Lack of effect of a booster dose of influenza vaccine in hemodialysis patients

Influenza vaccination reduces incidence of peripheral arterial occlusive disease in elderly patients with chronic kidney disease

An influenza vaccination might reduce the risk of incident peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), but supporting evidence is limited. This case-crossover study analyzed data from Taiwan's real-world National Health Insurance Research Database. This study included elderly (≥ 67 years old) patients with CKD having incident PAOD from January 1, 2006, to June 30, 2015. We defined 1 year before PAOD onset as the index date for the self-control group. A conditional logistic regression model was used to investigate exposure to an influenza vaccination for estimating the risk for incident PAOD following vaccination. In total, this study included 46,782 elderly patients with CKD having incident PAOD. The odds ratios for incident PAOD were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.77-0.94), 0.85 (0.79-0.92), 0.84 (0.79-0.90), and 0.85 (0.81-0.90) at 1, 2, 3, and 4 months after an influenza vaccination, respectively. We observed consistent results for the subgroups of patients with CKD and concomitant diabetes. However, we did not observe any beneficial effects of influenza vaccination in patients with advanced CKD or end-stage renal disease. This study demonstrated that influenza vaccination may be associated with a reduced risk of incident PAOD among patients with early-stage CKD.

When kidneys and lungs suffer together

A significant interaction between kidneys and lungs has been shown in physiological and pathological conditions. The two organs can both be targets of the same systemic disease (eg., some vasculitides). Moreover, loss of normal function of either of them can induce direct and indirect dysregulation of the other one. Subjects suffering from COPD may have systemic inflammation, hypoxemia, endothelial dysfunction, increased sympathetic activation and increased aortic stiffness. As well as the exposure to nicotine, all the foresaid factors can induce a microvascular damage, albuminuria, and a worsening of renal function. Renal failure in COPD can be unrecognized since elderly and frail patients may have normal serum creatinine concentration. Lungs and kidneys participate in maintaining the acid-base balance. Compensatory role of the lungs rapidly expresses through an increase or reduction of ventilation. Renal compensation usually requires a few days as it is achieved through changes in bicarbonate reabsorption. Chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal diseases increase the risk of pneumonia. Vaccination against Streptococcus pneumonia and seasonal influenza is recommended for these patients. Vaccines against the last very virulent H1N1 influenza A strain are also available and effective. Acute lung injury and acute kidney injury are frequent complications in critical illnesses, associated with high morbidity and mortality. The concomitant failure of kidneys and lungs implies a multidisciplinary approach, both in terms of diagnostic processes and therapeutic management.

Vaccination practices in dialysis patients: A narrative review

In a period of turmoil concerning vaccination practices, there is a serious conflict between scientifically reasonable, evidence-based guidelines and the far-fetched rumors or misconceptions concerning the vaccination practices in the general population. When a significant portion of the medical and paramedical personnel may be deliberately unvaccinated against common biological agents, achieving effective vaccination rates in the dialysis population may be complicated. Vaccination rates are unacceptably low in dialysis patients and seroconversion rates are even lower; further, serological follow-up is generally poor. The particularly anergic immune system of the advanced chronic kidney disease patients is partly a cause of both high rates of infection and low rates of seroconversions. This narrative review is an effort to summarize current knowledge concerning the vaccination practices in dialysis patients with some specific recommendations based on these facts. Of particular interest is a new vaccine, the Zoster Recombinant, Adjuvanted Vaccine (Shingrix), which we will include in our discussion.

Acetylcholine Receptor Antibody Titers and Clinical Course after Influenza Vaccination in Patients with Myasthenia Gravis: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial (ProPATIent-Trial)

BACKGROUND

It is a continuous matter of discussion whether immune activation by vaccination in general and Influenza vaccination in particular increases the risk for clinical deterioration of autoimmune diseases. This prospective study investigated the serological and clinical course of autoimmune Myasthenia gravis (MG) after a seasonal influenza vaccination.

