ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07883421SingVax-01Updated Oct 20, 2026

Immunogenicity of Standard-Dose Versus High-Dose Influenza Vaccines in Older Adults in Singapore

A Phase 4 interventional study of High-dose influenza vaccine and Standard-dose influenza vaccine in Influenza, sponsored by Tan Tock Seng Hospital. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Singapore. Open to participants aged 60 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-20.

Sponsored by Tan Tock Seng Hospital · Phase 4, Interventional, and Prevention

Updated Oct 20, 2026Newly registeredGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
150
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
60 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if the high-dose influenza vaccine can improve year-round protection in older adults aged 60 years and above. The main question it aims to answer is:

  • Can the high-dose influenza vaccine induce higher antibody titres at Day 14 post-vaccination compared to standard-dose influenza vaccine?

Participants will:

  • Receive one dose of either the high-dose or standard-dose influenza vaccine
  • Be followed for one year, with four scheduled visits
  • Keep a diary of their symptoms for 3 days after vaccination
  • Report symptoms whenever they experience an acute respiratory infection (ARI), self-perform lateral flow assay (LFA) testing capable of detecting influenza A and B, and send nasal swabs for central testing
Read the detailed description

The immunogenicity and effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccination declines with increasing age of the vaccinee. Singapore's resident population is aging, with the median resident age rising from 35.8 years two decades ago to 43.2 years in 2025. By 2035, it is estimated that about a third of Singaporeans will be aged 65 and above.

Unlike temperate countries where influenza epidemics characteristically occur during the cold winter months, influenza virus activity in tropical climates is more variable and complex. In Singapore, biannual epidemics are usual, but with continuous transmission year-round. The traditional standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) is unlikely to provide older adults with the year-round protection necessary for Singapore and other tropical countries with a similar climate and disease epidemiology.

In countries where the high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV) is available, national vaccination programmes generally recommended it in preference to the SD-IIV for older adults (e.g. US CDC, Australian government, UK Health Security Agency). This reflects the evidence from randomised clinical trials that the HD-IIV vaccine is superior to the SD-IIV at reducing rates of infection and serious complications such as hospital admission. However, none of these studies have been conducted in a tropical setting, an important evidence gap for policy makers when considering vaccination recommendations.

The SingVax-01 trial is a single-centre, randomised controlled, observer-blind, parallel-group Phase IV trial in 150 adults aged ≥60 years. It will examine the hypothesis that a single intramuscular injection of a HD-IIV offers higher vaccine strain specific haemagglutination inhibition (HI) geometric mean titres (GMTs) at 14-28 days after vaccination compared with the SD-IIV. By assessing the magnitude and durability of immune responses over a 12-month period, this study seeks to generate evidence to inform vaccine policy and optimize influenza prevention strategies for older adults in Singapore as well as other tropical settings to ensure sustained protection against influenza year-round.

02

Conditions studied

  • Influenza

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine
  • high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine
  • A(H3N2)
  • Efluelda
  • Fluzone
  • Fluzone high-dose
  • Vaxigrip
  • acute respiratory illness
  • immunogenicity
03

In context

Influenza, Human

2,264 studies on the registry are indexed under Influenza, Human; 173 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 150 is below the median of 240 across 1,894 interventional studies indexed under Influenza, Human.

Browse Influenza, Human studies →

Lead sponsor

Tan Tock Seng Hospital is the lead sponsor of 108 studies on the registry; 19 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
60 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Willing and able to provide written informed consent
  2. Aged ≥60 years at the time of study enrolment
  3. No influenza vaccination in the previous 8 months
  4. Able to attend all visits and comply with study procedures
  5. Owns a mobile phone

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. History of a severe allergic reaction (e.g. anaphylaxis) to any component of the vaccine, including egg protein, or after any previous dose of any influenza vaccine, including a History of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) within 6 weeks following previous influenza vaccination

    a. Note: mild allergic reactions (like hives) after eating eggs are not a contraindication to influenza vaccination or study enrolment

  2. Moderate or severe acute illness/infection (according to investigator judgement) on the day of vaccination, or febrile illness (temperature ≥ 37.5°C). A prospective participant should not be included in the study until the condition has resolved or the febrile event has subsided.
  3. Self-reported thrombocytopenia, contraindicating IM vaccination
  4. Known or suspected congenital or acquired immunodeficiency; or receipt of immunosuppressive therapy, such as anti-cancer chemotherapy or radiation therapy, within the preceding six months; or long-term systemic corticosteroid therapy (prednisolone ≥ 7.5mg/day or equivalent for more than 2 consecutive weeks within the past 3 months)
  5. Chronic illness that, in the opinion of the investigator, is at a stage where it might interfere with trial conduct or completion
  6. Deprived of freedom by an administrative or court order, or in an emergency setting, or hospitalized involuntarily
  7. Current alcohol abuse or drug addiction that might interfere with the ability to comply with trial procedures in the opinion of the Investigator
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Quadruple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
150 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    HD-IIV

    Trivalent, high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine

    Biological: High-dose influenza vaccine

  • Active comparator
    SD-IIV

    Trivalent, standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine

    Biological: Standard-dose influenza vaccine

Interventions

  • BiologicalHigh-dose influenza vaccine

    Each dose contains 60 mcg haemagglutinin of each of the 3 influenza vaccine strains.

