Vaccinations in paediatric rheumatology: an update on current developments

Lupus Nephritis in Children: Novel Perspectives

Childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus is an inflammatory and autoimmune condition characterized by heterogeneous multisystem involvement and a chronic course with unpredictable flares. Kidney involvement, commonly called lupus nephritis, mainly presents with immune complex-mediated glomerulonephritis and is more frequent and severe in adults. Despite a considerable improvement in long-term renal prognosis, children and adolescents with lupus nephritis still experience significant morbidity and mortality. Moreover, current literature often lacks pediatric-specific data, leading clinicians to rely exclusively on adult therapeutic approaches. This review aims to describe pediatric lupus nephritis and provide an overview of the novel perspectives on the pathogenetic mechanisms, histopathological classification, therapeutic approach, novel biomarkers, and follow-up targets in children and adolescents with lupus nephritis.

Vaccination coverage in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, inflammatory bowel diseases, and healthy peers: Cross-sectional electronic survey data

BACKGROUND

Patients with immune-mediated diseases, such as juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of developing infections, due to disease-related immune dysfunction and applying of immunosuppressive drugs.

AIM

To evaluate vaccine coverage in patients with IBD and JIA, and compare it with healthy children.

METHODS

In the cross-sectional study we included the data from a questionnaire survey of 190 Legal representatives of children with JIA (n = 81), IBD (n = 51), and healthy children (HC, n = 58). An electronic online questionnaire was created for the survey.

RESULTS

There were female predominance in JIA patients and younger onset age. Parents of JIA had higher education levels. Employment level and family status were similar in the three studied groups. Patients with JIA and IBD had lower vaccine coverage, without parental rejection of vaccinations in IBD, compare to JIA and healthy controls. The main reason for incomplete vaccination was medical conditions in IBD and JIA. IBD patients had a lower rate of normal vaccine-associated reactions compared to JIA and HC. The encouraging role of physicians for vaccinations was the lowest in JIA patients. IBD patients had more possibilities to check antibodies before immune-suppressive therapy and had more supplementary vaccinations compared to JIA and HC.

CONCLUSION

JIA and IBD patients had lower vaccine coverage compared to HC. Physicians' encouragement of vaccination and the impossibility of discus about future vaccinations and their outcomes seemed the main factors for patients with immune-mediated diseases, influencing vaccine coverage. Further investigations are required to understand the reasons for incomplete vaccinations and improve vaccine coverage in both groups, especially in rheumatic disease patients. The approaches that stimulate vaccination in healthy children are not always optimal in children with immune-mediated diseases. It is necessary to provide personalized vaccine-encouraging strategies for parents of chronically ill children with the following validation of these technics.

Immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in children with paediatric rheumatic diseases: a scoping review

Children with paediatric rheumatic diseases (PRDs) are at increased risk of vaccine-preventable disease. Safe and effective vaccination is central to preventive care in PRD patients; however, uncertainty surrounding immunogenicity and safety has contributed to suboptimal vaccination. The aim of this study was to evaluate treatment effect on immunogenicity to vaccination in PRD patients and assess vaccine safety, specifically adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) and disease flare. Scoping review. In this scoping review, a systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL and Embase databases was conducted from 2014 to 23 August 2022 to identify observational studies evaluating the immunogenicity and safety of commonly used vaccinations in PRD patients. The primary outcome was immunogenicity (defined as seroprotection and protective antibody concentrations), with secondary outcomes describing AEFI and disease flare also extracted. Due to extensive heterogeneity related to diagnostic and vaccination variability, narrative synthesis was used to describe the findings of each study. Study quality was assessed via the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022307212). The search yielded 19 studies evaluating immunogenicity to vaccination and incidence of AEFI and disease flares in this population, which were of acceptable quality. Corticosteroids did not have deleterious effects on vaccine response. Treatment with conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and biologic DMARDs generally had no effect immunogenicity in PRD patients. While patients exhibited adequate seroprotection, protective antibody levels were lower in patients on some immunosuppressant agents. Varicella infections were recorded post vaccination in several patients with low protective antibody levels undergoing treatment with DMARDs and corticosteroids. Most vaccines appear safe and effective in PRD patients, despite immunosuppressant treatment. Booster vaccinations should be considered with some studies highlighting inadequate seroprotection following primary course of vaccinations with acceleration of antibody decline over time. There was limited evidence to support avoiding live vaccines in PRD patients.

