I-MOVE multicentre case–control study 2010/11 to 2014/15 : is there within-season waning of influenza type/subtype vaccine effectiveness with increasing time since vaccination?

Influenza vaccines are currently the best method available to prevent seasonal influenza infection. In most European countries one dose (or two doses for children) of seasonal vaccine is given from September to December to the elderly and other target groups for vaccination. In Europe, influenza seasons can last until mid-May (1), and it is expected that vaccination conveys protection on the individual for the duration of the season. In 13/15 reviewed studies on the length of vaccine-induced protection among the elderly, using anti-haemagglutination antibody titres as a proxy for seroprotection levels, seroprotection rates lasted at least >4 months after vaccination (2). However in the 2011-12 influenza season various studies in Europe reported a decrease in influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against A(H3N2) over time within the season (3–5). In the United States, a decrease in VE against A(H3N2) with time since vaccination was suggested in the 2007-8 influenza season (6). The observed decrease of VE over time can be explained by viral change (notably antigenic drift) occurring in the season. Drift in B viruses may be slower than in A viruses (7), and A(H3N2) viruses undergo antigenic drift more frequently than A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses (8). The decrease of VE over time can also be explained by a waning of the immunity conferred by the vaccine independently from viral changes. If vaccine-induced protection wanes more rapidly during the season, then depending on the start and duration of the influenza season, the decline of VE may cause increases in overall incidence, hospitalisations and deaths. Changes to vaccination strategies (timing and boosters) may be needed. As anti-haemagglutination antibody titres are not well defined as a correlate of protection (9,10), vaccine efficacy (as measured in trials) or vaccine effectiveness observational studies may be one way to measure vaccine-induced protection. These studies require a large sample size to model VE by time since vaccination and currently, most of the seasonal observational studies lack the precision required to provide evidence for waning immunity. In this study we pooled data across five post-pandemic seasons (2010/11-2014/15) from the I-MOVE (Influenza - Monitoring Vaccine Effectiveness) multicentre case control studies (1,3,11,12), to obtain a greater sample size to study the effects of time since vaccination on influenza type/subtype-specific VE. We measure influenza type/subtype-specific VE by time since vaccination for the overall season, but also in the early influenza phase; under the hypothesis that virological changes are fewer in the early season, but waning of the vaccine effect should be present regardless of time within the influenza phase

Command Z : Artists Working with Phenomena and Technology

"Command Z presents works by North American artists who have been pioneers in the area of art and technology. Pieces by Paul DeMarinis, Nina Katchadourian, Ingrid Bachmann, and team Emile Morin and Jocelyn Robert feature a wide range of technological formats including kinetics, computer programming and Morse code." -- Distributor's website

2015/16 I-MOVE/I-MOVE+ multicentre case-control study in Europe: Moderate vaccine effectiveness estimates against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and low estimates against lineage-mismatched influenza B among children

BACKGROUND: During the 2015/16 influenza season in Europe, the cocirculating influenza viruses were A(H1N1)pdm09 and B/Victoria, which was antigenically distinct from the B/Yamagata component in the trivalent influenza vaccine. METHODS: We used the test-negative design in a multicentre case-control study in twelve European countries to measure 2015/16 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. General practitioners swabbed a systematic sample of consulting ILI patients and a random sample of influenza-positive swabs was sequenced. We calculated adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic group 6B.1 and influenza B overall and by age group. RESULTS: We included 11 430 ILI patients, of which 2272 were influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and 2901 were influenza B cases. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 32.9% (95% CI: 15.5-46.7). Among those aged 0-14, 15-64 and ≥65 years, VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 31.9% (95% CI: -32.3 to 65.0), 41.4% (95% CI: 20.5-56.7) and 13.2% (95% CI: -38.0 to 45.3), respectively. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic group 6B.1 was 32.8% (95% CI: -4.1 to 56.7). Among those aged 0-14, 15-64 and ≥65 years, VE against influenza B was -47.6% (95% CI: -124.9 to 3.1), 27.3% (95% CI: -4.6 to 49.4) and 9.3% (95% CI: -44.1 to 42.9), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and its genetic group 6B.1 was moderate in children and adults, and low among individuals ≥65 years. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza B was low and heterogeneous among age groups. More information on effects of previous vaccination and previous infection is needed to understand the VE results against influenza B in the context of a mismatched vaccine.ECDC has contributed fund for the coordination and some study sites under the Framework contract no. ECDC/2014/026 for the individuals aged less than 65 years. The I‐MOVE/I‐MOVE+ study team is very grateful to all patients, general practitioners, paediatricians, hospital teams, laboratory teams and regional epidemiologists who have contributed to the study. We acknowledge the authors, originating and submitting laboratories of the sequences from GISAID's EpiFlu Database used for this study. All submitters of data may be contacted directly via the GISAID website http://www.gisaid.org.S

