Pediatrics

ID Week, the annual meeting of the Infectious Disease Society of America, provided valuable insights into past season’s endemic influenza burden and the effectiveness of prevention strategies. Each year, there are from 9million to 49 million influenza cases in the United States, 140,000-960,000 hospitalized cases, and 12,000-70,000 deaths directly attributable to influenza infection. The burden disproportionately falls on infants and adults 65 years of age and older; 11,000-48,000 children are hospitalized, and as many as several hundred children may die from influenza and related complications. School age children (aged 5-19 years) and adults (aged 30-39 years) are a major part of the transmission cycle. Influenza vaccine underlies the prevention strategy for limiting the burden of disease in U.S. populations. ID Week provided new insights into critical questions about influenza vaccines.

spukkato/Getty Images

1. What is the effectiveness of influenza vaccine against severe disease (hospitalization) in children? Does it vary by age? By type or subtype?

Angela P. Campbell, MD, MPH, of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and associates presented data on influenza vaccine effectiveness from the New Vaccine Surveillance Network in children for the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 season (ID Week session 99; Abstract 899). During both 2016-2017 and 2017-2018, H3N2 was the dominant virus and influenza B represented about one-third of cases, and H1N1 was a greater percentage of cases in 2017-2018. Influenza positivity among children younger than 18 years of age admitted to hospital with respiratory disease was 14% among unvaccinated and 8% among vaccinated children; effectiveness again hospitalization was 50%. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was not statistically different between children younger than 8 years of age and those older that 8 years but did differ by vaccine type. VE was 76% against H1N1 disease, 59% again B disease, and only 33% against H3N2 disease.

Clearly, vaccination with influenza vaccine prevents serious respiratory disease. However, the impact of vaccine will vary by season and by which influenza stains are circulating in the community. The authors concluded that further understanding of the lower VE against H3N2 disease is needed.

2. Does the priming dose of influenza vaccine improve vaccine effectiveness?

Current recommendations call for a two-dose series for influenza vaccine in children aged 6 months through 8 years who have not had prior influenza vaccine. The recommendation is based on evidence demonstrating higher antibody responses in children receiving two doses, compared with a single dose. Using data from the U.S. Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network, Jessie R. Chung, MPH, of the CDC, and associates compared VE in children younger than 2 years receiving two doses in the first year of flu immunization (fully immunized), compared with those who received only one dose (partially immunized) (ID Week session 99; Abstract 900). VE was 53% for fully immunized and 23% for partially immunized children. Receipt of a single dose did not provide statistically significant protection against influenza. Surprisingly (to me), of 5,355 children aged 6 months to less than 2 years with no prior influenza vaccine, 1,870 (35%) received only one dose in the season.

The data strongly support the current recommendations for a priming dose, especially in young children, in the first season of influenza vaccine and warrants increased efforts to increase the update of second doses during the season. Hopefully we can do better in 2019!

3. Should we wait to vaccinate with influenza vaccine?

Some evidence suggests that waning immunity to influenza vaccine, primarily in those aged 65 years and older, may explain increased disease activity toward the end of influenza season. Other explanations include increasing viral diversity throughout the season, resulting in reduced effectiveness. Do such concerns warrant delaying immunization? The onset and peak of influenza season varies by year; in October 2019, 3% of tests performed on patients with respiratory illness were influenza positive. The trade-offs for delaying immunization until October are the unpredictability of onset of influenza season, the requirement for two doses in infants, the need for 2 weeks to achieve peak antibody concentrations, and the potential that fewer individuals will be vaccinated. Kathy Neuzil, MD, MPH, from the Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, reviewed recent modeling (for adults aged 65 years and older) and reported that delaying vaccine programs until October is associated with greater burden of hospitalization if 14% fewer individuals (who would be vaccinated in August/September) are vaccinated (ID Week; Session 940).

In response to these concerns, the CDC recommendations for 2019 are that, in children aged 6 months through 8 years who need two doses, start early so that you can achieve both doses before influenza season (MMWR 2019 Aug 23;68[3]:1-21).In older children and adults, who need only a single dose, early vaccination (August and early September) may lead to reduced protection late in the influenza season?

4. How can we optimize vaccine impact?

Vaccine impact refers to the affect on a population level and not at an individual level. Meagan C. Fitzpatrick, PhD, from the Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, evaluated the benefits of our moderately effective influenza vaccines (VE 40%-60%) to the population beyond those who are vaccinated. Her conclusions were that even a modestly effective vaccine prevents 21 million cases of influenza, 129,000 hospitalizations, and 62,000 deaths. And that two-thirds of the deaths prevented are from herd benefit (or indirect effects). Although both coverage and vaccine effectiveness are important, she reported that population impact was most sensitive to coverage, compared with vaccine effectiveness. Dr. Fitzpatrick found that targeting school-age children 6-19 years of age and adults 30-39 years of age maximizes the public health benefits (herd effects) of influenza vaccine. In 2018 season, influenza coverage was 63% for at least one dose in children aged 6 months through 17 years and 45% in adults aged 18 years and older; in the two target age groups 5-17 and 30-39 years, coverage was 59% and approximately 35%, respectively (ID Week; Session 939).

Clearly, even our modestly effective influenza vaccines have significant public health benefit in protecting the U.S. populations from serious disease and death. Efforts to increase vaccine uptake in school-age children, both those with and without comorbidity, and the 30- to 39-year-old adult cohort would likely further reduce the burden of serious disease from influenza.

In summary, despite a vaccine that is only moderately effective, there is clear evidence to support current recommendations of universal immunization beginning at 6 months of age. Optimizing the impact of the flu vaccine requires increasing coverage, including two doses for those less than 8 years of age being immunized for the first time. Delaying until October 1 is a good idea only if the same number of individuals will receive influenza vaccine, otherwise the hypothetical benefit is lost.
 

Dr. Pelton is professor of pediatrics and epidemiology at Boston University schools of medicine and public health and is senior attending physician, Boston Medical Center. Dr. Pelton has investigator-initiated research awards to Boston Medical Center from Pfizer and Merck Vaccines. He also received honorarium as an advisory board member, participation in symposium and consultation from Seqirus and Merck Vaccine, Pfizer, and Sanofi Pasteur. Email him at [email protected].

ID Week, the annual meeting of the Infectious Disease Society of America, provided valuable insights into past season’s endemic influenza burden and the effectiveness of prevention strategies. Each year, there are from 9million to 49 million influenza cases in the United States, 140,000-960,000 hospitalized cases, and 12,000-70,000 deaths directly attributable to influenza infection. The burden disproportionately falls on infants and adults 65 years of age and older; 11,000-48,000 children are hospitalized, and as many as several hundred children may die from influenza and related complications. School age children (aged 5-19 years) and adults (aged 30-39 years) are a major part of the transmission cycle. Influenza vaccine underlies the prevention strategy for limiting the burden of disease in U.S. populations. ID Week provided new insights into critical questions about influenza vaccines.

spukkato/Getty Images

1. What is the effectiveness of influenza vaccine against severe disease (hospitalization) in children? Does it vary by age? By type or subtype?

Angela P. Campbell, MD, MPH, of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and associates presented data on influenza vaccine effectiveness from the New Vaccine Surveillance Network in children for the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 season (ID Week session 99; Abstract 899). During both 2016-2017 and 2017-2018, H3N2 was the dominant virus and influenza B represented about one-third of cases, and H1N1 was a greater percentage of cases in 2017-2018. Influenza positivity among children younger than 18 years of age admitted to hospital with respiratory disease was 14% among unvaccinated and 8% among vaccinated children; effectiveness again hospitalization was 50%. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was not statistically different between children younger than 8 years of age and those older that 8 years but did differ by vaccine type. VE was 76% against H1N1 disease, 59% again B disease, and only 33% against H3N2 disease.

Clearly, vaccination with influenza vaccine prevents serious respiratory disease. However, the impact of vaccine will vary by season and by which influenza stains are circulating in the community. The authors concluded that further understanding of the lower VE against H3N2 disease is needed.

2. Does the priming dose of influenza vaccine improve vaccine effectiveness?

Current recommendations call for a two-dose series for influenza vaccine in children aged 6 months through 8 years who have not had prior influenza vaccine. The recommendation is based on evidence demonstrating higher antibody responses in children receiving two doses, compared with a single dose. Using data from the U.S. Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network, Jessie R. Chung, MPH, of the CDC, and associates compared VE in children younger than 2 years receiving two doses in the first year of flu immunization (fully immunized), compared with those who received only one dose (partially immunized) (ID Week session 99; Abstract 900). VE was 53% for fully immunized and 23% for partially immunized children. Receipt of a single dose did not provide statistically significant protection against influenza. Surprisingly (to me), of 5,355 children aged 6 months to less than 2 years with no prior influenza vaccine, 1,870 (35%) received only one dose in the season.

The data strongly support the current recommendations for a priming dose, especially in young children, in the first season of influenza vaccine and warrants increased efforts to increase the update of second doses during the season. Hopefully we can do better in 2019!

3. Should we wait to vaccinate with influenza vaccine?

Some evidence suggests that waning immunity to influenza vaccine, primarily in those aged 65 years and older, may explain increased disease activity toward the end of influenza season. Other explanations include increasing viral diversity throughout the season, resulting in reduced effectiveness. Do such concerns warrant delaying immunization? The onset and peak of influenza season varies by year; in October 2019, 3% of tests performed on patients with respiratory illness were influenza positive. The trade-offs for delaying immunization until October are the unpredictability of onset of influenza season, the requirement for two doses in infants, the need for 2 weeks to achieve peak antibody concentrations, and the potential that fewer individuals will be vaccinated. Kathy Neuzil, MD, MPH, from the Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, reviewed recent modeling (for adults aged 65 years and older) and reported that delaying vaccine programs until October is associated with greater burden of hospitalization if 14% fewer individuals (who would be vaccinated in August/September) are vaccinated (ID Week; Session 940).