Evaluation of pediatric rheumatologists’ knowledge, attitudes, and behavior regarding vaccination in pediatric rheumatic diseases

Aim: Developments in diagnostic methods and advances in the treatment of pediatric rheumatic diseases (PRDs) have improved the quality of life in this patient group. However, vaccine-preventable infectious diseases are still outstanding causes of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients more than in healthy population. Pediatric rheumatologists play a critical role in increasing vaccination rates since they have ample opportunity to administer vaccinations. The aim of this study is to determine the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of pediatric rheumatologists about vaccination in rheumatic diseases. Material and Method: Between March 2022-May 2022, an online questionnaire of 20 items was used to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of pediatric rheumatologists in Turkey with respect to vaccination. Results: A total of 81 participants answered all survey questions completely. The ages of the study group ranged from 30 to 48 years, at a mean of 37.5±3.8 years. Most of the pediatric rheumatologists (n:76, 93.8%) were working in a tertiary pediatric hospital; 27.2% did not consider themselves primarily responsible for the vaccination of children with PRDs, and 30.9% did not refer their patients to the department that administers the vaccine either before or during immunosuppressive therapy. In addition, it was found that only 14.8% regularly questioned the vaccination history of patients at each outpatient visit. One-third of study group recommended the implementation of non-scheduled vaccines and the most recommended non-scheduled vaccine was seasonal influenza (n:48, 59.3%). The comparative analysis between pediatric rheumatology residents and staff physicians showed no statistically significant difference in the level of knowledge except in the question concerning live vaccines. Conclusion: This study revealed that there are still serious problems in clinical practice about the vaccination of PRDs patients. For this purpose, pediatric rhematologists’ awareness and knowledge about vaccination should be increased with a special education program.

Vaccinations in Children and Adolescents Treated With Immune-Modifying Biologics: Update and Current Developments

Treatment with immune-modifying biologics has positively impacted disease control and quality of life in many patients with immune-mediated disorders. However, the higher susceptibility to common and opportunistic pathogens is of concern. Thus, immunization strategies to control vaccine-preventable diseases represent a critical issue in this population. However, limited data exist on the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of available vaccines in patients on biologics, particularly in children. Here, according to published literature and real-life experience and practice, we report the interim indications of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergology and Immunology (SIAIP) Vaccine Committee and of the Italian Primary Immunodeficiency Network (IPINet) Centers on immunization of children and adolescents receiving biologics. Our aim is to provide a practical guidance for the clinician to ensure optimal protection for patients and the community.

Vaccination and immunotherapies in neuroimmunological diseases

Neuroimmunological diseases and their treatment compromise the immune system, thereby increasing the risk of infections and serious illness. Consequently, vaccinations to protect against infections are an important part of the clinical management of these diseases. However, the wide variety of immunotherapies that are currently used to treat neuroimmunological disease — particularly multiple sclerosis and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders — can also impair immunological responses to vaccinations. In this Review, we discuss what is known about the effects of various immunotherapies on immunological responses to vaccines and what these effects mean for the safe and effective use of vaccines in patients with a neuroimmunological disease. The success of vaccination in patients receiving immunotherapy largely depends on the specific mode of action of the immunotherapy. To minimize the risk of infection when using immunotherapy, assessment of immune status and exclusion of underlying chronic infections before initiation of therapy are essential. Selection of the required vaccinations and leaving appropriate time intervals between vaccination and administration of immunotherapy can help to safeguard patients. We also discuss the rapidly evolving knowledge of how immunotherapies affect responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and how these effects should influence the management of patients on these therapies during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In this Review, the authors discuss how various immunotherapies for neuroimmunological diseases interact with vaccination responses, including responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, and the implications for the safe and effective use of vaccines in patients with these diseases.

Vaccination against infection is an essential part of the management of neuroimmunological diseases.

All indicated vaccinations should be administered before initiation of immunotherapy whenever possible; appropriate intervals between vaccination and treatment vary with treatment and vaccination.

Inactivated vaccines are considered safe in neuroimmunological diseases but live vaccines are generally contraindicated during immunotherapy.

Vaccination responses during immunotherapy can be diminished or abrogated, depending on the treatment and vaccination; antibody titre testing to monitor responses can be considered where appropriate.

Vaccinations must be avoided during relapses or exacerbations of neuroimmunological diseases.

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is recommended for patients with neuroimmunological disease but some immunotherapies limit the immune response; therefore, timing should be considered carefully.

