4.5 Article

Immunogenicity and safety of Intanza®/IDflu® intradermal influenza vaccine in South Korean adults

Journal

HUMAN VACCINES & IMMUNOTHERAPEUTICS
Volume 9, Issue 9, Pages 1971-1977

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.4161/hv.25295

Keywords

Influenza vaccine; intradermal; intramuscular; immunogenicity; safety

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Intanza((R))/IDflu((R)) (Sanofi Pasteur, Lyon, France) is an intradermal inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine developed as an alternative to intramuscular influenza vaccine. The objective of this study was to confirm the immunogenicity and safety of Intanza/IDflu in South Korean adults. In a phase IV multicenter trial, South Korean adults 18-59 y old (n = 120) and 60 y old (n = 120) were randomized 1:1 to receive a single dose of Intanza/IDflu (9 mu g for 18-59 y, 15 mu g for 60 y) or trivalent intramuscular vaccine (Vaxigrip((R)) 15 mu g, Sanofi Pasteur, Lyon, France). Blood was collected on pre-vaccination (day 0) and on day 21. Hemagglutination inhibition titers, seroprotection rates and seroconversion rates were determined on day 21. Geometric mean titers, seroprotection and seroconversion rates were similar between the intradermal and intramuscular vaccines in both age groups for all three vaccine strains (A/H1N1, A/H3N2 and B). Both vaccines met Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use criteria for all three strains. Solicited systemic reactions of the intradermal groups were generally mild, transient, and similar to those of the intramuscular groups. Solicited injection site reactions were more frequent in the intradermal groups but were mostly mild, transient, and consisted mainly of pain, erythema, and pruritus. No treatment-related serious adverse events or other safety concerns were reported. These results confirm that Intanza/IDflu is an effective and well-tolerated alternative to IM influenza vaccination. (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT ID: NCT01215669)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available