In response to these concerns, the CDC recommendations for 2019 are that, in children aged 6 months through 8 years who need two doses, start early so that you can achieve both doses before influenza season (MMWR 2019 Aug 23;68[3]:1-21).In older children and adults, who need only a single dose, early vaccination (August and early September) may lead to reduced protection late in the influenza season?

4. How can we optimize vaccine impact?

Vaccine impact refers to the affect on a population level and not at an individual level. Meagan C. Fitzpatrick, PhD, from the Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, evaluated the benefits of our moderately effective influenza vaccines (VE 40%-60%) to the population beyond those who are vaccinated. Her conclusions were that even a modestly effective vaccine prevents 21 million cases of influenza, 129,000 hospitalizations, and 62,000 deaths. And that two-thirds of the deaths prevented are from herd benefit (or indirect effects). Although both coverage and vaccine effectiveness are important, she reported that population impact was most sensitive to coverage, compared with vaccine effectiveness. Dr. Fitzpatrick found that targeting school-age children 6-19 years of age and adults 30-39 years of age maximizes the public health benefits (herd effects) of influenza vaccine. In 2018 season, influenza coverage was 63% for at least one dose in children aged 6 months through 17 years and 45% in adults aged 18 years and older; in the two target age groups 5-17 and 30-39 years, coverage was 59% and approximately 35%, respectively (ID Week; Session 939).

Clearly, even our modestly effective influenza vaccines have significant public health benefit in protecting the U.S. populations from serious disease and death. Efforts to increase vaccine uptake in school-age children, both those with and without comorbidity, and the 30- to 39-year-old adult cohort would likely further reduce the burden of serious disease from influenza.

In summary, despite a vaccine that is only moderately effective, there is clear evidence to support current recommendations of universal immunization beginning at 6 months of age. Optimizing the impact of the flu vaccine requires increasing coverage, including two doses for those less than 8 years of age being immunized for the first time. Delaying until October 1 is a good idea only if the same number of individuals will receive influenza vaccine, otherwise the hypothetical benefit is lost.
 

Dr. Pelton is professor of pediatrics and epidemiology at Boston University schools of medicine and public health and is senior attending physician, Boston Medical Center. Dr. Pelton has investigator-initiated research awards to Boston Medical Center from Pfizer and Merck Vaccines. He also received honorarium as an advisory board member, participation in symposium and consultation from Seqirus and Merck Vaccine, Pfizer, and Sanofi Pasteur. Email him at [email protected].

ID Week, the annual meeting of the Infectious Disease Society of America, provided valuable insights into past season’s endemic influenza burden and the effectiveness of prevention strategies. Each year, there are from 9million to 49 million influenza cases in the United States, 140,000-960,000 hospitalized cases, and 12,000-70,000 deaths directly attributable to influenza infection. The burden disproportionately falls on infants and adults 65 years of age and older; 11,000-48,000 children are hospitalized, and as many as several hundred children may die from influenza and related complications. School age children (aged 5-19 years) and adults (aged 30-39 years) are a major part of the transmission cycle. Influenza vaccine underlies the prevention strategy for limiting the burden of disease in U.S. populations. ID Week provided new insights into critical questions about influenza vaccines.

spukkato/Getty Images

1. What is the effectiveness of influenza vaccine against severe disease (hospitalization) in children? Does it vary by age? By type or subtype?

Angela P. Campbell, MD, MPH, of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and associates presented data on influenza vaccine effectiveness from the New Vaccine Surveillance Network in children for the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 season (ID Week session 99; Abstract 899). During both 2016-2017 and 2017-2018, H3N2 was the dominant virus and influenza B represented about one-third of cases, and H1N1 was a greater percentage of cases in 2017-2018. Influenza positivity among children younger than 18 years of age admitted to hospital with respiratory disease was 14% among unvaccinated and 8% among vaccinated children; effectiveness again hospitalization was 50%. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was not statistically different between children younger than 8 years of age and those older that 8 years but did differ by vaccine type. VE was 76% against H1N1 disease, 59% again B disease, and only 33% against H3N2 disease.

Clearly, vaccination with influenza vaccine prevents serious respiratory disease. However, the impact of vaccine will vary by season and by which influenza stains are circulating in the community. The authors concluded that further understanding of the lower VE against H3N2 disease is needed.

2. Does the priming dose of influenza vaccine improve vaccine effectiveness?

Current recommendations call for a two-dose series for influenza vaccine in children aged 6 months through 8 years who have not had prior influenza vaccine. The recommendation is based on evidence demonstrating higher antibody responses in children receiving two doses, compared with a single dose. Using data from the U.S. Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network, Jessie R. Chung, MPH, of the CDC, and associates compared VE in children younger than 2 years receiving two doses in the first year of flu immunization (fully immunized), compared with those who received only one dose (partially immunized) (ID Week session 99; Abstract 900). VE was 53% for fully immunized and 23% for partially immunized children. Receipt of a single dose did not provide statistically significant protection against influenza. Surprisingly (to me), of 5,355 children aged 6 months to less than 2 years with no prior influenza vaccine, 1,870 (35%) received only one dose in the season.

The data strongly support the current recommendations for a priming dose, especially in young children, in the first season of influenza vaccine and warrants increased efforts to increase the update of second doses during the season. Hopefully we can do better in 2019!

3. Should we wait to vaccinate with influenza vaccine?

Some evidence suggests that waning immunity to influenza vaccine, primarily in those aged 65 years and older, may explain increased disease activity toward the end of influenza season. Other explanations include increasing viral diversity throughout the season, resulting in reduced effectiveness. Do such concerns warrant delaying immunization? The onset and peak of influenza season varies by year; in October 2019, 3% of tests performed on patients with respiratory illness were influenza positive. The trade-offs for delaying immunization until October are the unpredictability of onset of influenza season, the requirement for two doses in infants, the need for 2 weeks to achieve peak antibody concentrations, and the potential that fewer individuals will be vaccinated. Kathy Neuzil, MD, MPH, from the Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, reviewed recent modeling (for adults aged 65 years and older) and reported that delaying vaccine programs until October is associated with greater burden of hospitalization if 14% fewer individuals (who would be vaccinated in August/September) are vaccinated (ID Week; Session 940).

In response to these concerns, the CDC recommendations for 2019 are that, in children aged 6 months through 8 years who need two doses, start early so that you can achieve both doses before influenza season (MMWR 2019 Aug 23;68[3]:1-21).In older children and adults, who need only a single dose, early vaccination (August and early September) may lead to reduced protection late in the influenza season?

4. How can we optimize vaccine impact?

Vaccine impact refers to the affect on a population level and not at an individual level. Meagan C. Fitzpatrick, PhD, from the Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, evaluated the benefits of our moderately effective influenza vaccines (VE 40%-60%) to the population beyond those who are vaccinated. Her conclusions were that even a modestly effective vaccine prevents 21 million cases of influenza, 129,000 hospitalizations, and 62,000 deaths. And that two-thirds of the deaths prevented are from herd benefit (or indirect effects). Although both coverage and vaccine effectiveness are important, she reported that population impact was most sensitive to coverage, compared with vaccine effectiveness. Dr. Fitzpatrick found that targeting school-age children 6-19 years of age and adults 30-39 years of age maximizes the public health benefits (herd effects) of influenza vaccine. In 2018 season, influenza coverage was 63% for at least one dose in children aged 6 months through 17 years and 45% in adults aged 18 years and older; in the two target age groups 5-17 and 30-39 years, coverage was 59% and approximately 35%, respectively (ID Week; Session 939).

Clearly, even our modestly effective influenza vaccines have significant public health benefit in protecting the U.S. populations from serious disease and death. Efforts to increase vaccine uptake in school-age children, both those with and without comorbidity, and the 30- to 39-year-old adult cohort would likely further reduce the burden of serious disease from influenza.

In summary, despite a vaccine that is only moderately effective, there is clear evidence to support current recommendations of universal immunization beginning at 6 months of age. Optimizing the impact of the flu vaccine requires increasing coverage, including two doses for those less than 8 years of age being immunized for the first time. Delaying until October 1 is a good idea only if the same number of individuals will receive influenza vaccine, otherwise the hypothetical benefit is lost.
 

Dr. Pelton is professor of pediatrics and epidemiology at Boston University schools of medicine and public health and is senior attending physician, Boston Medical Center. Dr. Pelton has investigator-initiated research awards to Boston Medical Center from Pfizer and Merck Vaccines. He also received honorarium as an advisory board member, participation in symposium and consultation from Seqirus and Merck Vaccine, Pfizer, and Sanofi Pasteur. Email him at [email protected].

ST. LOUIS – Children who have background EEG asymmetry while on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) have worse outcomes even after adjustment for recent cardiac arrest and EEG suppression, according to a review of 41 children treated at Washington University, St. Louis.

ECMO is a last-ditch heart/lung bypass for patients near death, be it from infection, trauma, cardiac abnormalities, or any other issue. Children can be on it for days or weeks while problems are addressed and the body attempts to recover. Sometimes ECMO works, and children make a remarkable recovery, but other times they die or are left with severe disabilities, and no one really knows why.