Immunogenicity and safety of routine vaccines in children and adolescents with rheumatic diseases on immunosuppressive treatment - a systematic review

The immunogenicity of vaccines in children with juvenile autoimmune rheumatic diseases (JARDs) can be reduced, there are additional safety concerns around vaccination, and there is a potential for worsening in disease activity. In this systematic review, we summarise studies that investigated the immunogenicity and safety of routine vaccines in children and adolescents with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment. We identified 37 studies investigating 2571 children and adolescents with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment and 4895 control children. Of the 56 geometric mean antibody titres measured, 19 (34%) were lower, six (11%) higher, and 31 (55%) similar; of the 39 seroprotection rates measured, 10 (26%) were lower, two (5%) higher, and 27 (69%) similar; and of the 27 seroconversion rates measured, nine (33%) were lower, two (8%) higher, and 16 (59%) similar in children with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment compared with control children. However, many of the studies were underpowered, and not designed to show non-inferiority between children with JARD and controls. Subgroup analysis for different types of immunosuppressive treatments was not feasible, as most studies did not report results by treatment. Severe adverse events were reported in 38 children (33 with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, four with systemic lupus erythematosus, and one in a healthy child); most of them were likely not related to the vaccination (e.g. elective hospitalisation or surgery). A worsening in disease activity was reported in 44 (2%) children with JARD; again, many of them were likely not related to the vaccination. There were no safety concerns with live attenuated vaccines; however, only few studies reported results for this.

CONCLUSION

Vaccination in children with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment is safe and should be promoted, especially since these children are at increased risk for infection. The importance for the completion of vaccination schedules should be stressed. Strategies to compensate for the lower vaccine responses, which are found in approximately one-third of these children, include measuring antibody levels to determine the optimal timing for the administration of additional booster doses.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Children with juvenile autoimmune rheumatic diseases (JARDs) are at higher risk for infections, due to their underlying disease and their immunosuppressive treatment. • In children with JARD, the immunogenicity of vaccines might be reduced, and concerns about safety or the potential for worsening in disease activity after vaccination exist.

WHAT IS NEW

• Our systematic review shows that vaccines in children with JARDs on immunosuppressive treatment are safe and immunogenic. • There are several limitations of the currently published studies, including random timing of measuring vaccine responses and age differences between children with JARD and control groups. Many of the studies were underpowered, and not designed to show non-inferiority between children with JARD and controls.

Vaccination completeness in children with rheumatic diseases: A longitudinal, observational multicenter cohort study in Switzerland

INTRODUCTION

Children with pediatric inflammatory rheumatic diseases (PRD) have an increased infection risk. Vaccinations are effective to avoid vaccine-preventable diseases. This study aimed to assess the vaccination completeness in Swiss PRD patients stratified by immunosuppressive treatment (IST).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter observational cohort study of PRD patients was performed in Basel, Geneva, Lucerne, Lausanne, and Zurich in PRD patients aged < 18 years included in the Juvenile Inflammatory Rheumatism Cohort. Completeness was assessed for i) the overall vaccination status (Swiss national immunization program (NIP) and specific additional PRD-recommended vaccinations), ii) for all and each vaccination of the NIP at PRD diagnosis and reference date (RefD) and iii) all and each specific additional PRD-recommended vaccination at RefD. Completeness was assessed over the disease course and stratified by IST.

RESULTS

Of 616 eligible patients, 234 children were analyzed. Of these, 147 (63%) were girls. Median age at PRD diagnosis was 6.5 years (IQR 2.9-10.3) and 10.9 years at RefD (6.9-14.3). The median follow-up since PRD diagnosis was 3 years (1.1-5.5). 120/234 children received IST. At RefD, overall vaccination completeness was 3.8% (9/234 children), completeness for the NIP vaccinations was 70.1% (164/234 children; IST 65%, no IST: 75.4%) and for all specific additional PRD-recommended vaccinations was 3.8% (9/234 children; IST 2.5%; no IST 5.3%). Vaccination completeness against pneumococcal disease, hepatitis B virus, and human papilloma virus (HPV) was 50.4, 20, 37.9%, respectively. In 25/35 children with negative varicella zoster virus history vaccination status was complete (IST: 94.4%, no IST: 47%). Annual non-live influenza vaccination was complete in 24.2% of children during IST; adherence decreased over the disease course.

DISCUSSION

This study identified a low overall vaccination completeness in children with PRD. Particularly, the completeness of specific additional PRD-recommended vaccinations was low. If not performed early after PRD diagnosis, vaccination status remained frequently incomplete. Close collaboration between pediatrician and rheumatologist to improve vaccination completeness is essential. Exchange of vaccination records, standardized assessment of specific PRD-recommended vaccinations and those of the NIP, and annual reminder for influenza vaccination are crucial to improve vaccination completeness in this vulnerable pediatric population.

Real-life vaccination coverage in Slovak children with rheumatic diseases

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based recommendations for vaccination of patients with pediatric rheumatic diseases (PRDs) are available, their implementation in practice is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze real-life vaccination coverage in children with PRDs and identify reasons for incomplete vaccination.