METHODS

This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study enrolled MG patients with antibodies against acetylcholine-receptors (AChR-ab). They were allocated to receive seasonal influenza vaccine or placebo. The primary endpoint was the relative change of AChR-ab-titer over 12weeks. A relative increase of 20% was set as non-inferiority margin. Secondary endpoints were clinical changes in the modified Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis Score (QMG), increase of anti-influenza-ELISA-antibodies, and changes of treatment. The study is registered with Clinicaltrialsregister.eu, EudraCT number 2006-004374-27.

FINDINGS

62 patients were included. Mean±standard deviation (median) in the vaccine and placebo group were AChR-ab-titer changes of -6.0%±23.3% (-4.0%) and -2.8%±22.0% (-0.5%) and QMG score changes of -0.08±0.27 (0.17) and 0.11±0.31 (0.00), respectively. The difference between groups (Hodges-Lehmann estimate with 95% CI) was - for the AChR-ab-titer change 4·0% [-13.3%, 4.5%] (p=0.28 for testing a difference, p<0.0001 for testing non-inferiority) and for the QMG change 0·00 [-0.17, 0.00] (p=0.79 for testing a difference). The occurrence of 74 adverse events (AE) was comparable between groups. The most common AE was flu-like symptoms. One serious AE (hospitalisation following gastrointestinal haemorrhage) in the verum group was not related to the vaccine.

INTERPRETATION

Influenza vaccination in MG is safe. Uprating the potential risk of a severe course of MG exacerbation during influenza infection compared to the 95% CI differences for the endpoints, vaccination is principally indicated in this patient population.

Effect of a booster dose of influenza vaccine in patients with hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis and renal transplant recipients: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Booster influenza vaccination has been recommended for patients with chronic renal disease in order to enhance the immune response to the influenza vaccine; however, the efficacy of a booster influenza vaccination is a matter of controversy. Therefore, we made a meta-analysis to determine the efficacy in patients with hemodialysis (HD), peritoneal dialysis (PD) and renal transplant recipient (RT). The sero-protection rate was used as a serologic parameter to describe the immune response to the vaccine. Statistical analysis was performed to calculate the pooled rate difference (RD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The pooled RD for the H1N1, H3N2 and B influenza vaccines was 0.02 (95% CI: -0.02-0.06), 0.05 (95% CI: -0.01-0.11), 0.04 (95% CI: -0.02-0.10), respectively. We concluded that a booster dose of the influenza vaccine did not effectively enhance immunogenicity. Therefore, a booster dose of vaccine is not recommended for patients with hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis and renal transplant recipients.

Changes of immunogenic profiles between a single dose and one booster influenza vaccination in hemodialysis patients - an 18-week, open-label trial

Annual influenza vaccination is recommended, but its efficacy in dialysis population is still controversial. Here we aimed to compare the dynamic changes of immune response between various influenza vaccination protocols in hemodialysis patients. A 18-week open label, non-randomized, controlled trial was conducted during 2011–2012. The efficacy between unvaccinated, one- and two-dose regimens were evaluated in 175 hemodialysis patients. Immunogenic profiles were assessed by hemagglutination-inhibition assays. At 3–9 weeks post-vaccination, antibody responses were similar between the one- and two-dose regimens, while the seroprotection rates (antibody titer ≥1:40) for influenza A were 55.6–82.5% in the adult (18–60 years) and 33.3–66.7% in the elderly (>60 years). Meanwhile, the seroprotection rates for influenza B were low (4.0–25.0%). By 18 weeks post-vaccination, the seroprotection rates for influenza A and B declined (0.0–33.3%) in both the adult and elderly receiving one- or two-dose regimens. Of dialysis patients, at most 2.4% developed moderate to severe adverse effects(myalgia and headache) after vaccination. In conclusion, the two-dose regimen could not improve immune responses than the one-dose regimen in hemodialysis patients; meanwhile the induced protective antibodies of both regimens could not be maintained for more than 4 months. Modification of current influenza vaccination strategy in dialysis population should be re-considered.

