4.4 Article

Safety of High Dose Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine in Pediatric Patients with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

期刊

PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER
卷 61, 期 5, 页码 815-820

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pbc.24863

关键词

children; influenza; leukemia; trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine

资金

  1. Thrasher Foundation [UL1TR000445]
  2. Sanofi Pasteur
  3. Pfizer
  4. Gilead

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundAlthough children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) mount immune responses after vaccination with the trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV), these responses are lower compared to controls. Recently, a high dose (HD) TIV was found to increase the level of antibody response in elderly patients compared to the standard dose (SD) TIV. We hypothesized that the HD TIV would be well-tolerated and more immunogenic compared to the SD TIV in pediatric subjects with ALL. ProcedureThis was a randomized, double-blind, phase I safety trial comparing the HD to the SD TIV in children with ALL. Our secondary objective was immunogenicity. Subjects were randomized 2:1 to receive either the HD (60 mu g) or the SD (15 mu g) TIV. Local and systemic reactions were solicited, hemagglutinin inhibition titers to influenza virus antigens were measured, and monitoring labs were collected prior to and/or after each vaccination. ResultsFifty subjects were enrolled (34 HD, 16 SD). Mean age was 8.5 years; 63% were male, and 80% were in maintenance therapy. There were no significant differences reported in local or systemic symptoms. No severe adverse events were attributed to vaccination. No significant differences between the HD and SD TIV groups were noted for immune responses. ConclusionsNo differences were noted between the HD and SD TIV groups for solicited systemic and local reactions. Since this study was not powered for immunogenicity, a phase II trial is needed to determine the immunogenicity of HD versus SD TIV in the pediatric ALL population. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2014;61:815-820. (c) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据