METHODS

Up-to-date information on vaccination status of Slovak children followed at a tertiary pediatric rheumatology center was retrieved from pediatricians over an 18-month period and compared to the standard Slovak Immunization Schedule. Reasons for missed vaccinations were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Vaccination records of 156 patients (median age 10 years, 2-18) with PRDs (JIA n = 108, systemic diseases n = 21, autoinflammatory diseases n = 16, uveitis n = 9, others n = 2) were available for analysis. 117 (75.0%) were completely vaccinated, 2 (1.3%) had not received any vaccine due to reasons unrelated to PRD. 37 (23.7%) remaining patients missed altogether 48 mandatory vaccinations. In 58.3% (n = 28, in 24 patients) no PRD related reasons for missing vaccinations were identified. Only 20 vaccinations (18 live-attenuated and 2 non-live in 19 patients) were missed due to ongoing immunosuppressive treatment or PRD activity. Patients aged 11-14 years were more likely to be incompletely vaccinated than other age groups (48.8% vs. 15.9%, p < 0.001), mainly due to missed MMR booster. Systemic immunosuppressive treatment was a significant predictor for incomplete vaccination status (OR 5.03, 95% CI 1.13-22.31, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Full vaccination is possible in a high proportion of PRD patients. In addition to immunosuppressive therapy, reasons unrelated to PRDs are a frequent and possibly inadequate cause of missed vaccinations. Periodic vaccination status assessments are needed in pediatric rheumatology care.

A National Survey Across Primary Care Pediatricians Regarding Immunization Views and Practices in Children With Rheumatic Diseases

METHODS

Cross-sectional survey conducted with an anonymous questionnaire of 34 items distributed to pediatricians via an online platform. Four hundred questionnaires were sent, and 256 were returned and analyzed using STATA 13. Data collection included demographics, questions on knowledge, perceptions, and opinions, as well as advice given to families.

RESULTS

The majority of doctors felt that vaccination in children with RDs is essential. Responders were using a variety of guidelines to reach a clinical decision. Fifty percent were hesitant to adhere to the national vaccination scheme without expert input. Reasons were as follows: not convinced from current literature that the vaccine is safe (32%), afraid to cause disease flare (43%), and unable to deal with parental concerns/refusal (54%). Twelve percent of responders felt that the RD may have been triggered by a vaccine. The majority (82%) of doctors were pro annual influenza vaccination. Seventy percent of doctors were keener to administer booster doses rather than primary ones.

CONCLUSIONS

Variation in opinion and clinical practice exists. Overall, although general pediatricians are informed regarding efficacy and adverse effects of immunizations in patients with RDs, there are steps to be made from principle to practice. Vaccinating these children is of vital importance, and primary care pediatricians should be updated regarding existing guidelines referring to this field.

Vaccination in Children With Autoimmune Disorders and Treated With Various Immunosuppressive Regimens: A Comprehensive Review and Practical Guide

Children with autoimmune disorders are especially at risk of vaccine-preventable diseases due to their underlying disease and the immunosuppressive treatment often required for a long period. In addition, vaccine coverage remains too low in this vulnerable population. This can be explained by a fear of possible adverse effects of vaccines under immunosuppression, but also a lack of data and clear recommendations, particularly with regard to vaccination with live vaccines. In this review, the latest literature and recommendations on vaccination in immunosuppressed children are discussed in detail, with the aim to provide a set of practical guidelines on vaccination for specialists caring for children suffering from different autoimmune disorders and treated with various immunosuppressive regimens.

An Update on the Management of Childhood-Onset Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) is a prototype of a multisystemic, inflammatory, heterogeneous autoimmune condition. This disease is characterized by simultaneous or sequential organ and system involvement, with unpredictable flare and high levels of morbidity and mortality. Racial/ethnic background, socioeconomic status, cost of medications, difficulty accessing health care, and poor adherence seem to impact lupus outcomes and treatment response. In this article, the management of cSLE patients is updated. Regarding pathogenesis, a number of potential targets for drugs have been studied. However, most treatments in pediatric patients are off-label drugs with recommendations based on inadequately powered studies, therapeutic consensus guidelines, or case series. Management practices for cSLE patients include evaluations of disease activity and cumulative damage scores, routine non-live vaccinations, physical activity, and addressing mental health issues. Antimalarials and glucocorticoids are still the most common drugs used to treat cSLE, and hydroxychloroquine is recommended for nearly all cSLE patients. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) should be standardized for each patient, based on disease flare and cSLE severity. Mycophenolate mofetil or intravenous cyclophosphamide is suggested as induction therapy for lupus nephritis classes III and IV. Calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine, tacrolimus, voclosporin) appear to be another good option for cSLE patients with lupus nephritis. Regarding B-cell-targeting biologic agents, rituximab may be used for refractory lupus nephritis patients in combination with another DMARD, and belimumab was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for cSLE treatment in children aged > 5 years. New therapies targeting CD20, such as atacicept and telitacicept, seem to be promising drugs for SLE patients. Anti-interferon therapies (sifalimumab and anifrolumab) have shown beneficial results in phase II randomized control trials in adult SLE patients, as have some Janus kinase inhibitors, and these could be alternative treatments for pediatric patients with severe interferon-mediated inflammatory disease in the future. In addition, strict control of proteinuria and blood pressure is required in cSLE, especially with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker use.

