Intradermal influenza vaccination of healthy adults using a new microinjection system: a 3-year randomised controlled safety and immunogenicity trial

Abstract

Background: Intradermal vaccination provides direct and potentially more efficient access to the immune system via specialised dendritic cells and draining lymphatic vessels. We investigated the immunogenicity and safety during 3 successive years of different dosages of a trivalent, inactivated, split-virion vaccine against seasonal influenza given intradermally using a microinjection system compared with an intramuscular control vaccine.

Effective and lesion-free cutaneous influenza vaccination

“…The severe local reactions could not be ascribed to poor quality of the vaccine, because ID injection of clinical seasonal influenza vaccine induced comparable local reactions (Fig. 5A, fourth panel), as has been well documented in humans (24,25). In sharp contrast, there were no visible erythema, wheal or other skin reactions occurring at the inoculation site after 15 min of vaccination with MNs in the presence (Fig.…”

Intanza®9 µg intradermal seasonal influenza vaccine for adults 18 to 59 years of age

“…This is similar to the frequency with the IM reference (37% to 48%). [55][56][57] Other injection site reactions, including erythema, swelling, induration and pruritus, also generally mild, were more frequent with Intanza 9 μg than with the IM reference. This is not surprising because the inflammatory process induced by ID vaccination occurs just below the skin surface and therefore can be easily seen and felt, whereas with IM vaccination, the inflammatory process begins deep in the muscle.…”

“…[55][56][57] No treatment-related serious adverse events microneedle that protrudes 1.5 mm from a depthlimiting tip (Fig. 1).…”

“…54 A 3 y phase II trial (NCT00703651) compared the immunogenicity of the TIV administered using the microinjection system or administered IM (i.e., Vaxigrip) in adults 18 to 59 y of age. 55 Subjects received the final version of Intanza 9 μg only during the third year of the study. The third-year results showed that Intanza 9 μg induced a non-inferior immune response compared with the IM reference vaccine and met the CPMP criteria for all three viral strains ( Table 2).…”

Acceptance of intradermal inactivated influenza vaccines among hospital staff following 2 seasonal vaccination campaigns

“…6 Compared with intramuscular formulations, intradermal influenza vaccines induce non-inferior immune responses in healthy adults and are less likely to induce muscle soreness but are more likely to induce injection site irritation (redness, swelling, itching). [6][7][8][9] The objectives of this study were to assess the rates of staff vaccination, determine whether offering a supplemental mobile vaccination cart with a choice of intradermal (ID) or intramuscular (IM) vaccines increased vaccine uptake, and to determine the relative acceptability of ID and IM administration of influenza vaccine for healthcare workers who were unvaccinated after the end of a hospital influenza vaccination campaign.…”