson, H Edward ; Canaday, David H ; Han, Lisa ; Saade, Elie ; Mor, Vince ; Gravenstein, Stefan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-cd82b8eb3a58c51f83238a89f324b0aa847c253cef5bd46e713438a4f02747c23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Adjuvants, Immunologic</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype</topic><topic>Influenza Vaccines</topic><topic>Influenza, Human - drug therapy</topic><topic>Influenza, Human - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Nursing Homes</topic><topic>Polysorbates</topic><topic>Squalene</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>McConeghy, Kevin W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davidson, H Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Canaday, David H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Han, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saade, Elie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mor, Vince</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gravenstein, Stefan</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical infectious diseases</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>McConeghy, Kevin W</au><au>Davidson, H Edward</au><au>Canaday, David H</au><au>Han, Lisa</au><au>Saade, Elie</au><au>Mor, Vince</au><au>Gravenstein, Stefan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cluster-randomized Trial of Adjuvanted Versus Nonadjuvanted Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in 823 US Nursing Homes</atitle><jtitle>Clinical infectious diseases</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Infect Dis</addtitle><date>2021-12-06</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>73</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>e4237</spage><epage>e4243</epage><pages>e4237-e4243</pages><issn>1058-4838</issn><eissn>1537-6591</eissn><abstract>Abstract Background Influenza leads in preventable infection-related hospitalization in nursing home (NH) residents. The adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) is more immunogenic than similarly dosed nonadjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV), and observational studies suggest aTIV better prevents hospitalizations in older adults. We prospectively tested this in an NH setting. Methods NHs with ≥50 long-stay residents aged ≥65 years were randomized to offer aTIV or TIV for residents for the 2016–2017 influenza season. Using intent-to-treat resident-level analysis with Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for clustering by facility and a priori baseline covariates (eg, age, heart failure, and facility-level characteristics), we assessed relative aTIV:TIV effectiveness for hospitalization (ie, all-cause, respiratory, and pneumonia and influenza [P&amp;I]). Results We randomized 823 NHs, housing 50 012 eligible residents, to aTIV or TIV. Residents were similar between groups by age (mean, ~79 years), heart failure, lung disease, and influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptake, except aTIV homes housed fewer Black residents (14.5 vs 18.9%). Staff vaccine uptake was similar (~55%). P&amp;I and all-cause resident hospitalization rates were lower (adjusted HR [aHR], .80 [95% CI, .66–.98; P = .03] and .94 [.89–.99; P = .02], respectively) for aTIV versus TIV, while the respiratory hospitalization rate was similar, in a season where vaccine effectiveness was considered poor. Conclusions aTIV was more effective than TIV in preventing all-cause and P&amp;I hospitalization from NHs during an A/H3N2-predominant season when TIV was relatively ineffective. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02882100. This trial evaluates adjuvanted influenza vaccine (aTIV) and hospitalization using an innovative pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial design in a high-risk nursing home population. aTIV was more effective than standard influenza vaccine in preventing all-cause hospitalization from US nursing homes.</abstract><cop>US</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>32882710</pmid><doi>10.1093/cid/ciaa1233</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5056-0431</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1058-4838
ispartof Clinical infectious diseases, 2021-12, Vol.73 (11), p.e4237-e4243
issn 1058-4838
1537-6591
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2440473887
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Adjuvants, Immunologic
Aged
Humans
Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype
Influenza Vaccines
Influenza, Human - drug therapy
Influenza, Human - prevention & control
Nursing Homes
Polysorbates
Squalene
title Cluster-randomized Trial of Adjuvanted Versus Nonadjuvanted Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in 823 US Nursing Homes
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T23%3A52%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cluster-randomized%20Trial%20of%20Adjuvanted%20Versus%20Nonadjuvanted%20Trivalent%20Influenza%20Vaccine%20in%20823%20US%20Nursing%20Homes&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20infectious%20diseases&rft.au=McConeghy,%20Kevin%20W&rft.date=2021-12-06&rft.volume=73&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=e4237&rft.epage=e4243&rft.pages=e4237-e4243&rft.issn=1058-4838&rft.eissn=1537-6591&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1233&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2440473887%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2440473887&rft_id=info:pmid/32882710&rft_oup_id=10.1093/cid/ciaa1233&rfr_iscdi=true