Recommendations for Vaccination in Children with Atopic Dermatitis Treated with Dupilumab: A Consensus Meeting, 2020

Dupilumab is the only biologic therapy currently approved in Europe and the United States for severe atopic dermatitis in patients 6 years of age or older. Off-label use is rationalized in younger children with severe atopic dermatitis. Decisions about vaccination for children on dupilumab are complex and depend on both the child’s current treatment and the type of vaccination required. To achieve consensus on recommendations for vaccination of pediatric patients with atopic dermatitis treated with or planning to start dupilumab, a review of the literature and a modified-Delphi process was conducted by a working group of 5 panelists with expertise in dermatology, immunology, infectious diseases and vaccination. Here, we provide seven recommendations for vaccination of pediatric patients with atopic dermatitis treated with or planning to start dupilumab. These recommendations serve to guide physicians’ decisions about vaccination in children with atopic dermatitis treated with dupilumab. Furthermore, we highlight an unmet need for research to determine how significantly dupilumab affects cellular and humoral immune responses to vaccination with live attenuated and inactivated vaccines.

Tdap booster to adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis on and off anti-TNF agents is safe and immunogenic

INTRODUCTION

The response to vaccines in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients on and off anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents remains highly discussed. There are no published studies on the immune response following a Tdap booster dose in JIA patients so far.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the immune response and safety after a Tdap booster in JIA patients and in healthy adolescents.

METHODS

Nineteen adolescents with JIA according to the ILAR criteria on anti-TNF medication, 19 adolescents with JIA off anti-TNF medication, and 27 healthy adolescents (control group) were compared after a Tdap booster. Adverse events and disease activity were evaluated. Lymphocyte immunophenotyping was performed by flow cytometry. Tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis toxin antibodies were assessed by ELISA; whole blood was stimulated with whole-cell pertussis, and supernatants were assessed for cytokines by xMAP.

RESULTS

The three groups showed a similar frequency of adverse events. There was no disease reactivation after the Tdap booster. Tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis antibodies showed a significant response when D0 and D14 concentrations were compared in both JIA groups and controls. Over time, a different pattern of response to the Tdap booster was observed among the groups for tetanus antibodies (p = 0.005) but not for diphtheria and pertussis antibodies. In contrast to the protection attained for tetanus and diphtheria, in the three groups, not all individuals showed pertussis seroconversion at either D14 or D28. In addition, the seroconversion of three subjects with JIA on anti-TNF medication was not maintained at D28. JIA patients off anti-TNF showed a higher percentage of naive CD8 + T cells (p = 0.007) and central memory CD8 + cells (p = 0.003) and a lower percentage of effector CD8 + T cells (p = 0.003) and NK cell numbers (p = 0.018) than the control group. The JIA group off anti-TNF medication had fewer B lymphocytes than both the JIA group on anti-TNF medication and the control group (p = 0.016). Cellular immunity to Bordetella pertussis showed that IFNγ levels were significantly lower in both JIA groups than in the control group (p = 0.003), IL10 levels were higher in the JIA off anti-TNF group (p = 0.009), IL17A and IL5 levels were lower in the JIA on anti-TNF group than in the control group (p = 0.018 and p = 0.016, respectively); however, an increase in IFNγ (p = 0.008), IL17A (p = 0.030) and TNFα (p = 0.041) levels was observed at D14 in both patient groups. Both JIA groups showed higher levels of IL21 than the control group (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

We conclude that individuals with JIA on or off anti-TNF agents showed a good response to a booster dose for the three antigens studied in the absence of major adverse events and without the reactivation of the disease.

Suboptimal vaccination coverage of recommended vaccines among French children with recurrent autoinflammatory fever syndromes: a study from the Juvenile Inflammatory Rheumatism cohort

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

To determine vaccination coverage among a French cohort of children with recurrent autoinflammatory fever syndromes (RFS).

METHOD

All RFS children aged 2 to 19 years from the Juvenile Inflammatory Rheumatism cohort and followed at the French Reference Center for Autoinflammatory Diseases, Versailles Hospital, were included in our observational study. Immunisation status at ages 2, 7 and 15 years and at the last outpatient visit was evaluated according to the standard French vaccine schedule and recommended supplementary vaccines for patients with immunosuppressive therapy.

