| Indication | Seasonal influenza prevention in adults aged 50 years and older |
| Drug | mFLUSIVA |
| Mechanism of Action | mRNA vaccine |
| Company | Moderna |
| Trial Phase | Phase III |
| Category | Regulatory Milestone |
| Sub Category | Approval Granted |
| Therapeutic Area | Infectious Diseases & Vaccines |
| Approval Date | August 10, 2026 |
| Approved Market/Region | US |
| Patient Population Size | Over 40,000 adults |
| Efficacy Rate | 26.6% more efficacious |
| Comparator Vaccine | Licensed, standard-dose, seasonal influenza vaccine, Licensed, high-dose, seasonal influenza vaccine |
| Target Age Group | Adults aged 50 years and older |
| Production Time Advantage | mRNA vaccine: 2-3 months; Traditional vaccine: 6 months |
| Regulatory Agency | FDA, CBER |
| Expected Availability | 2026–2027 influenza season |
| Regulatory Review Details | Initial Refusal-to-File, Full Approval for 50-64 years, Accelerated Approval for 65+ years |
FDA Approves Moderna's mFLUSIVA, First mRNA Flu Vaccine
The FDA has approved Moderna's messenger RNA (mRNA) seasonal influenza vaccine, mFLUSIVA, for adults aged 50 years and older, making it the first and only mRNA standalone seasonal influenza vaccine available. This approval, supported by a pivotal Phase III trial involving over 40,000 adults, demonstrated mFLUSIVA was 26.6% more efficacious than an active comparator, meeting superiority criteria. The vaccine's shorter production time (2-3 months vs. 6 months for traditional vaccines) allows for better strain matching. This milestone is expected to solidify Moderna's leadership in the mRNA vaccine market and shift market share from existing influenza vaccines, with availability anticipated for the 2026–2027 influenza season.
- The FDA approval was based on a pivotal Phase III trial involving over 40,000 adults aged 50 and older. mFLUSIVA demonstrated 26.6% higher efficacy compared to an active comparator vaccine, successfully meeting criteria for non-inferiority, superiority, and higher-level superiority. While common adverse events like injection site pain, fatigue, headache, and myalgia were observed more frequently in the mFLUSIVA group, the overall safety profile supported its approval.
- mFLUSIVA's approval establishes Moderna as the pioneer in the standalone mRNA seasonal influenza vaccine market, reinforcing its leadership in mRNA technology. This vaccine offers a significant production advantage, requiring only two to three months from strain selection to launch, compared to approximately six months for traditional vaccines. This accelerated timeline enables better matching to circulating influenza strains each season, potentially enhancing vaccine effectiveness and uptake.
- Moderna navigated a complex regulatory path, initially facing a Refusal-to-File (RTF) letter from the FDA's CBER due to concerns over the choice of comparator vaccine in its Phase III trial. Moderna successfully addressed these concerns by providing additional Phase III data comparing mFLUSIVA to a high-dose seasonal influenza vaccine and proposing a revised regulatory pathway, including full approval for ages 50-64 and accelerated approval for ages 65 and older, ultimately securing the FDA's green light.
mFLUSIVA's Pivotal Trial Data and Unique Regulatory Path to Approval
The pivotal trials supporting influenza vaccine development in adults aged 50 years and older span multiple study designs — from randomized controlled phase III trials to systematic meta-analyses — each employing hemagglutination inhibition (HAI)-based immunogenicity endpoints as the primary measure of vaccine response. Across these studies, seroconversion rates (SCR), geometric mean titers (GMT), and seroprotection rates (SPR) serve as the core efficacy endpoints, with safety follow-up extending up to six months post-vaccination.
