Head-to-head comparison of influenza vaccines in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
R��ka Garai, ��goston J��nosi, P��ter Kriv��csy, Vivien Herczeg, Tam��s K��i, Rita Nagy, Marcell Imrei, Andrea P��rniczky, Mikl��s Garami, P��ter Hegyi, Attila J��zsef Szab��
Author Information
R��ka Garai: Pediatric Center, MTA Center of Excellence, Semmelweis University, B��kay Unit, B��kay J��nos Utca 53-54, 1083, Budapest, Hungary. garai.reka@semmelweis.hu. ORCID
��goston J��nosi: Centre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
P��ter Kriv��csy: Pediatric Center, MTA Center of Excellence, Semmelweis University, B��kay Unit, B��kay J��nos Utca 53-54, 1083, Budapest, Hungary.
Vivien Herczeg: Pediatric Center, MTA Center of Excellence, Semmelweis University, B��kay Unit, B��kay J��nos Utca 53-54, 1083, Budapest, Hungary.
Tam��s K��i: Centre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Rita Nagy: Centre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Marcell Imrei: Centre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Andrea P��rniczky: Centre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Mikl��s Garami: Centre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
P��ter Hegyi: Centre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Attila J��zsef Szab��: Pediatric Center, MTA Center of Excellence, Semmelweis University, B��kay Unit, B��kay J��nos Utca 53-54, 1083, Budapest, Hungary.
Although vaccination is considered the most effective weapon against influenza, coverage rates, national vaccination policies, and funding vary largely around the globe. Despite their huge potential for achieving herd immunity, child-focused national vaccination strategies that favor pain-free nasal vaccines are uncommon. CENTRAL, Embase, and MEDLINE were last searched on November 13, 2023. Active-controlled randomized controlled trials comparing the live-attenuated intranasal vaccine with the inactivated intramuscular influenza vaccine in children were included. Event rates of laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection, all-cause mortality, hospitalization, serious adverse events, adverse events, and financial outcomes were extracted based on the PRISMA 2020 Guideline. PROSPERO: CRD42021285412. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the random-effects model when at least three comparable outcomes were available. We found no significant difference between quadrivalent live-attenuated intranasal and trivalent inactivated intramuscular (OR���=���1.48; 95% CI���0.49-4.45) or between trivalent live-attenuated intranasal and inactivated intramuscular vaccines (OR���=���0.77, CI���=���0.44-1.34) regarding their efficacy. However, the subgroup analysis of large, multi-center trials indicated that the trivalent live attenuated intranasal influenza vaccine was superior to the trivalent inactivated intramuscular influenza vaccine (12,154 people, OR���=���0.50, CI���=���0.28-0.88). Only 23 "vaccine-related serious adverse events" were recorded among 17 833 individuals, with no significant difference between methods. The widespread initiation of pediatric national flu vaccination programs prioritizing the live-attenuated intranasal influenza vaccine would be beneficial. Multi-continent, high-quality studies that include children younger than two years old and those living in subtropical and tropical regions are needed to further enhance our understanding.