RESULTS

Of 200 patients, 90 (45%) had periodic fever, aphthous stomatitis, pharyngitis and adenitis syndrome; 52 (26%) had familial Mediterranean fever and 50 (25%) had undefined recurrent fever. Complete immunisation as per the standard schedule was obtained by 32% of patients at 2 years, 28% at 7 years, 6% at 15 years and 44% at the last outpatient visit. Similar or higher coverage was obtained by the last outpatient visit for most vaccines, compared to immunisation coverage at 2 years: pneumococcus (91% vs 88%), diphtheria tetanus poliomyelitis (82% vs 86%), hepatitis B (79% vs 69%) and measles, mumps, rubella (91% vs 50%). No patients with immunosuppressive therapy (n = 14) were up to date for all supplementary immunisations recommended for them.

CONCLUSION

Vaccination coverage for RFS children is suboptimal, especially for infants who present with recurrent febrile episodes. The initial vaccination delay is partially corrected through specialist follow-up in later years. Coverage according to the supplementary vaccine recommendations for immunosuppressed patients is poor. Key Points • Vaccination coverage for RFS children is suboptimal, especially at 2 years of age which is likely due to the prevalence of early recurrent febrile symptoms. • The initial vaccination delay is partially recovered during later follow-up at an expert rheumatology center. • Specific recommendations are particularly difficult to apply to patients on immunosuppressive therapy.

Vaccinology Education of Nurses and the Current Immunoprophylaxis Recommendations for Children with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Introduction: The immunosuppressive effect of the disease and the applied treatment in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis increases the risk of infections. It is therefore essential that vaccinations be properly implemented and that a proper serological response is provoked after the vaccination. A competent nurse acting in compliance with the current recommendations constitutes one of the safety pillars of immunization of pediatric patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Aim: To discuss evidence-based recommendations for immunization of pediatric patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis in the context of nursing vaccination practice and vaccinology education. Material and Methods: A systematic review of the literature presenting evidence-based recommendations of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) expert group on immunization of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Compilation of source data selected subjectively by the authors in a standard literature search of Medline, Cochrane and Scopus databases, including both recommendations for immunization of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and the tasks to be performed by nurses in the course of vaccine administration. As part of the standard literature review of Medline, Cochrane and Scopus databases, including both recommendations for immunization of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and the tasks to be performed by nurses in the course of vaccine administration. Results: Most vaccines are immunogenic and safe for patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. The use of attenuated vaccines in patients receiving long-term immunosuppressive treatment should be considered with particular caution. Education and further training of nurses should take into account the recommendations and principles of immunization regarding children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Nurses should present the current knowledge of active immunoprophylaxis in such a way as to encourage parents/guardians to vaccinate their children in accordance with the national guidelines. Conclusion: The recommendations of the European League Against Rheumatism place special emphasis on the use of active immunoprophylaxis in the form of vaccination in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. The immunization schedule must be adjusted to the applied JIA treatment regimen. Such a stance on this matter is highly important as treatment regimens increasingly include biological drugs. Correctly performed by a nurse, a vaccination procedure is an important determinant of the desired immunoprophylactic results and minimizes the risk of adverse events following immunization. The priority for a nurse who provides active immunoprophylaxis should be to systematically broaden her training in immunization of chronically ill children, including juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

Adequate tetanus but poor diphtheria and pertussis response to a Tdap booster in adolescents with juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus

BACKGROUND

Reports on vaccine responses in immunocompromised patients, such as juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus (jSLE), have shown highly variable results.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the immune response and safety after a Tdap booster in 26 jSLE patients and 26 matched healthy adolescents.Methodology: Adverse events and disease activity were evaluated. Lymphocyte immunophenotyping was performed by flow cytometry. Tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis toxin antibodies were assessed by ELISA; whole blood was stimulated with whole cell pertussis and supernatants were assessed for cytokines by xMAP.

RESULTS

Both groups showed a similar frequency of adverse events. There was no evidence of disease reactivation after Tdap booster in the jSLE cohort. Both groups showed a significant increase in antibody titers for all three antigens on D14 and D28 (p < 0.001). jSLE patients had a significantly lower increase in diphtheria titers than the control group (p = 0.007). jSLE patients had a distinct titer increase of tetanus and pertussis antibodies when compared to controls (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively). There was a lower frequency of pertussis seroconversion in the jSLE group on D14 (p = 0.009), D28 (p = 0.023), D12m (p = 0.015) and D24m (p = 0.004). Cellular immune response to Bordetella pertussis showed significantly lower levels of IFNγ (p < 0.001) and higher levels of IL10, IL12, IL21 and TNFα in jSLE patients than controls.