| Study | Population | Design | Vaccine(s) Evaluated | Primary Endpoints | Key Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intradermal vs. Subcutaneous Vaccine Study | Adults ≥65 years (n=900) | Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled | Intradermal (ID, 15 μg HA/strain) vs. standard subcutaneous (SC) trivalent vaccine | Co-primary: GMT and SCR of HAI titers against 3 strains at Day 21; Secondary: GMTs and SCRs at Day 7 | ID vaccine demonstrated superiority in GMTs and SCRs for all 3 strains at both Day 7 and Day 21; higher injection-site reaction frequency with ID, but comparable systemic adverse events |
| Cell Culture-Derived Quadrivalent Vaccine Study (NBP607-QIV) | Adults aged 19–59 years and elderly ≥60 years (n=1,503) | Randomized controlled Phase III trial; 10 university hospitals, Republic of Korea; 2:1:1 allocation ratio | NBP607-QIV vs. NBP607-Y (B/Yamagata) vs. NBP607-V (B/Victoria) | Immunogenicity by HAI assay at 3 weeks post-vaccination; safety assessed over 6 months | SCRs for NBP607-QIV: 52.4% (A/H1N1), 51.2% (A/H3N2), 43.7% (B/Yamagata), 55.8% (B/Victoria); non-inferiority vs. shared strains and superiority vs. alternate B lineage demonstrated; 99.2% of ADRs solicited, 90.3% mild |
| Influenza Vaccination in COPD Patients | Adults ≥50 years (n=672 across 6 studies) | Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs and observational studies | Inactivated trivalent and quadrivalent split-virion vaccines via intradermal, intramuscular, or subcutaneous routes | Pooled GMT, SPR, SCR, and safety across administration routes | Pooled SCR highest with intradermal for A/H1N1 (68.6%, 95% CI: 48.6–83.5%) and A/H3N2 (65.8%, 95% CI: 57.9–73.0%); intradermal GMT higher than intramuscular for both A strains; local reactions more frequent with intradermal (erythema 31.5%, swelling 28.7%); systemic fever rare (<5%) |
| High-Dose vs. Standard-Dose Vaccines in Hemodialysis Patients | Hemodialysis patients across multiple age groups (n=254) | Prospective observational study; 4 hemodialysis clinics | HD-IIV3 (n=141), SD-IIV4 (n=36), RIV4 (n=77) | Seroprotection rates (HI titer ≥1:40 and ≥1:160) at 1, 2, 3, and 4 months post-vaccination | Robust initial seroresponse to influenza A strains across all vaccines; GMT and seroprotection against influenza A higher and more sustained with HD-IIV3; >80% of HD-IIV3 recipients maintained HI titer ≥1:160 at month 4 |
Reshaping the Seasonal Flu Vaccine Landscape for Older Adults
Over the past five years, the seasonal influenza prevention landscape for adults aged 50 and older has been shaped by a decisive shift toward enhanced vaccine formulations designed to overcome the immunological limitations inherent to this population. Immunosenescence, comorbidities, and frailty collectively attenuate immune responses to standard-dose vaccines, driving the development and adoption of high-dose, MF59-adjuvanted, cell-based, and recombinant quadrivalent formulations. A systematic review encompassing 59 studies (search through July 2023) quantified the comparative benefits of these platforms: relative vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza ranged from 24.2% for high-dose vaccine in randomized controlled trials to 30% for recombinant vaccine in RCTs, while MF59-adjuvanted vaccine demonstrated relative effectiveness of −30% to 88% depending on season and strain. Against influenza-related hospitalization, MF59-adjuvanted vaccine showed 59.2% effectiveness, high-dose vaccine 27%, cell-based vaccine 8.5%, and recombinant vaccine −7.3% to 16.3%. Notably, the high-dose formulation remains the only licensed influenza vaccine to have demonstrated superior efficacy over standard-dose vaccine in a dedicated randomized controlled trial.
Recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4) has attracted particular attention as an egg-free alternative with potentially superior antigenic fidelity. In a 2017–18 trial of adults aged 65–74 years, RIV4 generated post-vaccination hemagglutination inhibition titers against circulating A(H3N2) viruses with a mean fold-rise of 3.3–3.5, compared with 1.4–1.6 for high-dose vaccine and 1.7–1.6 for adjuvanted vaccine. Against antigenically advanced A(H3N2) virus, RIV4 achieved a mean fold-rise of 2.9 versus 1.3 and 1.7 for high-dose and adjuvanted vaccines, respectively. Real-world implementation data from England's 2018–19 season — the first in which adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) was deployed nationally for adults ≥65 years — reported adjusted vaccine effectiveness of 53.4% against any influenza hospitalization, 64.8% against A(H1N1)pdm09, and 39.3% against A(H3N2). A phase 4 trial conducted in long-term care facility residents aged ≥65 years (2018–2020; NCT03694808) found noninferior hemagglutination inhibition responses for adjuvanted versus high-dose vaccine for A/H1N1 (GMT ratio 1.03) and A/H3N2 (GMT ratio 1.04), though noninferiority criteria were not met for influenza B HAI levels or seroconversion across any of the three strains.