Influenza vaccination in patients with end-stage renal disease: systematic review and assessment of quality of evidence related to vaccine efficacy, effectiveness, and safety

BACKGROUND

Vaccination against influenza is recommended in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). However, so far, no systematic review has summarized the available evidence on the effectiveness and safety of influenza vaccination in this patient group.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis and assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE methodology. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists for studies on efficacy, effectiveness, and/or safety of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with ESRD receiving dialysis. All reported clinical outcomes were considered, including all-cause mortality, cardiac death, infectious death, all-cause hospitalization, hospitalization due to influenza or pneumonia, hospitalization due to bacteremia, viremia, or septicemia, hospitalization due to respiratory infection, ICU admission, and influenza-like illness.

RESULTS

Five observational studies and no randomized-controlled trial were identified. In four studies, risk of bias was high regarding all reported outcomes. Strong residual confounding was likely to be present in one study reporting on three outcomes, as indicated by significant protective effects of vaccination outside influenza seasons. Therefore, the statistically significant protective effects on all-cause mortality (vaccine effectiveness (VE), 32%; 95% CI, 24-39%), cardiac death (VE, 16%; 95% CI, 1-29%), hospitalization due to influenza or pneumonia (VE, 14%; 95% CI, 7-20%), ICU admission (VE, 81%; 95% CI, 63-86%), and influenza-like illness (VE, 12%; 95% CI, 10-14%) have to be taken with caution. According to GRADE, the quality of the body of evidence was considered very low for all outcomes. No study reported on laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections or on safety endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on the protective effects of influenza vaccination in patients with ESRD is limited and of very low quality. Since VE estimates in the available literature are prone to unmeasured confounding, studies using randomization or quasi-experimental designs are needed to determine the extent by which vaccination prevents influenza and related clinical outcomes in this at-risk population. However, given the high rates of health-endangering events in these patients, even a low VE can be considered as sufficient to recommend annual influenza vaccination.

Effectiveness of influenza vaccine in patients on hemodialysis--a review

The influenza virus is one of the most common causes of viral respiratory tract infections. Some chronic diseases predispose to a severe course of the disease and increase the risk of complications and death. To minimize the risk of infection and complications, care of patients with increased risk should include prophylactic measures such as the administration of a seasonal influenza vaccine. An influenza vaccine is the best and cheapest method of influenza prevention. It is indicated for patients with chronic kidney disease, both during conservative treatment and renal replacement therapy.

Many studies that have assessed the efficacy of an influenza vaccine in patients on hemodialysis have found that immune deficiency predisposes these patients to infection and a severe course of the disease. Because the immune response to a standard influenza vaccine in this population is weak, the studies covered many aspects of vaccination, including the need for a booster dose.

Unlike in a healthy population, the efficacy of an influenza vaccine in patients on hemodialysis might be insufficient; however, the vaccine is still able to induce immunity in a significant number of patients. Considering the latest data and the results of studies described above, the recommendation of a seasonal influenza vaccine should be obligatory in all hemodialysis patients.

This paper is based on original articles available from Medline database. The most recent and most significant literature on the influenza vaccine in patients on hemodialysis has been reviewed.

Effectiveness of influenza vaccination in patients with end-stage renal disease receiving hemodialysis: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Little is known on the effectiveness of influenza vaccine in ESRD patients. This study compared the incidence of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD) between cohorts with and without influenza vaccination.

METHODS

We used the insurance claims data from 1998 to 2009 in Taiwan to determine the incidence of these events within one year after influenza vaccination in the vaccine (N = 831) and the non-vaccine (N = 3187) cohorts. The vaccine cohort to the non-vaccine cohort incidence rate ratio and hazard ratio (HR) of morbidities and mortality were measured.