CONCLUSIONS

jSLE patients had good response to Tdap booster dose for the tetanus antigen, but not for diphtheria and pertussis. This vaccine was safe in relation to adverse events and absence of disease reactivation.

Safety and immunogenicity of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in patients with juvenile dermatomyositis: a real-world multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Concerns about the safety and efficacy of vaccines in patients with autoimmune diseases (AID) have led to contradictions and low vaccination coverage in this population, who are at a higher risk of infections, including by human papillomavirus (HPV). Although HPV vaccines have been recommended for immunocompromised patients, there is still a lack of data to support its use for AID patients, such as juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) patients. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the quadrivalent HPV (qHPV) vaccine in a cohort of JDM patients.

METHODS

JDM patients aged from 9 to 20 years and healthy controls (HC) were enrolled to receive a 3-dose schedule of qHPV vaccine from March/2014 to March/2016. Study visits were performed before the first dose, 1 month after the second and third doses, and 6 months after the third dose. Participants completed a diary of possible adverse events for 14 days following each dose of vaccination (AEFV). Disease activity and current therapy were analyzed at each visit for JDM patients. In addition, serum samples from all participants were collected to test antibody concentrations against HPV16 and 18 at each visit. Participant recruitment was conducted in ten Brazilian centres. From 47 eligible JDM patients and 41 HC, 42 and 35, respectively, completed the 3-dose schedule of the vaccine, given that five JDM patients and two HC had received doses prior to their inclusion in the study.

RESULTS

The AEFVs presented by the participants were mild and in general did not differ between JDM and HC groups. No severe AEFVs were related to the vaccination. Disease activity was stable, or even improved during the follow-up. One month after the third dose of the vaccine the JDM group presented seropositivity of 100% for HPV16 and 97% for HPV18, similarly to the HC group, who presented 100% for both serotypes (p = 1.000). Six months after the third dose the seropositivity for the patient group was 94% for both HPV types.

CONCLUSIONS

The HPV vaccination in this cohort of JDM patients was safe and immunogenic. Since the seropositivity against HPV16 and 18 was very high after the 3-dose schedule, this regimen should be recommended for JDM patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry, number: RBR-9ypbtf . Registered 20 March 2018 - Retrospectively registered.

[Travel vaccinations in rheumatic diseases : Specific considerations in children and adults]

Children and adults with rheumatic diseases (RD) have a higher risk to contract infections due to the underlying disease and the frequently necessary immunosuppressive treatment (IT). The quality of life of the majority of patients with RD has remarkably improved due to IT-related reduction of inflammation. Therefore, RD patients usually have an international travel behavior similar to healthy individuals. An investigation indicated that patients with RD and IT have lower travel vaccination rates and are often less well-prepared for their trip in comparison to healthy travelers, even when visiting high risk destinations. As the risk for general and travel-acquired infections is increased for patients with RD with and without IT, pretravel consultations are important. These pretravel consultations should include recommendations addressing travel cancellation, travel modification and travel vaccinations depending on the patient's risk. Travel vaccinations include vaccinations against hepatitis A, typhoid fever, rabies, cholera, meningococcal diseases, tick-bone encephalitis, Japanese encephalitis, seasonal influenza, poliomyelitis and yellow fever. In patients with RD the indications for vaccination depend on the exposure risks, disease severity, individual travel behavior, and possible complications associated with vaccination. In the further evaluation process it is crucial to include the general health condition of the patient, the underlying RD (type and activity), duration and intensity of the IT. In general, live-attenuated vaccines are contraindicated under IT. In contrast, inactivated vaccines may be administered although reduced immunogenicity with the need for antibody measurement, special vaccine schedules or additional booster vaccinations should be considered under IT.

Decreased frequency of allergy in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Results of a case-control study

OBJECTIVES

To determine the frequency of Th2-mediated allergic diseases (AD) in mainly Th1-driven juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) subtypes.

METHODS

Ninety-nine JIA patients and 128 control subjects were enrolled in a prospective case-control study. All subjects were assessed with standard allergy questionnaire, complete blood cell count, and total serum immunoglobulin (sIg) E. sIgs G, A, M, Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score-27 (JADAS27), and serum acute phase reactants (sAPR) were obtained in JIA. In the presence of allergic symptoms, skin prick (SPT) and pulmonary function tests (PFT) were performed.

RESULTS

Despite similar allergy risk factors, the frequencies of asthma and allergic rhinitis were lower in JIA group (all p ≤ .02). Allergic patients with JIA performed lower FEV₁/FVC ratio, PEF, and FEF25-75 compared to the control group (all p ≤ .04). JADAS27 and sAPR were similar among JIA patients with and without AD. Two JIA patients were found to have hypogammaglobulinemia.

