Table 2.
Comparison of baculovirus vector influenza vaccine with different types of influenza vaccines.
| Vaccine types | Advantages | Disadvantages | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inactivated vaccines (including whole virus inactivation, split, and purified subunit vaccines) | Safe for pregnant women Suitable for immunocompromised patients Adjuvants can enhance the antibody titers and cellular immune responses | May cause injection site pain, fever, headaches, muscle pain General discomfort are mostly observed in children Induce weaker immune responses in young children and the elderly than in adults Long production cycle May cause allergies Erythema may be caused by adjuvants | Jamali et al. (2018), Kim et al. (2022), Zhao et al. (2023), Moro et al. (2020) |
| Attenuated live vaccine | Systemic allergic reactions such as urticaria, angioedema, rhinitis, eczema, etc. have not yet been seen Can be administered via nasal spray (common in children) | May cause mild to moderate symptoms, including runny nose, sneezing, nasal discomfort, fever, and headache Can cause one or more adverse reactions in children, including arm pain, chills, myalgia Not recommended for routine use in pregnant women | Clements and Murphy (1986), Singanayagam et al. (2018), Tanner et al. (2021), Loeb et al. (2016) |
| Baculovirus vector vaccine | High security Well tolerated with few side effects Rapid and stable induction of humoral and cellular immune responses | Low doses may reduce immunogenicity Need increased dosage to improve immunogenicity | Felberbaum (2015) and Soema et al. (2015) |
| RNA vaccine | Safety Efficacy High potency Ability to design multivalent vaccines encoding antigens of known influenza virus subtypes Possibility of mucosal delivery | May cause mild to moderate symptoms, including injection site pain, fever, headache, fatigue, myalgia, arthralgia, nausea, chills Higher costs Adverse effects such as thrombosis and/or edema may occur | Vogel et al. (2018), Arevalo et al. (2022), Liu et al. (2024), Bahl et al. (2017), Soens et al. (2025) |
| DNA vaccine | Possibility of mucosal delivery Stimulates innate immunity Adjuvants can enhance the antibody titers and cellular immune responses | Low immunogenicity Risk of integration of DNA vaccine genetic material into cellular or host DNA May cause autoimmune disorders against host DNA Mild to moderate flu-like symptoms and injection site reactions that may be caused by adjuvants | Zhao et al. (2023), Loudon et al. (2010), Alexander et al. (2010), Chen et al. (2008), Vollmer and Krieg (2009) |
| Virus-like particles vaccine | Elicits a strong and persistent immune response Ability to load immunomodulators | Multi-step process Less immunogenicity compared to other platforms | Durous et al. (2019) |
| Adenovirus vectored vaccines | High expression levels of the transgene of the antigenic protein Ability to simultaneously induce humoral and cellular immune responses Safe, easy to prepare and do not require adjuvants | Innate inflammatory response may lead to systemic toxicity after adenovirus vector administration but the probability is low | Appledorn et al. (2008), Zhu et al. (2007), Ahi et al. (2011) |
| Virosomes vaccines | Good immunogenicity in both healthy and immunocompromised elderly, adults and children | Without adjuvants, virosomes poorly activate the antigen-presenting cells and fail to trigger cross-presentation, limiting the immunity induction in antigen-presenting cells | Herzog et al. (2009) |