RESULTS

The age-specific analysis showed that the elderly in the vaccine cohort had lower hospitalization rate (100.8 vs. 133.9 per 100 person-years), contributing to an overall HR of 0.81 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-0.90). The vaccine cohort also had an adjusted HR of 0.85 [95% CI 0.75-0.96] for heart disease. The corresponding incidence of pneumonia and influenza was 22.4 versus 17.2 per 100 person-years, but with an adjusted HR of 0.80 (95% CI 0.64-1.02). The vaccine cohort had lowered risks than the non-vaccine cohort for intensive care unit (ICU) admission (adjusted HR 0.20, 95% CI 0.12-0.33) and mortality (adjusted HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.41-0.60). The time-dependent Cox model revealed an overall adjusted HR for mortality of 0.30 (95% CI 0.26-0.35) after counting vaccination for multi-years.

CONCLUSIONS

ESRD patients with HD receiving the influenza vaccination could have reduced risks of pneumonia/influenza and other morbidities, ICU stay, hospitalization and death, particularly for the elderly.

Factors influencing the efficacy of two injections of a pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) nonadjuvanted vaccine in systemic lupus erythematosus

OBJECTIVE

To assess the factors influencing the efficacy of 2 injections of a pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) vaccine in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, observational prospective study of 111 patients who were vaccinated with a monovalent, inactivated, nonadjuvanted, split-virus vaccine during December 2009 and January 2010 and received a second dose of vaccine 3 weeks later. The antibody response was evaluated using the hemagglutination inhibition assay according to the guidelines recommended for the pandemic vaccine, consisting of 3 immunogenicity criteria (i.e., a seroprotection rate of 70%, a seroconversion rate of 40%, and a geometric mean ratio [GMR] of 2.5).

RESULTS

The 3 immunogenicity criteria were met on day 42 (seroprotection rate 80.0% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 72.5-87.5%], seroconversion rate 71.8% [95% CI 63.4-80.2%], and GMR 10.3 [95% CI 2.9-14.2]), while only 2 criteria were met on day 21 (seroprotection rate 66.7% [95% CI 57.9-75.4%], seroconversion rate 60.4% [95% CI 51.3-69.5%], and GMR 8.5 [95% CI 3.2-12.0]). The vaccine was well tolerated. Disease activity, assessed by the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment version of the SLE Disease Activity Index, the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group score, and the Systemic Lupus Activity Questionnaire, did not increase. In the multivariate analysis, vaccination failure was significantly associated with immunosuppressive treatment or a lymphocyte count of ≤ 1.0 × 10⁹/liter. The second injection significantly increased the immunogenicity in these subgroups, but not high enough to fulfill the seroprotection criterion in patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that the efficacy of the vaccine was impaired in patients who were receiving immunosuppressive drugs or who had lymphopenia. A second injection increased vaccine immunogenicity without reaching all efficacy criteria for a pandemic vaccine in patients receiving an immunosuppressive agent. These results open possibilities for improving anti-influenza vaccination in SLE.

Vaccines for the elderly

Vaccination is the most efficient strategy to prevent infectious disease. The increased vulnerability to infection of the elderly makes them a particularly important target population for vaccination. However, most vaccines are less immunogenic and efficient in the elderly because of age-related changes in the immune system. Vaccination against influenza, Streptococcus pneumoniae and varicella zoster virus is recommended for the elderly in many countries. Various strategies such as the use of adjuvants and novel administration routes are pursued to improve influenza vaccination for the elderly and recent developments in the field of pneumococcal vaccination led to the licensure of protein-conjugated polysaccharide vaccines containing up to 13 serotypes. As antibody titres are generally lower in the elderly and-particularly for inactivated vaccines-decline fast in the elderly, regular booster immunizations, for example against tetanus, diphtheria and, in endemic areas, tick-borne encephalitis, are essential during adulthood to ensure protection of the elderly. With increasing health and travel opportunities in old age the importance of travel vaccines for persons over the age of 60 is growing. However, little is known about immunogenicity and efficacy of travel vaccines in this age group. Despite major advances in the field of vaccinology over the last decades, there are still possibilities for improvement concerning vaccines for the elderly. Novel approaches, such as viral vectors for antigen delivery, DNA-based vaccines and innovative adjuvants, particularly toll-like receptor agonists, will help to achieve optimal protection against infectious diseases in old age.