The most consequential emerging development is the entry of mRNA-based influenza vaccines into clinical evaluation. Phase 1/2 trial data for mRNA-1010 (NCT04956575) demonstrated that doses of 25–200 µg elicited robust Day 29 hemagglutination inhibition titers that persisted through six months, with lower doses (6.25–25 µg) producing HAI titers higher than or comparable to standard-dose vaccine (Afluria) for influenza A strains. At the 50 µg dose, mRNA-1010 elicited broader A/H3N2 antibody responses and greater T-cell responses than placebo at Day 8, with responses sustained or amplified at Day 29. Solicited adverse reactions were reported more frequently than with placebo or standard vaccine, though the majority were grade 1 or 2, with no vaccine-related serious adverse events or deaths observed. Across the enhanced vaccine class as a whole, no increased risk of serious adverse events was detected across 12 RCTs and 7 non-randomized studies. Despite this evolving evidence base, certainty of evidence across most comparative effectiveness estimates remains low to moderate, and vaccination coverage in high-risk older adult populations continues to fall below recommended targets globally.
mRNA Flu Vaccine: A Strategic Leap for Public Health
The recent FDA approval of Moderna's mFLUSIVA, the first standalone mRNA seasonal influenza vaccine for adults aged 50 and older, marks a significant inflection point in the fight against seasonal influenza. This milestone not only underscores the remarkable potential of mRNA technology but also promises to redefine how we approach annual flu vaccination, particularly for a vulnerable demographic.
For older adults, who often experience diminished immune responses to traditional vaccines, mFLUSIVA's demonstrated 26.6% superior efficacy over an active comparator is a critical advancement. This improved protection is further bolstered by the mRNA platform's inherent agility, allowing for a significantly shorter production timeline of 2-3 months. This speed is crucial, as it enables better matching of vaccine strains to circulating viruses, a factor that studies indicate can be compromised by the longer, egg-based manufacturing processes of conventional vaccines. This strategic advantage could lead to more effective vaccines each season, mitigating the impact of antigenic drift.
However, the introduction of this novel vaccine also brings considerations. While mRNA vaccines have shown acceptable reactogenicity, a consistent profile of mild to moderate local and systemic adverse reactions has been observed across various mRNA vaccine types, including influenza candidates. This reactogenicity, potentially linked to the lipid nanoparticle platform, could influence patient perception and uptake. Furthermore, while overall efficacy is superior, research on earlier mRNA influenza formulations suggests variability in immune responses against different influenza strains, with higher responses against influenza A but lower against influenza B. This implies that real-world effectiveness might fluctuate depending on the dominant strains in a given season. Additionally, existing literature highlights that certain immunocompromised populations, such as inflammatory arthritis patients on specific anti-TNF monoclonal antibodies, may exhibit reduced immunogenicity to influenza vaccines, a factor that will need careful consideration for mRNA vaccines in these groups.
Ultimately, this approval solidifies Moderna's leadership in the mRNA vaccine market and validates the platform's broad utility beyond COVID-19. As mFLUSIVA becomes available for the 2026–2027 influenza season, it is poised to shift market dynamics and set a new standard for influenza vaccine development, offering a powerful new tool in public health arsenals.