Because of this, the investigators in this review sought to identify predictors of poor outcomes with an eye toward identifying modifiable risk factors, said senior investigator Kristin Guilliams, MD, an assistant professor of pediatric critical care medicine.

“We are trying to figure out why some kids do fantastically, and others don’t. We were looking at whether EEG can give us any clues and new ways to think about modifiable risk factors so that every kid rescued by ECMO can go back to their normal life,” she said at the American Neurological Association annual meeting.

The 41 children had an EEG within a day or 2 of starting ECMO; 22 did well, but 19 had bad outcomes, defined in the study as either dying in the hospital or being discharged with a Functional Status Score above 12, meaning mild dysfunction across six domains or more severe disability in particular ones.

The finding that all four children with EEG suppression – overall low brain activity – did poorly was not surprising, but the fact that EEG background asymmetry – one side of the brain being much less active than the other or giving different signals – in five children predicted poor outcomes, even after adjustment for cardiac arrest and overall suppression, was “a big surprise,” Dr. Guilliams said (odds ratio, 29.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-398.3; P = .003).

“The asymmetry tells me that we need to look more closely into brain blood flow patterns on ECMO,” she said. There might be a way to change delivery that could help, but “it’s not obvious right now.” The issue warrants further investigation, Dr. Guilliams said.

Twelve children had ECMO during chest compressions for cardiac arrest, which as expected, also predicted poor outcomes (OR, 9.5; 95% CI 1.6-58.2; P = .008).

Neuroimaging was available for 34 children. Abnormalities (n = 13; P = .2), including ischemia (n = 8; P = .1), hemorrhage (n = 8; P = .06), and seizures (n = 4; P = .2) did not predict poor outcomes, nor did sex, age, and mode of ECMO delivery (veno-arterial versus veno-venous).

As of about a year ago, EEGs at the university are now standard for children on ECMO, with special software to pick out asymmetries. “We are paying more attention to” EEGs, Dr. Guilliams said.

Children were a median of about 10 years old, and subjects were at least 1 year old. There were about equal numbers of boys and girls; 25 children were alive at discharge.

There was no external funding, and Dr. Guilliams didn’t have any disclosures.
 

[email protected]

ST. LOUIS – Children who have background EEG asymmetry while on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) have worse outcomes even after adjustment for recent cardiac arrest and EEG suppression, according to a review of 41 children treated at Washington University, St. Louis.

ECMO is a last-ditch heart/lung bypass for patients near death, be it from infection, trauma, cardiac abnormalities, or any other issue. Children can be on it for days or weeks while problems are addressed and the body attempts to recover. Sometimes ECMO works, and children make a remarkable recovery, but other times they die or are left with severe disabilities, and no one really knows why.

Because of this, the investigators in this review sought to identify predictors of poor outcomes with an eye toward identifying modifiable risk factors, said senior investigator Kristin Guilliams, MD, an assistant professor of pediatric critical care medicine.

“We are trying to figure out why some kids do fantastically, and others don’t. We were looking at whether EEG can give us any clues and new ways to think about modifiable risk factors so that every kid rescued by ECMO can go back to their normal life,” she said at the American Neurological Association annual meeting.

The 41 children had an EEG within a day or 2 of starting ECMO; 22 did well, but 19 had bad outcomes, defined in the study as either dying in the hospital or being discharged with a Functional Status Score above 12, meaning mild dysfunction across six domains or more severe disability in particular ones.

The finding that all four children with EEG suppression – overall low brain activity – did poorly was not surprising, but the fact that EEG background asymmetry – one side of the brain being much less active than the other or giving different signals – in five children predicted poor outcomes, even after adjustment for cardiac arrest and overall suppression, was “a big surprise,” Dr. Guilliams said (odds ratio, 29.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-398.3; P = .003).

“The asymmetry tells me that we need to look more closely into brain blood flow patterns on ECMO,” she said. There might be a way to change delivery that could help, but “it’s not obvious right now.” The issue warrants further investigation, Dr. Guilliams said.

Twelve children had ECMO during chest compressions for cardiac arrest, which as expected, also predicted poor outcomes (OR, 9.5; 95% CI 1.6-58.2; P = .008).

Neuroimaging was available for 34 children. Abnormalities (n = 13; P = .2), including ischemia (n = 8; P = .1), hemorrhage (n = 8; P = .06), and seizures (n = 4; P = .2) did not predict poor outcomes, nor did sex, age, and mode of ECMO delivery (veno-arterial versus veno-venous).

As of about a year ago, EEGs at the university are now standard for children on ECMO, with special software to pick out asymmetries. “We are paying more attention to” EEGs, Dr. Guilliams said.

Children were a median of about 10 years old, and subjects were at least 1 year old. There were about equal numbers of boys and girls; 25 children were alive at discharge.

There was no external funding, and Dr. Guilliams didn’t have any disclosures.
 

[email protected]

ST. LOUIS – Children who have background EEG asymmetry while on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) have worse outcomes even after adjustment for recent cardiac arrest and EEG suppression, according to a review of 41 children treated at Washington University, St. Louis.

ECMO is a last-ditch heart/lung bypass for patients near death, be it from infection, trauma, cardiac abnormalities, or any other issue. Children can be on it for days or weeks while problems are addressed and the body attempts to recover. Sometimes ECMO works, and children make a remarkable recovery, but other times they die or are left with severe disabilities, and no one really knows why.

Because of this, the investigators in this review sought to identify predictors of poor outcomes with an eye toward identifying modifiable risk factors, said senior investigator Kristin Guilliams, MD, an assistant professor of pediatric critical care medicine.

“We are trying to figure out why some kids do fantastically, and others don’t. We were looking at whether EEG can give us any clues and new ways to think about modifiable risk factors so that every kid rescued by ECMO can go back to their normal life,” she said at the American Neurological Association annual meeting.

The 41 children had an EEG within a day or 2 of starting ECMO; 22 did well, but 19 had bad outcomes, defined in the study as either dying in the hospital or being discharged with a Functional Status Score above 12, meaning mild dysfunction across six domains or more severe disability in particular ones.

The finding that all four children with EEG suppression – overall low brain activity – did poorly was not surprising, but the fact that EEG background asymmetry – one side of the brain being much less active than the other or giving different signals – in five children predicted poor outcomes, even after adjustment for cardiac arrest and overall suppression, was “a big surprise,” Dr. Guilliams said (odds ratio, 29.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-398.3; P = .003).

“The asymmetry tells me that we need to look more closely into brain blood flow patterns on ECMO,” she said. There might be a way to change delivery that could help, but “it’s not obvious right now.” The issue warrants further investigation, Dr. Guilliams said.

Twelve children had ECMO during chest compressions for cardiac arrest, which as expected, also predicted poor outcomes (OR, 9.5; 95% CI 1.6-58.2; P = .008).

Neuroimaging was available for 34 children. Abnormalities (n = 13; P = .2), including ischemia (n = 8; P = .1), hemorrhage (n = 8; P = .06), and seizures (n = 4; P = .2) did not predict poor outcomes, nor did sex, age, and mode of ECMO delivery (veno-arterial versus veno-venous).

As of about a year ago, EEGs at the university are now standard for children on ECMO, with special software to pick out asymmetries. “We are paying more attention to” EEGs, Dr. Guilliams said.

Children were a median of about 10 years old, and subjects were at least 1 year old. There were about equal numbers of boys and girls; 25 children were alive at discharge.

There was no external funding, and Dr. Guilliams didn’t have any disclosures.
 

[email protected]

WASHINGTON – A single dose of a novel monoclonal antibody against a respiratory syncytial virus surface protein safely protected preterm infants against severe infections for 150 days during their first winter season in a randomized trial with more than 1,400 children.

copyright DesignPics/Thinkstock

One intramuscular injection of nirsevimab (also known as MEDI8897) administered to infants born at 29-35 weeks’ gestation at the start of the local respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) season (November in the Northern hemisphere) led to a 70% relative reduction in the rate of medically attended lower respiratory tract infections with RSV during the subsequent 150 days, compared with placebo, the study’s primary efficacy outcome, M. Pamela Griffin, MD, said at an annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases.

In a secondary efficacy measure, the rate of hospitalizations for RSV-caused lower respiratory tract infections, a single injection of nirsevimab dropped the incidence by 78%, relative to placebo. Both effects were statistically significant. The rate of total adverse events and serious adverse events was similar in the two treatment arms, reported Dr. Griffin, a clinical development lead with AstraZeneca.

These positive results for a single intramuscular injection of nirsevimab are the first findings from a series of studies aimed at getting the monoclonal antibody onto the U.S. market as a superior alternative to palivizumab (Synagis), which acts in a similar way to block RSV infection (albeit by targeting a different viral surface protein) but which requires administration every 30 days. This need for serial dosing of palivizumab in children younger than 1 year old for complete seasonal protection against RSV is probably a reason why the American Academy of Pediatrics, as well as other medical societies, have targeted using palivizumab only on certain types of high-risk infants: those born before 29 weeks’ gestational age, with chronic lung disease of prematurity, or with hemodynamically significant congenital heart disease (Pediatrics. 2014 Aug;134[2]:415-20). “It’s not feasible for most infants to come for five treatments during RSV season,” Dr. Griffin noted. A tweak in the structure of nirsevimab gives it a much longer blood half-life than palivizumab and allows a single dose to maintain efficacy for 5 months, the duration of RSV season.

“The big advantage of nirsevimab is one dose instead of five,” she said in an interview.

The study randomized 969 preterm infants to nirsevimab and 484 to placebo when the children averaged 3 months old and 4.5 kg. The incidence of the primary endpoint was 2.6% in the nirsevimab-treated infants and 9.5% in those who received placebo. The incidence of hospitalizations associated with an RSV lower respiratory tract infection was 0.8% in the nirsevimab group and 4.1% on placebo. Nirsevimab was equally effective regardless of RSV subtype, infant age, or sex. The rate of hypersensitivity reactions was low, less than 1%, and similar in the two treatment arms, as was the rate of detection of antidrug antibody, 3.8% with placebo and 5.6% with nirsevimab.

Two other large trials are underway to document the performance of nirsevimab in other types of infants. One study is examining the drug’s performance compared with placebo in term infants with a gestational age of at least 36 weeks, while another is comparing nirsevimab against a five-dose regimen of palivizumab in high-risk infants who are recommended to receive palivizumab by local medical societies. In the United States, this would be infants born at less than 29 weeks’ gestation, and those with either hemodynamically significant congenital heart disease or chronic lung disease of prematurity. In these studies, the researchers also will assess the cost effectiveness of nirsevimab relative to the costs for medical care needed by infants who receive comparator treatments, Dr. Griffin said.

The study was funded by AstraZeneca, the company developing nirsevimab. Dr. Griffin is an employee of and shareholder in AstraZeneca.

[email protected]

SOURCE: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02878330.

WASHINGTON – A single dose of a novel monoclonal antibody against a respiratory syncytial virus surface protein safely protected preterm infants against severe infections for 150 days during their first winter season in a randomized trial with more than 1,400 children.

copyright DesignPics/Thinkstock

One intramuscular injection of nirsevimab (also known as MEDI8897) administered to infants born at 29-35 weeks’ gestation at the start of the local respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) season (November in the Northern hemisphere) led to a 70% relative reduction in the rate of medically attended lower respiratory tract infections with RSV during the subsequent 150 days, compared with placebo, the study’s primary efficacy outcome, M. Pamela Griffin, MD, said at an annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases.

In a secondary efficacy measure, the rate of hospitalizations for RSV-caused lower respiratory tract infections, a single injection of nirsevimab dropped the incidence by 78%, relative to placebo. Both effects were statistically significant. The rate of total adverse events and serious adverse events was similar in the two treatment arms, reported Dr. Griffin, a clinical development lead with AstraZeneca.

These positive results for a single intramuscular injection of nirsevimab are the first findings from a series of studies aimed at getting the monoclonal antibody onto the U.S. market as a superior alternative to palivizumab (Synagis), which acts in a similar way to block RSV infection (albeit by targeting a different viral surface protein) but which requires administration every 30 days. This need for serial dosing of palivizumab in children younger than 1 year old for complete seasonal protection against RSV is probably a reason why the American Academy of Pediatrics, as well as other medical societies, have targeted using palivizumab only on certain types of high-risk infants: those born before 29 weeks’ gestational age, with chronic lung disease of prematurity, or with hemodynamically significant congenital heart disease (Pediatrics. 2014 Aug;134[2]:415-20). “It’s not feasible for most infants to come for five treatments during RSV season,” Dr. Griffin noted. A tweak in the structure of nirsevimab gives it a much longer blood half-life than palivizumab and allows a single dose to maintain efficacy for 5 months, the duration of RSV season.

“The big advantage of nirsevimab is one dose instead of five,” she said in an interview.

The study randomized 969 preterm infants to nirsevimab and 484 to placebo when the children averaged 3 months old and 4.5 kg. The incidence of the primary endpoint was 2.6% in the nirsevimab-treated infants and 9.5% in those who received placebo. The incidence of hospitalizations associated with an RSV lower respiratory tract infection was 0.8% in the nirsevimab group and 4.1% on placebo. Nirsevimab was equally effective regardless of RSV subtype, infant age, or sex. The rate of hypersensitivity reactions was low, less than 1%, and similar in the two treatment arms, as was the rate of detection of antidrug antibody, 3.8% with placebo and 5.6% with nirsevimab.

Two other large trials are underway to document the performance of nirsevimab in other types of infants. One study is examining the drug’s performance compared with placebo in term infants with a gestational age of at least 36 weeks, while another is comparing nirsevimab against a five-dose regimen of palivizumab in high-risk infants who are recommended to receive palivizumab by local medical societies. In the United States, this would be infants born at less than 29 weeks’ gestation, and those with either hemodynamically significant congenital heart disease or chronic lung disease of prematurity. In these studies, the researchers also will assess the cost effectiveness of nirsevimab relative to the costs for medical care needed by infants who receive comparator treatments, Dr. Griffin said.

The study was funded by AstraZeneca, the company developing nirsevimab. Dr. Griffin is an employee of and shareholder in AstraZeneca.

[email protected]

SOURCE: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02878330.

WASHINGTON – A single dose of a novel monoclonal antibody against a respiratory syncytial virus surface protein safely protected preterm infants against severe infections for 150 days during their first winter season in a randomized trial with more than 1,400 children.

copyright DesignPics/Thinkstock

One intramuscular injection of nirsevimab (also known as MEDI8897) administered to infants born at 29-35 weeks’ gestation at the start of the local respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) season (November in the Northern hemisphere) led to a 70% relative reduction in the rate of medically attended lower respiratory tract infections with RSV during the subsequent 150 days, compared with placebo, the study’s primary efficacy outcome, M. Pamela Griffin, MD, said at an annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases.

In a secondary efficacy measure, the rate of hospitalizations for RSV-caused lower respiratory tract infections, a single injection of nirsevimab dropped the incidence by 78%, relative to placebo. Both effects were statistically significant. The rate of total adverse events and serious adverse events was similar in the two treatment arms, reported Dr. Griffin, a clinical development lead with AstraZeneca.

These positive results for a single intramuscular injection of nirsevimab are the first findings from a series of studies aimed at getting the monoclonal antibody onto the U.S. market as a superior alternative to palivizumab (Synagis), which acts in a similar way to block RSV infection (albeit by targeting a different viral surface protein) but which requires administration every 30 days. This need for serial dosing of palivizumab in children younger than 1 year old for complete seasonal protection against RSV is probably a reason why the American Academy of Pediatrics, as well as other medical societies, have targeted using palivizumab only on certain types of high-risk infants: those born before 29 weeks’ gestational age, with chronic lung disease of prematurity, or with hemodynamically significant congenital heart disease (Pediatrics. 2014 Aug;134[2]:415-20). “It’s not feasible for most infants to come for five treatments during RSV season,” Dr. Griffin noted. A tweak in the structure of nirsevimab gives it a much longer blood half-life than palivizumab and allows a single dose to maintain efficacy for 5 months, the duration of RSV season.

“The big advantage of nirsevimab is one dose instead of five,” she said in an interview.

The study randomized 969 preterm infants to nirsevimab and 484 to placebo when the children averaged 3 months old and 4.5 kg. The incidence of the primary endpoint was 2.6% in the nirsevimab-treated infants and 9.5% in those who received placebo. The incidence of hospitalizations associated with an RSV lower respiratory tract infection was 0.8% in the nirsevimab group and 4.1% on placebo. Nirsevimab was equally effective regardless of RSV subtype, infant age, or sex. The rate of hypersensitivity reactions was low, less than 1%, and similar in the two treatment arms, as was the rate of detection of antidrug antibody, 3.8% with placebo and 5.6% with nirsevimab.

Two other large trials are underway to document the performance of nirsevimab in other types of infants. One study is examining the drug’s performance compared with placebo in term infants with a gestational age of at least 36 weeks, while another is comparing nirsevimab against a five-dose regimen of palivizumab in high-risk infants who are recommended to receive palivizumab by local medical societies. In the United States, this would be infants born at less than 29 weeks’ gestation, and those with either hemodynamically significant congenital heart disease or chronic lung disease of prematurity. In these studies, the researchers also will assess the cost effectiveness of nirsevimab relative to the costs for medical care needed by infants who receive comparator treatments, Dr. Griffin said.

The study was funded by AstraZeneca, the company developing nirsevimab. Dr. Griffin is an employee of and shareholder in AstraZeneca.

[email protected]

SOURCE: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02878330.

A novel robot-assisted, gamelike test accurately classified ADHD type in elementary school–aged children, according to Mun-Taek Choi, PhD, and associates.

A total of 326 children in the third and fourth grades were included in the study, 35 of whom had been diagnosed with ADHD and 26 of whom were at risk. For the 10- to 12-minute test, participants followed a robot on a path across a numbered mat while stimuli were shown on a TV with both images and sound, and completed a task at each numbered square, reported Dr. Choi, of Sungkyunkwan University, Suwan, South Korea, and associates. The study was published in the Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems.

Inattentive and hyperactive-impulsive behavior was measured by the number of omission and commission errors. Response time and task completion time contributed to the measure of inattentive and hyperactive-impulsive behavior. Working memory deficits were measured as deviations in the prescribed route.

The tool was able to identify the children with ADHD with a high degree of accuracy, up to a maximum of 97%. This figure improved over the course of the study as the tool learned more, indicating that generalization errors were not a serious issue for the tool, the investigators noted.

“Unlike conventional questionnaire-based tests, the robot-assisted test increases the accuracy of ADHD diagnosis by directly reflecting the quality of children’s behavior during the activity game with the robot involved in the action. Since the test obtains behavioral patterns and levels using robotic sensing technologies, it can reliably determine the three key elements of ADHD diagnosis: hyperactivity, inattentive behavior, and working memory,” the investigators wrote. Ultimately, Dr. Choi and associates wrote, the tool could help clinicians diagnose childhood ADHD.