Exploring the effect of previous inactivated influenza vaccination on seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness against medically attended influenza: Results of the European I-MOVE multicentre test-negative case-control study, 2011/2012-2016/2017

BACKGROUND: Results of previous influenza vaccination effects on current season influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) are inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: To explore previous influenza vaccination effects on current season VE among population targeted for vaccination. METHODS: We used 2011/2012 to 2016/2017 I-MOVE primary care multicentre test-negative data. For each season, we compared current season adjusted VE (aVE) between individuals vaccinated and unvaccinated in previous season. Using unvaccinated in both seasons as a reference, we then compared aVE between vaccinated in both seasons, current only, and previous only. RESULTS: We included 941, 2645 and 959 influenza-like illness patients positive for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B, respectively, and 5532 controls. In 2011/2012, 2014/2015 and 2016/2017, A(H3N2) aVE point estimates among those vaccinated in previous season were -68%, -21% and -19%, respectively; among unvaccinated in previous season, these were 33%, 48% and 46%, respectively (aVE not computable for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B). Compared to current season vaccination only, VE for both seasons' vaccination was (i) similar in two of four seasons for A(H3N2) (absolute difference [ad] 6% and 8%); (ii) lower in three of four seasons for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (ad 18%, 26% and 29%), in two seasons for influenza A(H3N2) (ad 27% and 39%) and in two of three seasons for influenza B (ad 26% and 37%); (iii) higher in one season for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (ad 20%) and influenza B (ad 24%). CONCLUSIONS: We did not identify any pattern of previous influenza vaccination effect. Prospective cohort studies documenting influenza infections, vaccinations and vaccine types are needed to understand previous influenza vaccinations' effects.S

2015/16 I-MOVE/I-MOVE+ multicentre case-control study in Europe: Moderate vaccine effectiveness estimates against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and low estimates against lineage-mismatched influenza B among children

Background: During the 2015/16 influenza season in Europe, the cocirculating influenza viruses were A(H1N1)pdm09 and B/Victoria, which was antigenically distinct from the B/Yamagata component in the trivalent influenza vaccine. Methods: We used the test-negative design in a multicentre case-control study in twelve European countries to measure 2015/16 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. General practitioners swabbed a systematic sample of consulting ILI patients and a random sample of influenza-positive swabs was sequenced. We calculated adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic group 6B.1 and influenza B overall and by age group. Results: We included 11 430 ILI patients, of which 2272 were influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and 2901 were influenza B cases. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 32.9% (95% CI: 15.5-46.7). Among those aged 0-14, 15-64 and ≥65 years, VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 31.9% (95% CI: −32.3 to 65.0), 41.4% (95% CI: 20.5-56.7) and 13.2% (95% CI: −38.0 to 45.3), respectively. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic group 6B.1 was 32.8% (95% CI: −4.1 to 56.7). Among those aged 0-14, 15-64 and ≥65 years, VE against influenza B was −47.6% (95% CI: −124.9 to 3.1), 27.3% (95% CI: −4.6 to 49.4) and 9.3% (95% CI: −44.1 to 42.9), respectively. Conclusions: Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and its genetic group 6B.1 was moderate in children and adults, and low among individuals ≥65 years. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza B was low and heterogeneous among age groups. More information on effects of previous vaccination and previous infection is needed to understand the VE results against influenza B in the context of a mismatched vaccine

Virtual Seminar on the Bioapparatus

Includes a text based on transcripts of proceedings of a seminar on the "bioapparatus," conceived as the focus of issues concerning technology and the body. Statements by 20 artists and writers treat such topics as natural artifice, designing the social, virtual reality, art machines, and aural/visual space. Biographical notes on the participants