Frequently Asked Questions
References
- [1] Omer SB, O'Leary ST et al.. Multi-tiered intervention to increase maternal immunization coverage: A randomized, controlled trial. Vaccine. 2022 Aug 12. 35817646
- [2] Yudhawati R, Aini FN et al.. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Immunogenicity and Safety of the Influenza Vaccine in COPD Patients, and Its Relevance with Real-World Effectiveness. International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. 2026. 41939928
- [3] Castillejos M, Cabello-Gutiérrez C et al.. High performance of rapid influenza diagnostic test and variable effectiveness of influenza vaccines in Mexico. International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases. 2019 Dec. 31493523
- [4] Richmond P, Kwan TTL et al.. A Novel Unadjuvanted Subunit Respiratory Syncytial Virus Prefusion F Vaccine Induces Potent and Differentiated Functional Immune Responses Compared to AS01-Adjuvanted Arexvy in Older Adults. Open forum infectious diseases. 2026 Jan. 41531504
- [5] Didion EM, Kass JD et al.. Which Enhanced Influenza Vaccine Has the Greatest Immunogenicity in Long-Term Care Residents: The Adjuvanted or the High-Dose Formulation?. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. 2025 Jul. 40373825
- [6] Belongia EA, Levine MZ et al.. Clinical trial to assess immunogenicity of high-dose, adjuvanted, and recombinant influenza vaccines against cell-grown A(H3N2) viruses in adults 65 to 74 years, 2017-2018. Vaccine. 2020 Mar 30. 32145994
- [7] Williams KV, Moehling Geffel K et al.. Factors associated with humoral immune response in older adults who received egg-free influenza vaccine. Vaccine. 2023 Jan 16. 36543682
- [8] Lee IT, Nachbagauer R et al.. Safety and immunogenicity of a phase 1/2 randomized clinical trial of a quadrivalent, mRNA-based seasonal influenza vaccine (mRNA-1010) in healthy adults: interim analysis. Nature communications. 2023 Jun 19. 37336877
- [9] Šín R, Lochmannová A et al.. Short-term safety and reactogenicity of same-day COVID-19 and influenza vaccination in very old, community-dwelling adults. European geriatric medicine. 2026 Jun. 41999483
- [10] Antonelli Incalzi R, Consoli A et al.. Influenza vaccination for elderly, vulnerable and high-risk subjects: a narrative review and expert opinion. Internal and emergency medicine. 2024 Apr. 37891453
- [11] Fan R, Huang X et al.. Safety and immunogenicity of a quadrivalent influenza vaccine in adults aged 60 years or above: a phase III randomized controlled clinical study. Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics. 2022 Dec 31. 34473607
- [12] Pebody R, Whitaker H et al.. Protection provided by influenza vaccine against influenza-related hospitalisation in ≥65 year olds: Early experience of introduction of a newly licensed adjuvanted vaccine in England in 2018/19. Vaccine. 2020 Jan 10. 31653528
- [13] Carregaro RL, Roscani ANCP et al.. Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with the trivalent vaccine for influenza infection: an overview of systematic reviews. BMC infectious diseases. 2023 Aug 29. 37644401
- [14] Ananworanich J, Lee IT et al.. Safety and Immunogenicity of mRNA-1010, an Investigational Seasonal Influenza Vaccine, in Healthy Adults: Final Results From a Phase 1/2 Randomized Trial. The Journal of infectious diseases. 2025 Feb 4. 38934845
- [15] Arakane R, Annaka R et al.. Superior immunogenicity profile of the new intradermal influenza vaccine compared to the standard subcutaneous vaccine in subjects 65 years and older: A randomized controlled phase III study. Vaccine. 2015 Nov 27. 26519549
- [16] Ward BJ, Séguin A et al.. Phase III: Randomized observer-blind trial to evaluate lot-to-lot consistency of a new plant-derived quadrivalent virus like particle influenza vaccine in adults 18-49 years of age. Vaccine. 2021 Mar 5. 33581920
- [17] Statler VA, Albano FR et al.. Immunogenicity and safety of a quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in children 6-59 months of age: A phase 3, randomized, noninferiority study. Vaccine. 2019 Jan 7. 30057283
- [18] Choi WS, Noh JY et al.. Immunogenicity and safety of a cell culture-derived inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine (NBP607-QIV): A randomized, double-blind, multi-center, phase III clinical trial in adults and elderly subjects. Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics. 2017 Jul 3. 28406746
- [19] Bersanelli M, Giannarelli D et al.. INfluenza Vaccine Indication During therapy with Immune checkpoint inhibitors: a multicenter prospective observational study (INVIDIa-2). Journal for immunotherapy of cancer. 2021 May. 34016723
- [20] Manley HJ, Lacson EK Jr et al.. Seroresponse to Inactivated and Recombinant Influenza Vaccines Among Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients. American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation. 2022 Sep. 35288216
Contact Us
Address
One Research Ct, Suite 450
Rockville, MD 20850
For General Inquiry
info@pienomial.com
