The study was funded by the South Korean Ministry of Trade, Industry, & Energy. No disclosures were reported.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Choi M-T et al. J Intell Robot Syst. 2018 Jun 19. doi: 10.1007/s10846-018-0890-9.

A novel robot-assisted, gamelike test accurately classified ADHD type in elementary school–aged children, according to Mun-Taek Choi, PhD, and associates.

A total of 326 children in the third and fourth grades were included in the study, 35 of whom had been diagnosed with ADHD and 26 of whom were at risk. For the 10- to 12-minute test, participants followed a robot on a path across a numbered mat while stimuli were shown on a TV with both images and sound, and completed a task at each numbered square, reported Dr. Choi, of Sungkyunkwan University, Suwan, South Korea, and associates. The study was published in the Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems.

Inattentive and hyperactive-impulsive behavior was measured by the number of omission and commission errors. Response time and task completion time contributed to the measure of inattentive and hyperactive-impulsive behavior. Working memory deficits were measured as deviations in the prescribed route.

The tool was able to identify the children with ADHD with a high degree of accuracy, up to a maximum of 97%. This figure improved over the course of the study as the tool learned more, indicating that generalization errors were not a serious issue for the tool, the investigators noted.

“Unlike conventional questionnaire-based tests, the robot-assisted test increases the accuracy of ADHD diagnosis by directly reflecting the quality of children’s behavior during the activity game with the robot involved in the action. Since the test obtains behavioral patterns and levels using robotic sensing technologies, it can reliably determine the three key elements of ADHD diagnosis: hyperactivity, inattentive behavior, and working memory,” the investigators wrote. Ultimately, Dr. Choi and associates wrote, the tool could help clinicians diagnose childhood ADHD.

The study was funded by the South Korean Ministry of Trade, Industry, & Energy. No disclosures were reported.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Choi M-T et al. J Intell Robot Syst. 2018 Jun 19. doi: 10.1007/s10846-018-0890-9.

A novel robot-assisted, gamelike test accurately classified ADHD type in elementary school–aged children, according to Mun-Taek Choi, PhD, and associates.

A total of 326 children in the third and fourth grades were included in the study, 35 of whom had been diagnosed with ADHD and 26 of whom were at risk. For the 10- to 12-minute test, participants followed a robot on a path across a numbered mat while stimuli were shown on a TV with both images and sound, and completed a task at each numbered square, reported Dr. Choi, of Sungkyunkwan University, Suwan, South Korea, and associates. The study was published in the Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems.

Inattentive and hyperactive-impulsive behavior was measured by the number of omission and commission errors. Response time and task completion time contributed to the measure of inattentive and hyperactive-impulsive behavior. Working memory deficits were measured as deviations in the prescribed route.

The tool was able to identify the children with ADHD with a high degree of accuracy, up to a maximum of 97%. This figure improved over the course of the study as the tool learned more, indicating that generalization errors were not a serious issue for the tool, the investigators noted.

“Unlike conventional questionnaire-based tests, the robot-assisted test increases the accuracy of ADHD diagnosis by directly reflecting the quality of children’s behavior during the activity game with the robot involved in the action. Since the test obtains behavioral patterns and levels using robotic sensing technologies, it can reliably determine the three key elements of ADHD diagnosis: hyperactivity, inattentive behavior, and working memory,” the investigators wrote. Ultimately, Dr. Choi and associates wrote, the tool could help clinicians diagnose childhood ADHD.

The study was funded by the South Korean Ministry of Trade, Industry, & Energy. No disclosures were reported.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Choi M-T et al. J Intell Robot Syst. 2018 Jun 19. doi: 10.1007/s10846-018-0890-9.

Federal funding for research into death by firearms in children and adolescents does not match the level of the mortality burden these deaths represent, new research has found.

Joshuashearn/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0

For the period 2008-2017, an average of $88 million per year was granted to study motor vehicle crashes, the leading cause of death in this age group. Cancer, the third leading cause of mortality, received on average $335 million per year. However, research into mortality from firearms, the second leading cause of death in this age group, received $12 million total during the entire research period across a total of 32 research grants.

This translates to $26,136 in research funding per death for the 33,577 deaths of children and adolescents in motor vehicle crashes from 2008-2017, $195,508 per death from cancer (17,111 deaths recorded), and just $597 per death from firearm injury (20,719 deaths recorded).

Pediatric firearm injury prevention “is substantially underfunded in relation to the magnitude of the public health problem,” Rebecca Cunningham, MD, from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and colleagues wrote in the October 2019 issue of Health Affairs.

“According to our analysis, federal funding for this leading cause of pediatric mortality is 3.3 percent of what would be needed for it to be commensurate with the funding for other common causes of pediatric death,” the authors continued.

Dr. Cunningham and colleagues said that the “lack of an evidence base for firearm safety prevention has likely contributed to the lack of progress on, and recent increase in, firearm deaths among children and adolescents since 2013.”

They did note that there was an increase in federal research funding following the shooting in Newtown, Conn., with an increase from $136,224 in 2012 to $4.5 million in 2017, but it clearly is not enough.

“Our analysis, using other major diseases and the country’s history of federal funding as a guide, demonstrates that approximately $37 million per year over the next decade is needed to realize a reduction in pediatric firearm mortality that is comparable to that observed for other pediatric causes of death,” the authors state.

The group also suggests the development of a group similar to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that is focused specifically on firearm safety that could “begin to address the large gaps in foundational epidemiological and multidisciplinary behavioral research that the nation needs. It could have a transformational impact on the reduction of firearm injuries among children and adolescents parallel to what has been seen for other major causes of pediatric death in the U.S.”

[email protected]

SOURCE: Cunningham R et al. Health Affairs. 2019. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00476.

Federal funding for research into death by firearms in children and adolescents does not match the level of the mortality burden these deaths represent, new research has found.

Joshuashearn/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0

For the period 2008-2017, an average of $88 million per year was granted to study motor vehicle crashes, the leading cause of death in this age group. Cancer, the third leading cause of mortality, received on average $335 million per year. However, research into mortality from firearms, the second leading cause of death in this age group, received $12 million total during the entire research period across a total of 32 research grants.

This translates to $26,136 in research funding per death for the 33,577 deaths of children and adolescents in motor vehicle crashes from 2008-2017, $195,508 per death from cancer (17,111 deaths recorded), and just $597 per death from firearm injury (20,719 deaths recorded).

Pediatric firearm injury prevention “is substantially underfunded in relation to the magnitude of the public health problem,” Rebecca Cunningham, MD, from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and colleagues wrote in the October 2019 issue of Health Affairs.

“According to our analysis, federal funding for this leading cause of pediatric mortality is 3.3 percent of what would be needed for it to be commensurate with the funding for other common causes of pediatric death,” the authors continued.

Dr. Cunningham and colleagues said that the “lack of an evidence base for firearm safety prevention has likely contributed to the lack of progress on, and recent increase in, firearm deaths among children and adolescents since 2013.”

They did note that there was an increase in federal research funding following the shooting in Newtown, Conn., with an increase from $136,224 in 2012 to $4.5 million in 2017, but it clearly is not enough.

“Our analysis, using other major diseases and the country’s history of federal funding as a guide, demonstrates that approximately $37 million per year over the next decade is needed to realize a reduction in pediatric firearm mortality that is comparable to that observed for other pediatric causes of death,” the authors state.

The group also suggests the development of a group similar to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that is focused specifically on firearm safety that could “begin to address the large gaps in foundational epidemiological and multidisciplinary behavioral research that the nation needs. It could have a transformational impact on the reduction of firearm injuries among children and adolescents parallel to what has been seen for other major causes of pediatric death in the U.S.”

[email protected]

SOURCE: Cunningham R et al. Health Affairs. 2019. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00476.

Federal funding for research into death by firearms in children and adolescents does not match the level of the mortality burden these deaths represent, new research has found.

Joshuashearn/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0

For the period 2008-2017, an average of $88 million per year was granted to study motor vehicle crashes, the leading cause of death in this age group. Cancer, the third leading cause of mortality, received on average $335 million per year. However, research into mortality from firearms, the second leading cause of death in this age group, received $12 million total during the entire research period across a total of 32 research grants.

This translates to $26,136 in research funding per death for the 33,577 deaths of children and adolescents in motor vehicle crashes from 2008-2017, $195,508 per death from cancer (17,111 deaths recorded), and just $597 per death from firearm injury (20,719 deaths recorded).

Pediatric firearm injury prevention “is substantially underfunded in relation to the magnitude of the public health problem,” Rebecca Cunningham, MD, from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and colleagues wrote in the October 2019 issue of Health Affairs.

“According to our analysis, federal funding for this leading cause of pediatric mortality is 3.3 percent of what would be needed for it to be commensurate with the funding for other common causes of pediatric death,” the authors continued.

Dr. Cunningham and colleagues said that the “lack of an evidence base for firearm safety prevention has likely contributed to the lack of progress on, and recent increase in, firearm deaths among children and adolescents since 2013.”

They did note that there was an increase in federal research funding following the shooting in Newtown, Conn., with an increase from $136,224 in 2012 to $4.5 million in 2017, but it clearly is not enough.

“Our analysis, using other major diseases and the country’s history of federal funding as a guide, demonstrates that approximately $37 million per year over the next decade is needed to realize a reduction in pediatric firearm mortality that is comparable to that observed for other pediatric causes of death,” the authors state.

The group also suggests the development of a group similar to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that is focused specifically on firearm safety that could “begin to address the large gaps in foundational epidemiological and multidisciplinary behavioral research that the nation needs. It could have a transformational impact on the reduction of firearm injuries among children and adolescents parallel to what has been seen for other major causes of pediatric death in the U.S.”

[email protected]

SOURCE: Cunningham R et al. Health Affairs. 2019. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00476.

"The Child Neurology Society Annual Meeting is the meeting of choice for child neurologists and professionals in other fields of study related to neurologic and neurodevelopmental disorders in children and adolescents,” according to the society. Check back later this month for top news from the 48th conference in Charlotte, NC.

"The Child Neurology Society Annual Meeting is the meeting of choice for child neurologists and professionals in other fields of study related to neurologic and neurodevelopmental disorders in children and adolescents,” according to the society. Check back later this month for top news from the 48th conference in Charlotte, NC.

"The Child Neurology Society Annual Meeting is the meeting of choice for child neurologists and professionals in other fields of study related to neurologic and neurodevelopmental disorders in children and adolescents,” according to the society. Check back later this month for top news from the 48th conference in Charlotte, NC.

MADRID – A placebo-controlled trial has confirmed that amoxicillin/clavulanate is beneficial for resolution of acute exacerbations in nonsevere bronchiectasis while also demonstrating a greater relative effect than azithromycin, based on data presented at the annual congress of the European Respiratory Society.

“We now have robust data with which to support our guidelines,” reported Vikas Goyal, MD, of the Children’s Health Clinical Unit, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

The study addresses a knowledge gap. Antibiotics are already recommended by many guidelines for treatment of acute exacerbations in children with bronchiectasis, but Dr. Goyal said that no controlled trials have ever been performed in this age group to confirm superiority to placebo.

In this multicenter study, called BEST-1, 197 children with bronchiectasis were randomized at the start of an exacerbation to placebo, 45 mg/kg per day of amoxicillin/clavulanate, or 5 mg/kg per day of azithromycin. To maintain blinding, patients in the active treatment groups received a dummy for the opposite antibiotic while patients on placebo received dummies for both active agents.

For the primary outcome, 65% of children randomized to amoxicillin/clavulanate had resolution of their exacerbation by day 14 versus 61% of those randomized to azithromycin and 43% of those randomized to placebo. On the basis of relative risk for reaching this end point, the outcome was superior to placebo for amoxicillin/clavulanate (RR, 1.5; P = .015).

Although the relative risk for azithromycin (RR, 1.4; P = .042) was only slightly lower, it did not reach a prespecified level of significance set at P = .025. Dr. Goyal did report that the resolution rate at 14 days in the placebo group was “higher than expected.”

In this trial, 53% of the 154 children who were tested for respiratory viruses with nasal swabs on day 1 of the exacerbation were found to have respiratory viruses. Of these viruses, rhinovirus was the most common, according to Dr. Goyal, whose data were published just prior to his presentation (Lancet Respir Med. 2019;7:791-801).

The median durations of the exacerbations were 7 days, 8 days, and 10 days for those treated with amoxicillin/clavulanate, azithromycin, and placebo, respectively. The difference between amoxicillin/clavulanate and placebo, but not that between azithromycin and placebo, reached statistical significance, Dr. Goyal said.

There were no between group differences in the time to next exacerbation.

In discussing limitations of this study, Dr. Goyal pointed out that the optimal doses of amoxicillin/clavulanate or azithromycin have never been established for the treatment of exacerbations in children with bronchiectasis. He noted that some infectious disease specialists have advocated higher doses of both than those employed in this trial, but dose-ranging studies have never been conducted in this age group.

In this study, adverse events were less common on azithromycin than amoxicillin/clavulanate (21% vs. 30%), but none were severe, according to Dr. Goyal. He said treatment with azithromycin was associated with increased macrolide-resistant bacteria.

On the basis of these data, Dr. Goyal concluded that amoxicillin/clavulanate should remain, as already specified in some guidelines, the standard first-line therapy for nonsevere exacerbations in nonhospitalized children with bronchiectasis. He recommended reserving azithromycin as an alternative therapy.

Dr. Goyal reports no potential conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Goyal V et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2019;7:791-801.

MADRID – A placebo-controlled trial has confirmed that amoxicillin/clavulanate is beneficial for resolution of acute exacerbations in nonsevere bronchiectasis while also demonstrating a greater relative effect than azithromycin, based on data presented at the annual congress of the European Respiratory Society.

“We now have robust data with which to support our guidelines,” reported Vikas Goyal, MD, of the Children’s Health Clinical Unit, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

The study addresses a knowledge gap. Antibiotics are already recommended by many guidelines for treatment of acute exacerbations in children with bronchiectasis, but Dr. Goyal said that no controlled trials have ever been performed in this age group to confirm superiority to placebo.

In this multicenter study, called BEST-1, 197 children with bronchiectasis were randomized at the start of an exacerbation to placebo, 45 mg/kg per day of amoxicillin/clavulanate, or 5 mg/kg per day of azithromycin. To maintain blinding, patients in the active treatment groups received a dummy for the opposite antibiotic while patients on placebo received dummies for both active agents.

For the primary outcome, 65% of children randomized to amoxicillin/clavulanate had resolution of their exacerbation by day 14 versus 61% of those randomized to azithromycin and 43% of those randomized to placebo. On the basis of relative risk for reaching this end point, the outcome was superior to placebo for amoxicillin/clavulanate (RR, 1.5; P = .015).

Although the relative risk for azithromycin (RR, 1.4; P = .042) was only slightly lower, it did not reach a prespecified level of significance set at P = .025. Dr. Goyal did report that the resolution rate at 14 days in the placebo group was “higher than expected.”

In this trial, 53% of the 154 children who were tested for respiratory viruses with nasal swabs on day 1 of the exacerbation were found to have respiratory viruses. Of these viruses, rhinovirus was the most common, according to Dr. Goyal, whose data were published just prior to his presentation (Lancet Respir Med. 2019;7:791-801).

The median durations of the exacerbations were 7 days, 8 days, and 10 days for those treated with amoxicillin/clavulanate, azithromycin, and placebo, respectively. The difference between amoxicillin/clavulanate and placebo, but not that between azithromycin and placebo, reached statistical significance, Dr. Goyal said.

There were no between group differences in the time to next exacerbation.

In discussing limitations of this study, Dr. Goyal pointed out that the optimal doses of amoxicillin/clavulanate or azithromycin have never been established for the treatment of exacerbations in children with bronchiectasis. He noted that some infectious disease specialists have advocated higher doses of both than those employed in this trial, but dose-ranging studies have never been conducted in this age group.

In this study, adverse events were less common on azithromycin than amoxicillin/clavulanate (21% vs. 30%), but none were severe, according to Dr. Goyal. He said treatment with azithromycin was associated with increased macrolide-resistant bacteria.

On the basis of these data, Dr. Goyal concluded that amoxicillin/clavulanate should remain, as already specified in some guidelines, the standard first-line therapy for nonsevere exacerbations in nonhospitalized children with bronchiectasis. He recommended reserving azithromycin as an alternative therapy.

Dr. Goyal reports no potential conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Goyal V et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2019;7:791-801.

MADRID – A placebo-controlled trial has confirmed that amoxicillin/clavulanate is beneficial for resolution of acute exacerbations in nonsevere bronchiectasis while also demonstrating a greater relative effect than azithromycin, based on data presented at the annual congress of the European Respiratory Society.

“We now have robust data with which to support our guidelines,” reported Vikas Goyal, MD, of the Children’s Health Clinical Unit, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

The study addresses a knowledge gap. Antibiotics are already recommended by many guidelines for treatment of acute exacerbations in children with bronchiectasis, but Dr. Goyal said that no controlled trials have ever been performed in this age group to confirm superiority to placebo.

In this multicenter study, called BEST-1, 197 children with bronchiectasis were randomized at the start of an exacerbation to placebo, 45 mg/kg per day of amoxicillin/clavulanate, or 5 mg/kg per day of azithromycin. To maintain blinding, patients in the active treatment groups received a dummy for the opposite antibiotic while patients on placebo received dummies for both active agents.

For the primary outcome, 65% of children randomized to amoxicillin/clavulanate had resolution of their exacerbation by day 14 versus 61% of those randomized to azithromycin and 43% of those randomized to placebo. On the basis of relative risk for reaching this end point, the outcome was superior to placebo for amoxicillin/clavulanate (RR, 1.5; P = .015).

Although the relative risk for azithromycin (RR, 1.4; P = .042) was only slightly lower, it did not reach a prespecified level of significance set at P = .025. Dr. Goyal did report that the resolution rate at 14 days in the placebo group was “higher than expected.”

In this trial, 53% of the 154 children who were tested for respiratory viruses with nasal swabs on day 1 of the exacerbation were found to have respiratory viruses. Of these viruses, rhinovirus was the most common, according to Dr. Goyal, whose data were published just prior to his presentation (Lancet Respir Med. 2019;7:791-801).

The median durations of the exacerbations were 7 days, 8 days, and 10 days for those treated with amoxicillin/clavulanate, azithromycin, and placebo, respectively. The difference between amoxicillin/clavulanate and placebo, but not that between azithromycin and placebo, reached statistical significance, Dr. Goyal said.

There were no between group differences in the time to next exacerbation.

In discussing limitations of this study, Dr. Goyal pointed out that the optimal doses of amoxicillin/clavulanate or azithromycin have never been established for the treatment of exacerbations in children with bronchiectasis. He noted that some infectious disease specialists have advocated higher doses of both than those employed in this trial, but dose-ranging studies have never been conducted in this age group.

