Skip to main content
. 2010 Jan 31;4(3):141–145. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-2659.2009.00124.x

Table 3.

 Relative efficacy of LAIV versus TIV by age and strain (study 2)

Age, months (n) All strains*
Relative efficacy, % (95% CI) H1N1* H3N2* B*
Attack rate, % Relative efficacy, % (95% CI) Attack rate, % Relative efficacy, % (95% CI) Attack rate, % Relative efficacy, % (95% CI)
LAIV TIV LAIV TIV LAIV TIV
6–23 (3686) 56 (40–68) 0·1 0·3 67 (−56 to 95) 0·7 4·1 83 (70–91) 2·3 2·7 15 (−29 to 43)
24–35 (2612) 57 (40–69) 0·1 0·3 78 (−79 to 99) 1·0 5·6 82 (68–90) 2·8 3·0 10 (−42 to 43)
36–47 (846) 42 (5–66) 0 2·3 100 (63–100) 1·7 3·4 48 (−29 to 81) 4·1 4·8 12 (−69 to 55)
48–59 (708) 56 (25–75) 0 2·0 100 (47–100) 1·1 4·0 76 (22–95) 5·0 7·5 25 (−37 to 60)

LAIV, live attenuated influenza vaccine; TIV, trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine.

*Regardless of antigenic match to vaccine.