The 2025/26 influenza season in Canada was characterized by predominance of A(H3N2) subclade K, co-circulation of A(H1N1)pdm09, and prolonged activity of influenza B. The Canadian Sentinel Practitioner Surveillance Network monitors vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended acute respiratory illness in the context of genetic and antigenic relatedness between vaccine strains and circulating viruses.
VE was estimated using a test-negative design among outpatients presenting with medically attended acute respiratory illness between November and April. Clinical specimens were tested for influenza; positive specimens were subtyped and characterized by whole genome sequencing and hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay where available. VE estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for influenza types and subclades identified during the surveillance period.
Among 9,047 specimens submitted to the sentinel network, 2,809 (31%) tested positive for influenza. Of these influenza-positive specimens, 82% (2,306/2,809) were influenza A and 18% (504/2,809) were influenza B. Of subtyped influenza A viruses (2,169), 85% (1,848) were A(H3N2).
Sequencing coverage varied by type and subtype. For A(H3N2), 59% (1,099/1,848) of viruses were sequenced; for A(H1N1)pdm09, 69% (222/323) were sequenced; and for influenza B, 82% (413/504) were sequenced. Antigenic characterization was performed using HI assay data reported alongside sequencing results.
Of the 1,099 A(H3N2) viruses sequenced, 87% (956/1,099) belonged to subclade K. The sequenced subclade K viruses were antigenically mismatched to the vaccine subclade J.2. VE against A(H3N2) overall was estimated at 38% (95% CI 27%–47%). VE specifically against A(H3N2) subclade K was 33% (95% CI 19%–45%).
Of the A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses sequenced (n=222), virtually all (n=218) were classified as clade 5a.2a.1. Within this clade, two subclades were noted: D.3.1 (21%; n=47) and D.3.1.1 (77%; n=171). These A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses were antigenically matched to the vaccine subclade D.
VE estimates for A(H1N1)pdm09 were: 28% (95% CI 4%–47%) overall; −21% (95% CI −144%–40%) for subclade D.3.1; and 44% (95% CI 14%–64%) for subclade D.3.1.1. The negative point estimate with wide CI for D.3.1 indicates imprecision and limited evidence of protection for that subclade in this dataset.
All sequenced influenza B viruses (413/413) were of the B/Victoria lineage. Two subclades were identified relative to the vaccine strain: subclade C.3 (18%; n=74), which was antigenically mismatched and carried a D197N gain-of-glycosylation, and subclade C.5 (82%; n=339), which was antigenically matched to the vaccine.
VE against influenza B overall was 55% (95% CI 41%–66%). Subclade-specific VE estimates were 10% (95% CI −60%–49%) for C.3 and 68% (95% CI 51%–79%) for C.5.
During the 2025/26 Canadian influenza season, the seasonal vaccine reduced risk of medically attended influenza by an estimated one-third for A(H3N2), roughly one-quarter for A(H1N1)pdm09, and about one-half for B/Victoria in aggregate, based on test-negative design VE estimates reported here.
Sequencing and HI assay results showed a mix of antigenic match and mismatch across subclades: A(H3N2) subclade K was antigenically mismatched to the vaccine subclade J.2, A(H1N1)pdm09 clade 5a.2a.1 (including subclades D.3.1 and D.3.1.1) was antigenically matched to the subclade D vaccine, and B/Victoria included both antigenically mismatched (C.3) and matched (C.5) subclades. Despite these laboratory-based indicators, observed VE did not align perfectly with antigenic characterization for all subclades, and some VE estimates were imprecise with wide confidence intervals.
The authors emphasize that laboratory indicators of vaccine match or mismatch are imperfect proxies for actual population-level protection and underscore the continued importance of annual epidemiological VE monitoring to assess vaccine impact in real-world settings.
Ethical approval or waivers were obtained or documented across participating provinces according to local public health practice and institutional review processes. Sequencing data meeting upload criteria are available on GISAID under EPI_SET_260819zv. Funding sources declared in the source include provincial health ministries, public health agencies, and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Competing interests and author funding declarations are reported in the source article.