Antibody responses to natural influenza A/H1N1/09 disease or following immunization with adjuvanted vaccines, in immunocompetent and immunocompromised children

OBJECTIVES

To compare antibody responses elicited by influenza A/H1N1/09 disease and immunization with adjuvanted vaccines, in immunocompetent or immunocompromised children.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective parallel cohort field study enrolling children with confirmed influenza A/H1N1/09 disease or immunized with 1 (immunocompetent) or 2 (immunocompromised) doses of influenza A/H1N1/09 squalene-based AS03- or MF59-adjuvanted vaccines. Antibody geometric mean titers (GMT) were measured by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization (MN) assays 4-6 weeks after vaccination/disease. Vaccine adverse events were self-recorded in a 7-day diary.

RESULTS

Antibody titers were as high in 48 immunocompetent children after a single immunization (HAI and MN seroprotection rates: 98%; HAI-GMT: 395, MN-GMT: 370) as in 51 convalescent children (seroprotection rates: 98% (HAI) and 92% (MN); GMT: 350 (HAI) and 212 (MN). Twenty-seven immunocompromised children reached slightly lower seroprotection rates (HAI: 89%, MN: 85%) but similar antibody titers (HAI-GMT: 306, MN-GMT: 225) after 2 immunizations. Adverse events increased with age (P=0.01) and were more frequent with Pandemrix® than Focetria® (P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Similarly high seroresponses may be expected in immunocompetent children after a single dose of adjuvanted vaccines as responses of convalescent children. Two vaccine doses were sufficient for most immunocompromised children.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT0102293 and NCT01022905.

Cost-effectiveness of adjuvanted versus nonadjuvanted influenza vaccine in adult hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Currently more than 340,000 individuals are receiving long-term hemodialysis (HD) therapy for end-stage renal disease and therefore are particularly vulnerable to influenza, prone to more severe influenza outcomes, and less likely to achieve seroprotection from standard influenza vaccines. Influenza vaccine adjuvants, chemical or biologic compounds added to a vaccine to boost the elicited immunologic response, may help overcome this problem.

STUDY DESIGN

Economic stochastic decision analytic simulation model.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

US adult HD population.

MODEL, PERSPECTIVE, & TIMEFRAME

The model simulated the decision to use either an adjuvanted or nonadjuvanted vaccine, assumed the societal perspective, and represented a single influenza season, or 1 year.

INTERVENTION

Adjuvanted influenza vaccine at different adjuvant costs and efficacies. Sensitivity analyses explored the impact of varying influenza clinical attack rate, influenza hospitalization rate, and influenza-related mortality.

OUTCOMES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of adjuvanted influenza vaccine (vs nonadjuvanted) with effectiveness measured in quality-adjusted life-years.

RESULTS

Adjuvanted influenza vaccine would be cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$50,000/quality-adjusted life-year) at a $1 adjuvant cost (on top of the standard vaccine cost) when adjuvant efficacy (in overcoming the difference between influenza vaccine response in HD patients and healthy adults) ≥60% and economically dominant (provides both cost savings and health benefits) when the $1 adjuvant's efficacy is 100%. A $2 adjuvant would be cost-effective if adjuvant efficacy was 100%.

LIMITATIONS

All models are simplifications of real life and cannot capture all possible factors and outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvanted influenza vaccine with adjuvant cost ≤$2 could be a cost-effective strategy in a standard influenza season depending on the potency of the adjuvant.

Immunogenicity of a standard trivalent influenza vaccine in patients on long-term hemodialysis: an open-label trial

BACKGROUND

Disturbances in acquired immunity are considered to be responsible, at least in part, for the high infection rate and inadequate response to vaccinations observed in hemodialysis (HD) patients. The present prospective trial aimed to: (1) evaluate the immunogenicity of a standard influenza vaccine in HD patients, and (2) identify determinants of the immune response.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective interventional open-label study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

201 long-term HD patients and 41 healthy volunteers.

