4.5 Article

Comparative effectiveness of high dose versus adjuvanted influenza vaccine: A retrospective cohort study

期刊

VACCINE
卷 38, 期 2, 页码 372-379

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.09.105

关键词

HD-IIV3; aIIV3; High-dose; Adjuvanted; Influenza vaccine; Comparative effectiveness; Relative vaccine effectiveness; rVE; Previous event rate ratio; PERR; Unmeasured confounding factors; Residual confounding

资金

  1. Sanofi Pasteur, Inc., Swiftwater, PA, USA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Adults 65 years and older (seniors) experience more complications following influenza infection than younger adults. We estimated the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of a trivalent high dose (HD-IIV3) versus an adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aIIV3) in seniors for respiratory-related hospitalizations. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using claims data from Optum's Clinformatics (R) Data Mart to compare outcome rates between seniors who received HD-IIV3 versus aIIV3 during the 2016/17 and 2017/18, predominantly A/H3N2 respiratory seasons. Rates were adjusted for demographic characteristics, comorbid conditions, previous influenza vaccination, and geography. We used the previous event rate ratio (PERR) approach to address bias by time-fixed unmeasured confounders. Results: We identified 842,282 HD-IIV3 and 34,157 aIIV3 recipients for the 2016/17 season and 1,058,638 HD-IIV3 and 189,636 aIIV3 recipients for the 2017/18 season. The pooled rVE of HD-IIV3 versus aIIV3 for respiratory-related hospitalizations over both seasons was 12% (95% confidence interval: 3.3%-20%); 13% (-6.4% to 32%) for the 2016/17 season and 12% (2.1%-21%) for the 2017/18 season. Conclusions: Pooled over two predominantly A/H3N2 respiratory seasons, HD-IIV3 was associated with fewer respiratory hospital admissions than aIIV3 in senior members of large national managed health care company in the U.S. (C) 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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

4.5
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