In this study, adverse events were less common on azithromycin than amoxicillin/clavulanate (21% vs. 30%), but none were severe, according to Dr. Goyal. He said treatment with azithromycin was associated with increased macrolide-resistant bacteria.

On the basis of these data, Dr. Goyal concluded that amoxicillin/clavulanate should remain, as already specified in some guidelines, the standard first-line therapy for nonsevere exacerbations in nonhospitalized children with bronchiectasis. He recommended reserving azithromycin as an alternative therapy.

Dr. Goyal reports no potential conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Goyal V et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2019;7:791-801.

Read the full Cutis article, “Quality of Life in Patients With Atopic Dermatitis.”

Read the full Cutis article, “Quality of Life in Patients With Atopic Dermatitis.”

Read the full Cutis article, “Quality of Life in Patients With Atopic Dermatitis.”

Adolescents diagnosed with insomnia have a high prevalence of concurrent mental health disorders and should be screened for them, according to new research.

Monkey Business Images Ltd/Thinkstock

For a study published in the Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, Tori R. Van Dyk, PhD, of Loma Linda (Calif.) University, and colleagues, enrolled 376 adolescents aged 11-18 years (mean age 14.5, 55% female) diagnosed with primary insomnia and referred to a sleep clinic. Subjects were evaluated using two validated questionnaires used to measure sleep disorders in adolescents, while caregivers reported and mental health diagnoses and symptoms using a standard behavioral checklist for adolescents.

Dr. Van Dyk and colleagues found that 75% of subjects had at least one or more parent-reported mental health diagnosis, most commonly anxiety, mood disorders, and ADHD. Some 64% had a clinical elevation of mental health symptoms on evaluation, most commonly affective disorders, with 40% of the cohort having two or more elevations. Specific mental health symptoms were seen linked with particular sleep symptoms. A greater burden of ADHD symptoms, for example, was significantly associated with more difficulties falling asleep, maintaining sleep, and reinitiating sleep after waking at night.

A total of 15% of subjects were reported by caregivers to engage in deliberate self-harming behaviors or talking about or attempting suicide – a higher rate than in the general adolescent population. “Because youth presenting for insomnia treatment may be even more likely to engage in self-harm behavior or to be suicidal, particular attention should be paid to directly assessing for these high-risk behaviors within the context of behavioral sleep medicine evaluations,” Dr. Van Dyk and colleagues wrote in their analysis.

Although mental health symptoms have been linked to sleep problems in other studies of children and adults, “associations identified in younger youths and/or adults should not be assumed to hold true among adolescents,” the researchers wrote, adding that adolescence “is a distinctive developmental period characterized by increases in both psychopathology and sleep problems, changing biology, increasing independence, and unique social and societal demands.” The investigators noted that because pediatric sleep specialists are relatively rare, the management of adolescent sleep problems and related mental health symptoms is likely to fall on primary care and other providers who “would benefit in recognizing the relationship between sleep problems and mental health symptoms in this population.”

Dr. Van Dyk and colleagues noted among the weaknesses of their study its cross-sectional design, use of parent-reported mental health symptoms only, lack of information on medication use or mental health treatment, and the potential for selection bias toward more severe cases.

The authors disclosed no outside funding or conflicts of interest related to their study.

SOURCE: Van Dyk TR et al. J Clin Sleep Med. 2019 Sep 6. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.7970.

Adolescents diagnosed with insomnia have a high prevalence of concurrent mental health disorders and should be screened for them, according to new research.

Monkey Business Images Ltd/Thinkstock

For a study published in the Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, Tori R. Van Dyk, PhD, of Loma Linda (Calif.) University, and colleagues, enrolled 376 adolescents aged 11-18 years (mean age 14.5, 55% female) diagnosed with primary insomnia and referred to a sleep clinic. Subjects were evaluated using two validated questionnaires used to measure sleep disorders in adolescents, while caregivers reported and mental health diagnoses and symptoms using a standard behavioral checklist for adolescents.

Dr. Van Dyk and colleagues found that 75% of subjects had at least one or more parent-reported mental health diagnosis, most commonly anxiety, mood disorders, and ADHD. Some 64% had a clinical elevation of mental health symptoms on evaluation, most commonly affective disorders, with 40% of the cohort having two or more elevations. Specific mental health symptoms were seen linked with particular sleep symptoms. A greater burden of ADHD symptoms, for example, was significantly associated with more difficulties falling asleep, maintaining sleep, and reinitiating sleep after waking at night.

A total of 15% of subjects were reported by caregivers to engage in deliberate self-harming behaviors or talking about or attempting suicide – a higher rate than in the general adolescent population. “Because youth presenting for insomnia treatment may be even more likely to engage in self-harm behavior or to be suicidal, particular attention should be paid to directly assessing for these high-risk behaviors within the context of behavioral sleep medicine evaluations,” Dr. Van Dyk and colleagues wrote in their analysis.

Although mental health symptoms have been linked to sleep problems in other studies of children and adults, “associations identified in younger youths and/or adults should not be assumed to hold true among adolescents,” the researchers wrote, adding that adolescence “is a distinctive developmental period characterized by increases in both psychopathology and sleep problems, changing biology, increasing independence, and unique social and societal demands.” The investigators noted that because pediatric sleep specialists are relatively rare, the management of adolescent sleep problems and related mental health symptoms is likely to fall on primary care and other providers who “would benefit in recognizing the relationship between sleep problems and mental health symptoms in this population.”

Dr. Van Dyk and colleagues noted among the weaknesses of their study its cross-sectional design, use of parent-reported mental health symptoms only, lack of information on medication use or mental health treatment, and the potential for selection bias toward more severe cases.

The authors disclosed no outside funding or conflicts of interest related to their study.

SOURCE: Van Dyk TR et al. J Clin Sleep Med. 2019 Sep 6. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.7970.

Adolescents diagnosed with insomnia have a high prevalence of concurrent mental health disorders and should be screened for them, according to new research.

Monkey Business Images Ltd/Thinkstock

For a study published in the Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, Tori R. Van Dyk, PhD, of Loma Linda (Calif.) University, and colleagues, enrolled 376 adolescents aged 11-18 years (mean age 14.5, 55% female) diagnosed with primary insomnia and referred to a sleep clinic. Subjects were evaluated using two validated questionnaires used to measure sleep disorders in adolescents, while caregivers reported and mental health diagnoses and symptoms using a standard behavioral checklist for adolescents.

Dr. Van Dyk and colleagues found that 75% of subjects had at least one or more parent-reported mental health diagnosis, most commonly anxiety, mood disorders, and ADHD. Some 64% had a clinical elevation of mental health symptoms on evaluation, most commonly affective disorders, with 40% of the cohort having two or more elevations. Specific mental health symptoms were seen linked with particular sleep symptoms. A greater burden of ADHD symptoms, for example, was significantly associated with more difficulties falling asleep, maintaining sleep, and reinitiating sleep after waking at night.

A total of 15% of subjects were reported by caregivers to engage in deliberate self-harming behaviors or talking about or attempting suicide – a higher rate than in the general adolescent population. “Because youth presenting for insomnia treatment may be even more likely to engage in self-harm behavior or to be suicidal, particular attention should be paid to directly assessing for these high-risk behaviors within the context of behavioral sleep medicine evaluations,” Dr. Van Dyk and colleagues wrote in their analysis.

Although mental health symptoms have been linked to sleep problems in other studies of children and adults, “associations identified in younger youths and/or adults should not be assumed to hold true among adolescents,” the researchers wrote, adding that adolescence “is a distinctive developmental period characterized by increases in both psychopathology and sleep problems, changing biology, increasing independence, and unique social and societal demands.” The investigators noted that because pediatric sleep specialists are relatively rare, the management of adolescent sleep problems and related mental health symptoms is likely to fall on primary care and other providers who “would benefit in recognizing the relationship between sleep problems and mental health symptoms in this population.”

Dr. Van Dyk and colleagues noted among the weaknesses of their study its cross-sectional design, use of parent-reported mental health symptoms only, lack of information on medication use or mental health treatment, and the potential for selection bias toward more severe cases.

The authors disclosed no outside funding or conflicts of interest related to their study.

SOURCE: Van Dyk TR et al. J Clin Sleep Med. 2019 Sep 6. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.7970.

WASHINGTON – Influenza vaccines that substitute flu grown in cell-culture for the standard formulation of flu grown in eggs recently came onto the U.S. market, and new evidence confirmed that cell-grown flu works at least as well as its egg-grown counterpart for triggering immune responses.

Results from a randomized study with 148 evaluable subjects that directly compared the immune response of individuals aged 4-20 years old to the 2018-2019 commercial formulation of a mostly cell-based influenza vaccine with a commercially marketed, fully egg-based vaccine from the same vintage showed “no difference” between the two vaccines for inducing serologic titers on both the hemagluttination inhibition assay and by microneutralization, Richard K. Zimmerman, MD, said at an annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases.

The question addressed by the study was whether the primarily cell culture–grown vaccine would perform differently in children than a standard, egg-grown vaccine. “We thought that we might find something different, but we didn’t,” said Dr. Zimmerman, a professor of family medicine at the University of Pittsburgh who studies vaccines. The finding gave further support to using flu vaccines made without eggs because of their advantages over egg-based vaccines, he said in an interview.

Dr. Zimmerman cited two major, potential problems with egg-grown influenza vaccines. First, they require a big supply of eggs to manufacture, which can pose logistical challenges that are absent with cell culture–grown vaccine once the bioreactor capacity exists to produce the necessary amount of cells. This means that egg-free vaccine production can ramp up faster when a pandemic starts, he noted.