    Also known as: Fluzone high-dose, Efluelda

  • BiologicalStandard-dose influenza vaccine

    Each dose contains 15 mcg haemagglutinin of each of the 3 influenza vaccine strains.

    Also known as: Fluzone, Vaxigrip

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. GMT ratio (HD-IIV/SD-IIV) for A/H3N2 strain in the vaccine

    Time frame: Day 14

Secondary outcomes

  1. GMT ratio (HD-IIV/SD-IIV) for A/H3N2 strain in the vaccine

    Time frame: Day 180 and 330

  2. GMT ratio (HD-IIV/SD-IIV) for A/H1N1 strain in the vaccine

    Time frame: Day 14, 180 and 330

  3. GMT ratio (HD-IIV/SD-IIV) for B/Victoria strain in the vaccine

    Time frame: Day 14, 180 and 330

  4. HI GMTs against influenza vaccine strains

    Time frame: Day 14, 180 and 330

  5. Geometric mean ratio (GMR) of HI titres post- versus pre-vaccination against vaccine strains

    Time frame: Day 14 to 330

  6. Seroprotection rates against vaccine strains

    Seroprotection is defined as HI titre ≥1:40

    Time frame: Day 14 to 330

  7. Seroconversion rates against vaccines strains

    Seroconversion is defined as a pre-vaccination (Day 0) HI titre \<10 and post-vaccination HI titre ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titres from a pre-vaccination HI titre ≥10.

    Time frame: Day 14 to 330

  8. Micro-neutralization titres against vaccine strains

    Time frame: Day 14, 180 and 330

  9. Frequency of solicited local (injection site) and systemic adverse events

    Time frame: 3 days post-vaccination

  10. Severity of solicited local (injection site) and systemic adverse events

    Time frame: 3 days post-vaccination

  11. Percentage of subjects with serious adverse events (SAEs)

    Time frame: Day 0 to 330

Other outcomes

  1. Number of subjects reporting influenza like illness (ILI)

    Time frame: Day 14 to 330

  2. Number of subjects with confirmed influenza infection

    Influenza infection confirmed by lateral flow assay (LFA) and/or polymerase chain reaction (PCR)

    Time frame: Day 14 to 330

07

Study locations

1 site
  • National Centre for Infectious Diseases (NCID)
    Singapore, Singapore
08

References and documents

Publications

  • DiazGranados CA, Dunning AJ, Kimmel M, Kirby D, Treanor J, Collins A, Pollak R, Christoff J, Earl J, Landolfi V, Martin E, Gurunathan S, Nathan R, Greenberg DP, Tornieporth NG, Decker MD, Talbot HK. Efficacy of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccine in older adults. N Engl J Med. 2014 Aug 14;371(7):635-45. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1315727. PubMed 25119609 ↗
  • Cheng C, Chen X, Ge Y, Sung MH, Zhang Y, Ogunyemi K, Carlock MA, Hanley HB, Handel A, Ross TM, Shen Y. Assessing factors associated with one-year antibody waning in participants with repeated influenza vaccinations: A six-year cohort study. Vaccine. 2025 Dec 5;68:127904. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127904. Epub 2025 Nov 6. PubMed 41202613 ↗
  • Young B, Sadarangani S, Jiang L, Wilder-Smith A, Chen MI. Duration of Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression of Test-Negative Design Case-Control Studies. J Infect Dis. 2018 Feb 14;217(5):731-741. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jix632. PubMed 29220496 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — All study findings and documents will be regarded as confidential. The investigators and other study personnel must not disclose such information without prior written approval from the PI. Participant confidentiality will be strictly maintained to the extent possible under the law and local hospital policy. Identifiable information will be removed from any published data.

09

Updates

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
Registered
First appeared on the registry. No changes since
Oct 20, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Oct 20, 2026
    First appeared on the registry

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07883421
Collaborators
A*STAR Infectious Diseases Labs, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Influenza (WHOCCRRI)
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Oct 20, 2026
Start date
Nov 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Mar 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 20, 2026

Study contacts

Xuan Ying Poh, PhD
Contact
poh.xuan.ying@nhghealth.com.sg
+65 6511 5090
Jia Yi Hee, PhD
Contact
hee.jia.yi@nhghealth.com.sg
Barnaby E Young, MB BChir, PhD
principal investigator · National Centre for Infectious Diseases (NCID)

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Oct 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion