Cellular immune responses of older adults to four influenza vaccines: Results of a randomized, controlled comparison
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellular immunity is important for protection against the serious complications of influenza in older adults. As it is unclear if newer influenza vaccines elicit greater cellular responses than standard vaccines, we compared responses to 2 standard and 2 newer licensed trivalent inactivated vaccines (TIVs) in a randomized trial in older adults. Non-frail adults ≥ 65 y old were randomly assigned to receive standard subunit, MF59-adjuvanted subunit, standard split-virus or intradermal split-virus TIV. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) harvested pre- and 3-weeks post-vaccination were stimulated with live A/H3N2 virus. PBMC supernatants were tested for interleukin 10 (IL-10) and interferon gamma (IFN-γ), and lysates for granzyme B (GrB). Flow cytometry identified CD4+ and CD8+ T- cells expressing intracellular IL-2, IL-10, IFN-γ, GrB, or perforin. Differences following immunization were assessed for paired subject samples and among vaccines. 120 seniors participated, 29-31 per group, which were well matched demographically. Virus-stimulated PBMCs were GrB-rich before and after vaccination, with minimal increases evident. Immunization did not increase secretion of IFN-γ or IL-10. However, cytolytic effector T-cells (CD8+GrB+perforin+) increased significantly in percentage post-vaccination in all groups, to similar mean values across groups. CD4+GrB+perforin+ T-cells also increased significantly after each vaccine, to similar mean values among vaccines. Vaccination did not increase the low baseline percentages of CD4+ or CD8+ T-cells expressing IFN-γ, IL-2 or IL-10 . In conclusion, participants had pre-existing cellular immunity to H3N2 virus. All 4 vaccines boosted cellular responses to a similar but limited extent, particularly cytolytic effector CD8+ T-cells associated with clinical protection against influenza.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".