400 likes | 509 Views
Immunogenicity of influenza vaccines in children, healthy adults and the elderly. John Treanor University of Rochester. Assessment of immune responses to influenza vaccine. Humoral immunity Hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI, HI) Neuraminidase-inhibition (NI) Neutralization
E N D
Immunogenicity of influenza vaccines in children, healthy adults and the elderly John Treanor University of Rochester
Assessment of immune responses to influenza vaccine • Humoral immunity • Hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI, HI) • Neuraminidase-inhibition (NI) • Neutralization • Ig ELISA (e.g., HA-specific sIgA) • Cellular immunity • Lymphocyte proliferation • Cytokine production/ELISPOT assays • Cytotoxicity assays/tetramers
Agreement in HAI results Lab A Lab B
Agreement in HAI results Lab A Lab B Lab A = 786/963 (81.6%)
Agreement in HAI results Lab A Lab B Lab B=662/963 (68.7%)
Serum HAI responses to TIV1995-1999 • Healthy adults (mean age = 32 yrs) • Community elderly (mean age = 72 yrs) • Nursing home elderly (mean age = 83 yrs) • Renal transplant recipients (ma = 44 yrs) • Chronic pulmonary disease (ma = 46 yrs) • Toddlers (2 dose) (mean age = 11 mo) • ~ 50 subjects per group (except toddlers)
H3 Antibody Titers 1024 512 128 64 GMT HAI antibody 32 16 8 4 Sera
H1 Antibody Titers 1024 512 128 64 GMT HAI antibody 32 16 8 4 Sera
B Antibody Titers 1024 512 128 64 GMT HAI antibody 32 16 8 4 Sera
Factors affecting the serum HI response to TIV • Year of study/strain • Age of subject (Y>O) • History of prior vaccination (N>Y) • Titer of pre-vaccination antibody (L>H) • Sex (F > M) • Dose (H>L)
Recognition of drift variants by sera following inactivated vaccine Mean ratio of serum HI titer to drift variant/homologous virus
Kinetics of the serum antibody response to inactivated vaccine Brokstad et al JID 171:198-203, 1995
NI response to TIV 32 32 16 16 8 8 4 4 N1 N2 Powers, et. al. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 3:511-516
Factors impacting NA-specific responses • Stability of the NA and content in the vaccine • Mode of presentation • Assay methodology • Host priming/exposure • Age
Antibody responses to live and inactivated vaccines in healthy adults Results in subjects selected for pre HAI < 1:8 22/23 (96) 11/12 (92) 16/17 (94) GMT Serum HAI 9/23 (39) 7/24 (29) 1/10 (10) H1N1 H3N2 B Vaccine 18:899-906, 2000
Antibody responses to live and inactivated vaccines in healthy adults 7/30 (23) 4/28 (14.3) 9/30 (32.1) Nasal sIgA (units/mL) 5/28 (16.7) 5/28 (17.9) 5/30 (16.7) H1N1 H3N2 B Vaccine 18:899-906, 2000
Comparison of post vaccination nasal and serum antibody TIV CAIV
Prechallenge antibody titers and infection Pre-challenge antibody Nasal IgA Serum HAI % > 1000 69 29 55 19 56 0 % > 1:8 38 14 64 6 96 75 Vaccine Group CAIV Placebo TIV Infection No Yes No Yes No Yes n 16 7 12 16 25 4 GMT 1705 736 1323 550 1048 324 GMT 8.4 4.4 18.1 3.4 151.2 22.6
Relationship between antibody and protection • Infection induced serum NI > 1:4 • Nasal wash HA IgA > 1:64 • Nasal wash HA Fab > 1:80 • Inactivated vaccine induced serum HI > 1:32 Clements et al J Clin Micro 24:157, 1986
Serum and nasal antibody in elderly subjects given CAIV 256 128 64 32 16 Nasal KELISA Serum HAI Powers et al J Clin Microbiol 29:498, 1991
Immune responses to combined vaccination Percent responding H1 H3 H1 H3 H1 H3 HAI SERUM IgG NASAL IgA
Relationship between pre-vaccination antibody and protection Intranasal: % with lab confirmed influenza Pre-vaccination serum HAI titer
H3N2 response to CAIV in children 128 64 32 GMT serum HAI antibody 16 8 4 < 4 Bernstein et al Pediatr Infect Dis J 22:28-34, 2003
H1N1 response to CAIV in children 128 64 32 GMT serum HAI antibody 16 8 4 < 4 Bernstein et al Pediatr Infect Dis J 22:28-34, 2003
Pre-challenge antibody and shedding of ca H1N1 virus after challenge No. of subjects with or without CAIV-M shedding following challenge among those who initially received: Pre-challenge antibody status CAIV-T Placebo Test shed no shed shed no shed positive negative positive negative 2 4 1 5 94 41 77 36 0 19 3 16 25 31 20 28 HAI IgA Protective efficacy of CAIV-T against CAIV-M challenge 83% (60%,93%)
Cross-protective antibody response to CAIV in children 128 Wuhan 64 Ann Arbor Sydney 32 Yamanashi Shenzhen GMT HAI antibody 16 Beijing 8 Beijing 4 2 Nolan, et. al. Vaccine 21:1224-1231, 2003
Conclusions • Responses to both TIV and CAIV vary by year for a variety of reasons • In general, TIV generates higher levels of serum ab, CAIV mucosal ab • Serum HI responses to TIV are greatest in young adults, to CAIV are highest in children • Responses in the elderly are often suboptimal • Relatively little is known re NA-specific response • Multiple factors influence the response to TIV and to CAIV
Unresolved issues that might be important for universal vaccination • Should vaccine performance be monitored in a more systematic way? • What strategies should be pursued to improve vaccine performance in the elderly and other groups with poor immune response? • Is a “one size fits all” strategy (type of vaccine, dose, route of administration) compatible with the goal of universal vaccination? • Are vaccines that do not require yearly administration feasible?
Unresolved issues that might be important for universal vaccination • Should the NA content of the vaccine and the NA-specific response to vaccination be monitored more closely? • Can standardized assays of mucosal responses to live vaccine be developed as surrogate endpoints for protection? • Generally, to what extent can improved laboratory assays facilitate the introduction of new influenza vaccines? • What would be the impact of a universal recommendation on new vaccine development?