Second, over time, egg-grown vaccine strains of influenza have become increasingly adapted to grow in eggs with the result that “in some years the egg-grown virus is so different as to not work as well [Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2017 Nov;114[44]:12578-83]. With cell culture you bypass” issues of glycosylation mismatch or other antigenic problems caused by egg passage, he explained.

Dr. Zimmerman feels so strongly about the superiority of the cell-culture vaccine that “I am personally going to get a vaccine that’s not egg based,” and he advised the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center to focus its 2019-2020 flu vaccine purchase primarily on formulations made by cell culture. For the 2019-2020 season, that specifically is Flucelvax, an inactivated influenza vaccine licensed for people aged at least 4 years old, and Flublok, a recombinant flu vaccine also produced entirely in cell culture and licensed for people aged at least 18 years old. The 2019-2020 season is the first one during which the quadravalent Flucelvax vaccine has all four component strains (one H1N1, one H3N2, and two B strains) grown in cell culture.

The study run by Dr. Zimmerman and associates at the start of the 2018-2019 season used that season’s formulation of Flucelvax, which had only three of its four component strains grown in cell culture plus one strain (H1N1) grown in eggs. The Pittsburgh researchers randomized 168 individuals to receive the 2018-2019 Flucelvax vaccine or Fluzone, an entirely egg-made quadravelent vaccine, and they had analyzable results from 148 of the enrolled participants, more than 85% of whom were 9-20 years old. The study’s primary endpoint was the extent of seropositivity and seroconversion 28 days after immunization measured with both a hemagglutination inhibition assay and by a microneutralization assay. The results showed similar rates in the 75 children who received Flucelvax and the 73 who received Fluzone. For example, seropositivity against B Victoria lineage strains by the hemagglutination inhibition assay 28 days after vaccination was 76% in children who received Flucelvax, and it was 79% among those who got Fluzone, with a seroconversion rate of 34% in each of the two study subgroups.

“These findings do not say that egg-free is better, but it was certainly no worse. My guess is that in some years vaccines that are egg-free will make a big difference. In other years it may not. But you don’t know ahead of time,” Dr. Zimmerman said.

The study received no commercial funding but received free Fluzone vaccine from Sanofi Pasteur. Dr. Zimmerman had no disclosures.

[email protected]

WASHINGTON – Influenza vaccines that substitute flu grown in cell-culture for the standard formulation of flu grown in eggs recently came onto the U.S. market, and new evidence confirmed that cell-grown flu works at least as well as its egg-grown counterpart for triggering immune responses.

Results from a randomized study with 148 evaluable subjects that directly compared the immune response of individuals aged 4-20 years old to the 2018-2019 commercial formulation of a mostly cell-based influenza vaccine with a commercially marketed, fully egg-based vaccine from the same vintage showed “no difference” between the two vaccines for inducing serologic titers on both the hemagluttination inhibition assay and by microneutralization, Richard K. Zimmerman, MD, said at an annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases.

The question addressed by the study was whether the primarily cell culture–grown vaccine would perform differently in children than a standard, egg-grown vaccine. “We thought that we might find something different, but we didn’t,” said Dr. Zimmerman, a professor of family medicine at the University of Pittsburgh who studies vaccines. The finding gave further support to using flu vaccines made without eggs because of their advantages over egg-based vaccines, he said in an interview.

Dr. Zimmerman cited two major, potential problems with egg-grown influenza vaccines. First, they require a big supply of eggs to manufacture, which can pose logistical challenges that are absent with cell culture–grown vaccine once the bioreactor capacity exists to produce the necessary amount of cells. This means that egg-free vaccine production can ramp up faster when a pandemic starts, he noted.

Second, over time, egg-grown vaccine strains of influenza have become increasingly adapted to grow in eggs with the result that “in some years the egg-grown virus is so different as to not work as well [Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2017 Nov;114[44]:12578-83]. With cell culture you bypass” issues of glycosylation mismatch or other antigenic problems caused by egg passage, he explained.

Dr. Zimmerman feels so strongly about the superiority of the cell-culture vaccine that “I am personally going to get a vaccine that’s not egg based,” and he advised the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center to focus its 2019-2020 flu vaccine purchase primarily on formulations made by cell culture. For the 2019-2020 season, that specifically is Flucelvax, an inactivated influenza vaccine licensed for people aged at least 4 years old, and Flublok, a recombinant flu vaccine also produced entirely in cell culture and licensed for people aged at least 18 years old. The 2019-2020 season is the first one during which the quadravalent Flucelvax vaccine has all four component strains (one H1N1, one H3N2, and two B strains) grown in cell culture.

The study run by Dr. Zimmerman and associates at the start of the 2018-2019 season used that season’s formulation of Flucelvax, which had only three of its four component strains grown in cell culture plus one strain (H1N1) grown in eggs. The Pittsburgh researchers randomized 168 individuals to receive the 2018-2019 Flucelvax vaccine or Fluzone, an entirely egg-made quadravelent vaccine, and they had analyzable results from 148 of the enrolled participants, more than 85% of whom were 9-20 years old. The study’s primary endpoint was the extent of seropositivity and seroconversion 28 days after immunization measured with both a hemagglutination inhibition assay and by a microneutralization assay. The results showed similar rates in the 75 children who received Flucelvax and the 73 who received Fluzone. For example, seropositivity against B Victoria lineage strains by the hemagglutination inhibition assay 28 days after vaccination was 76% in children who received Flucelvax, and it was 79% among those who got Fluzone, with a seroconversion rate of 34% in each of the two study subgroups.

“These findings do not say that egg-free is better, but it was certainly no worse. My guess is that in some years vaccines that are egg-free will make a big difference. In other years it may not. But you don’t know ahead of time,” Dr. Zimmerman said.

The study received no commercial funding but received free Fluzone vaccine from Sanofi Pasteur. Dr. Zimmerman had no disclosures.

[email protected]

WASHINGTON – Influenza vaccines that substitute flu grown in cell-culture for the standard formulation of flu grown in eggs recently came onto the U.S. market, and new evidence confirmed that cell-grown flu works at least as well as its egg-grown counterpart for triggering immune responses.

Results from a randomized study with 148 evaluable subjects that directly compared the immune response of individuals aged 4-20 years old to the 2018-2019 commercial formulation of a mostly cell-based influenza vaccine with a commercially marketed, fully egg-based vaccine from the same vintage showed “no difference” between the two vaccines for inducing serologic titers on both the hemagluttination inhibition assay and by microneutralization, Richard K. Zimmerman, MD, said at an annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases.

The question addressed by the study was whether the primarily cell culture–grown vaccine would perform differently in children than a standard, egg-grown vaccine. “We thought that we might find something different, but we didn’t,” said Dr. Zimmerman, a professor of family medicine at the University of Pittsburgh who studies vaccines. The finding gave further support to using flu vaccines made without eggs because of their advantages over egg-based vaccines, he said in an interview.

Dr. Zimmerman cited two major, potential problems with egg-grown influenza vaccines. First, they require a big supply of eggs to manufacture, which can pose logistical challenges that are absent with cell culture–grown vaccine once the bioreactor capacity exists to produce the necessary amount of cells. This means that egg-free vaccine production can ramp up faster when a pandemic starts, he noted.

Second, over time, egg-grown vaccine strains of influenza have become increasingly adapted to grow in eggs with the result that “in some years the egg-grown virus is so different as to not work as well [Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2017 Nov;114[44]:12578-83]. With cell culture you bypass” issues of glycosylation mismatch or other antigenic problems caused by egg passage, he explained.

Dr. Zimmerman feels so strongly about the superiority of the cell-culture vaccine that “I am personally going to get a vaccine that’s not egg based,” and he advised the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center to focus its 2019-2020 flu vaccine purchase primarily on formulations made by cell culture. For the 2019-2020 season, that specifically is Flucelvax, an inactivated influenza vaccine licensed for people aged at least 4 years old, and Flublok, a recombinant flu vaccine also produced entirely in cell culture and licensed for people aged at least 18 years old. The 2019-2020 season is the first one during which the quadravalent Flucelvax vaccine has all four component strains (one H1N1, one H3N2, and two B strains) grown in cell culture.

The study run by Dr. Zimmerman and associates at the start of the 2018-2019 season used that season’s formulation of Flucelvax, which had only three of its four component strains grown in cell culture plus one strain (H1N1) grown in eggs. The Pittsburgh researchers randomized 168 individuals to receive the 2018-2019 Flucelvax vaccine or Fluzone, an entirely egg-made quadravelent vaccine, and they had analyzable results from 148 of the enrolled participants, more than 85% of whom were 9-20 years old. The study’s primary endpoint was the extent of seropositivity and seroconversion 28 days after immunization measured with both a hemagglutination inhibition assay and by a microneutralization assay. The results showed similar rates in the 75 children who received Flucelvax and the 73 who received Fluzone. For example, seropositivity against B Victoria lineage strains by the hemagglutination inhibition assay 28 days after vaccination was 76% in children who received Flucelvax, and it was 79% among those who got Fluzone, with a seroconversion rate of 34% in each of the two study subgroups.

“These findings do not say that egg-free is better, but it was certainly no worse. My guess is that in some years vaccines that are egg-free will make a big difference. In other years it may not. But you don’t know ahead of time,” Dr. Zimmerman said.

The study received no commercial funding but received free Fluzone vaccine from Sanofi Pasteur. Dr. Zimmerman had no disclosures.

[email protected]