Antibody persistence after Pandemic H1N1 2009 influenza vaccination among healthcare workers in Pune, India

Tandale, Babasaheb V.; Pawar, Shailesh D.; Gurav, Yogesh K.; Parkhi, Saurabh S.; Mishra, Akhilesh C.

doi:10.4161/hv.22421

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Likewise, after 25 months, we found a similar tendency in both the seroprevalent and seroprotective antibody levels in VLP vaccinated subjects compared with the placebo treated subjects. The SPR values that were found in the VLP recipients were lower (22.8–29.8%), compared with those reported in other egg-produced, non-adjuvanted, pandemic H1N1 vaccines, which, in adults, reached values from 46% up to 68% after 12 months [ 39 , 42 , 49 ]. In the case of adjuvanted vaccines (with MF59 or AS03), the SPR values reported elsewhere ranged from 35% [ 43 ] up to above 70% [ 40 , 44 , 48 ].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 58%

Antibody Persistence in Adults Two Years after Vaccination with an H1N1 2009 Pandemic Influenza Virus-Like Particle Vaccine

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influenza virus is a human pathogen that causes epidemics every year, as well as potential pandemic outbreaks, as occurred in 2009. Vaccination has proven to be sufficient in the prevention and containment of viral spreading. In addition to the current egg-based vaccines, new and promising vaccine platforms, such as cell culture-derived vaccines that include virus-like particles (VLPs), have been developed. VLPs have been shown to be both safe and immunogenic against influenza infections. Although antibody persistence has been studied in traditional egg-based influenza vaccines, studies on antibody response durations induced by VLP influenza vaccines in humans are scarce. Here, we show that subjects vaccinated with an insect cell-derived VLP vaccine, in the midst of the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic outbreak in Mexico City, showed antibody persistence up to 24 months post-vaccination. Additionally, we found that subjects that reported being revaccinated with a subsequent inactivated influenza virus vaccine showed higher antibody titres to the pandemic influenza virus than those who were not revaccinated. These findings provide insights into the duration of the antibody responses elicited by an insect cell-derived pandemic influenza VLP vaccine and the possible effects of subsequent influenza vaccination on antibody persistence induced by this VLP vaccine in humans.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 58%

Antibody Persistence in Adults Two Years after Vaccination with an H1N1 2009 Pandemic Influenza Virus-Like Particle Vaccine

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…16 These numbers, which refer to laboratory-confirmed cases, are likely underestimated. The city of Pune, which suffered high morbidity and mortality, [17][18][19] is incidentally home to a large vaccine manufacturer, Serum Institute of India Ltd. Inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV, injectable administration) and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV, nasal administration) were available for public purchase in Pune during the 2009 pandemic. 20 While IIVs alone are licensed for certain groups (children under 2 years, persons 50 years and above and pregnant women), both types of vaccines are considered efficacious and safe for the larger population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community awareness, use and preference for pandemic influenza vaccines in Pune, India

Sundaram

Purohit

Scheffold

et al. 2015

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vaccination is a cornerstone of influenza prevention, but limited vaccine uptake was a problem worldwide during the 2009–2010 pandemic. Community acceptance of a vaccine is a critical determinant of its effectiveness, but studies have been confined to high-income countries. We conducted a cross-sectional, mixed-method study in urban and rural Pune, India in 2012–2013. Semi-structured explanatory model interviews were administered to community residents (n = 436) to study awareness, experience and preference between available vaccines for pandemic influenza. Focus group discussions and in-depth interviews complemented the survey. Awareness of pandemic influenza vaccines was low (25%). Some respondents did not consider vaccines relevant for adults, but nearly all (94.7%), when asked, believed that a vaccine would prevent swine flu. Reported vaccine uptake however was 8.3%. Main themes identified as reasons for uptake were having heard of a death from swine flu, health care provider recommendation or affiliation with the health system, influence of peers and information from media. Reasons for non-use were low perceived personal risk, problems with access and cost, inadequate information and a perceived lack of a government mandate endorsing influenza vaccines. A majority indicated a preference for injectable over nasal vaccines, especially in remote rural areas. Hesitancy from a lack of confidence in pandemic influenza vaccines appears to have been less of an issue than access, complacency and other sociocultural considerations. Recent influenza outbreaks in 2015 highlight a need to reconsider policy for routine influenza vaccination while paying attention to sociocultural factors and community preferences for effective vaccine action.

show abstract

“… 19 Most studies evaluating pandemic influenza in India have focused on the burden and clinical response. 8 20–24 A few have considered knowledge, attitudes and practices. 25 26 The scope of interest and methods have been limited in their ability to consider and compare the priority of community ideas based on how they are reported and what they mean to respondents.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pune, Maharashtra's second largest city, recorded the first death in the country 7 and was considered a hotspot of the 2009 influenza pandemic in India. 8 9 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural epidemiology of pandemic influenza in urban and rural Pune, India: a cross-sectional, mixed-methods study

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo identify and compare sociocultural features of pandemic influenza with reference to illness-related experience, meaning and behaviour in urban and rural areas of India.DesignCross-sectional, mixed-methods, cultural epidemiological survey with vignette-based interviews. Semistructured explanatory model interviews were used to study community ideas of the 2009 influenza pandemic. In-depth interviews elaborated respondents’ experience during the pandemic.SettingUrban and rural communities, Pune district, western India.ParticipantsSurvey of urban (n=215) and rural (n=221) residents aged between 18 and 65 years. In-depth interviews of respondents with a history of 2009 pandemic influenza (n=6).ResultsMore urban (36.7%) than rural respondents (16.3%, p<0.001) identified the illness in the vignette as ‘swine flu’. Over half (56.7%) believed the illness would be fatal without treatment, but with treatment 96% predicted full recovery. Worry (‘tension’) about the illness was reported as more troubling than somatic symptoms. The most common perceived causes—‘exposure to a dirty environment’ and ‘cough or sneeze of an infected person’–were more prominent in the urban group. Among rural respondents, climatic conditions, drinking contaminated water, tension and cultural ideas on humoral imbalance from heat-producing or cold-producing foods were more prominent. The most widely reported home treatment was herbal remedies; more rural respondents suggested reliance on prayer, and symptom relief was more of a priority for urban respondents. Government health services were preferred in the urban communities, and rural residents relied more than urban residents on private facilities. The important preventive measures emphasised were cleanliness, wholesome lifestyle and vaccines, and more urban respondents reported the use of masks. In-depth interviews indicated treatment delays during the 2009 pandemic, especially among rural patients.ConclusionsAlthough the term was well known, better recognition of pandemic influenza cases is needed, especially in rural areas. Improved awareness, access to treatment and timely referrals by private practitioners are also required to reduce treatment delays.

show abstract

Antibody persistence after Pandemic H1N1 2009 influenza vaccination among healthcare workers in Pune, India

Cited by 4 publications

References 9 publications

Antibody Persistence in Adults Two Years after Vaccination with an H1N1 2009 Pandemic Influenza Virus-Like Particle Vaccine

Antibody Persistence in Adults Two Years after Vaccination with an H1N1 2009 Pandemic Influenza Virus-Like Particle Vaccine

Community awareness, use and preference for pandemic influenza vaccines in Pune, India

Cultural epidemiology of pandemic influenza in urban and rural Pune, India: a cross-sectional, mixed-methods study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About