INTERVENTION

Vaccination with a standard trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome was seroprotection rate, defined as percentage of participants with an antibody titer of 40 or greater 1 month after vaccination.

MEASUREMENTS

All antibody titers were determined in duplicate by using the hemagglutination inhibition assay. Regression analyses were performed to investigate the association between demographics, uremic retention solutes (including p-cresol), inflammation, nutrition, iron status, trace elements, and immune response in HD patients.

RESULTS

More than 80% of HD patients showed seroprotection after vaccination. The immune response of HD patients was similar to that of healthy volunteers. Booster vaccination did not improve the immune response. High serum ferritin level was the only parameter independently associated with a better vaccination-induced antibody response in HD patients.

LIMITATIONS

A high seroprotection rate at baseline undermined the power to identify clinical determinants of the immune response.

CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccination is as efficacious in HD patients as in healthy volunteers. With the exception of serum ferritin, none of the investigated parameters of nutrition, inflammation, and dialysis adequacy had a significant impact on the immune response. Our data support annual vaccination of HD patients and question the clinical relevance of disturbances in acquired immunity in contemporary HD patients.

Staphylococcal vaccines and immunotherapies

Staphylococcus aureus is an important pathogen in the hospital and in the community, and it is increasingly resistant to multiple antibiotics. A nonantimicrobial approach to controlling S aureus is needed. The most extensively tested vaccine against S aureus, which is a capsular polysaccharide-based vaccine known as StaphVAX, showed promise in an initial phase 3 trial, but was found to be ineffective in a confirmatory trial, leading to its development being halted. Likewise, a human IgG preparation known as INH-A21 (Veronate) with elevated levels of antibodies to the staphylococcal surface adhesins ClfA and SdrG made it into phase 3 testing, where it failed to show a clinical benefit. Several novel antigens are being tested for potential inclusion in a staphylococcal vaccine, including cell wall-anchored adhesin proteins and exotoxins. Given the multiple and sometimes redundant virulence factors of S aureus that enable it to be such a crafty pathogen, if a vaccine is to prove effective, it will have to be multicomponent, incorporating several surface proteins, toxoids, and surface polysaccharides.

Should health-care providers in the United States have access to influenza vaccines formulated for the southern hemisphere?

BACKGROUND

Influenza is the most common vaccine-preventable disease in travelers. It circulates year-round in the tropics, November to March in the northern hemisphere (NH), and April to October in the southern hemisphere (SH). In 2005, approximately 8.5 million US adults aged 18 years and older traveled to the Caribbean. A similar number traveled to the tropics and the SH. SH formulation of influenza vaccine is not available in the United States. We surveyed International Society of Travel Medicine (ISTM) members to ask if they would use SH influenza vaccine if available.

METHODS

We electronically mailed a survey in December 2006 to 1,251 ISTM members in the United States. We asked if respondents would use SH vaccine for patients traveling to the SH or tropics, how many such patients per week they see, and their practice location.

RESULTS

We received 157 responses for a response rate of 12.5%. Of these, 129 (82%) stated that they would be interested in having SH influenza vaccine available. Of those indicating interest, 73 (60%) reported seeing >10 patients traveling to the SH or tropics each week. Respondents reported practice settings in 34 states and the District of Columbia. Respondents requested more information about the likely cost of SH influenza vaccine, ordering conditions, vaccine use guidelines, comparability with NH vaccine, and approval of SH vaccine by the Food and Drug Administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Many travelers to the SH are at risk for influenza infection. Although only a limited number of ISTM members responded, respondents indicated considerable interest in availability of SH influenza vaccine for their patients. More data from travel medicine and other practitioners are needed on this topic. Inquiries are being made of influenza vaccine manufacturers about licensing SH influenza vaccines in the United States. Adding SH influenza vaccine to the vaccines available to NH clinicians could help mitigate the morbidity of influenza in travelers.