CONCLUSION

The frequencies of AD, asthma, and allergic rhinitis may decrease in Th1-mediated JIA subtypes although the coexistence does not appear to affect the severity of arthritis whereas allergic symptoms may resolve after immunosuppressive treatment. PFTs should be obtained periodically in JIA. JIA patients may have an underlying primary immunodeficiency (ID) or immunosuppressive drugs may cause secondary ID.KEY POINTSCompared to the population, the frequency of Th2-mediated allergic diseases is lower in oligoarthritis and RF-negative polyarthritis that are primarily driven by a Th1 activity.The coexistence of allergic diseases in juvenile idiopathic arthritis does not affect the severity of arthritis.Pulmonary function tests can be thought to be obtained periodically in juvenile idiopathic arthritis.Immunological workup should be considered in atypically or severely presented patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis before the initiation of immunosuppressive therapy to differentiate primary and secondary immunodeficiency.

Follow the complex bread crumbs: A review of autoinflammation for the general paediatrician

Autoinflammatory diseases have emerged as a group of disorders that have significant morbidity, and even mortality. Since their onset predominately occurs during childhood, it is important that paediatricians are aware of what these diseases are, how they present, when to include them in differential diagnoses, and when to refer to a specialist. This review will focus on the clinical indicators suggestive of autoinflammatory disease, how the presence of an autoinflammatory disease may influence routine care, indications for immediate referral, and both their acute and chronic complications.

Maintaining Hepatitis B Protection in Immunocompromised Pediatric Rheumatology and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients

OBJECTIVE

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection remains a significant public health challenge, particularly for immunocompromised patients. Our aim was to evaluate the serologic immunity in immunocompromised rheumatology and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients, assess factors for serologic nonimmunity, and evaluate their response to 1 HBV booster dose.

METHODS

Immunocompromised rheumatology and IBD patients with completed HBV screening were identified. A chart review was performed to collect demographics, clinical information, baseline HBV serology results, and serologic response to booster vaccination. Serologic nonimmunity was defined as a negative/indeterminate hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs) level.

RESULTS

Among 580 patients, 71% were nonimmune. The highest portion of nonimmune patients were 11-18 years old (P = 0.004). There was no significant difference between immune and nonimmune patients with regards to diagnosis (P = 0.34), age at diagnosis (P = 0.64), duration of treatment (P = 0.07), or type of medications (P = 0.08). Sixty-two percent of those who received a booster vaccine were rescreened, and most (68%) seroconverted. In those 18 years or older, only half seroconverted.

CONCLUSION

Results of this study support the benefit of HBV screening in immunosuppressed patients. Beginning at age 11 years, most patients lacked serologic immunity to HBV. Seroconversion for most patients 11-18 years occurred after 1 booster vaccine. Thus, for immunocompromised patients without recent HBV serologic data, obtaining the HBV serology beginning at age 11 years might be considered. Those 18 years and older were least likely to seroconvert after 1 booster, indicating that they may benefit from receiving the 3-dose HBV vaccine series.

Safety and immunogenicity of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in patients with childhood systemic lupus erythematosus: a real-world interventional multi-centre study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus (qHPV) vaccination in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) patients.

METHODS

Volunteer cSLE patients aged 9-20 years and healthy controls (HC) were enrolled to receive a two- or three-dose qHPV vaccination schedule from March 2014 to March 2016. Study visits were performed before the first dose, one month after the second and third doses and one year after the first dose. In each study visit, disease activity and adverse events following vaccination were analyzed, and a serum sample was collected for testing antibody concentrations. Participant recruitment was conducted in 15 Brazilian paediatric rheumatology units. Of the 256 cSLE patients included, 210 completed the two- or three-dose schedules; 15 had previously received one dose, and 18 had received two doses of the vaccine. The analysis was based on intention-to-treat so that participants who did not complete the entire study protocol were also included.

RESULTS

No severe adverse events were related to the vaccination. Disease activity was generally low and remained stable or even improved. The HC presented 100% seropositivity to HPV16 and HPV18, whereas the two- and three-dose cSLE groups presented 93% and 83% versus 97% and 91%, respectively. One year after the first dose, seropositivity of the three-dose cSLE group was 91% to HPV16 and 84% to HPV18.

CONCLUSIONS

HPV vaccination in cSLE patients is safe and immunogenic. Since the seropositivity to HPV16 and HPV18 was higher for the three-dose schedule group, this regimen should be recommended for cSLE patients.

Vaccination for Children on Biologics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Several biologic drugs are available for treatment of immune-mediated diseases, and the number of children treated with biologics is increasing. This review summarises current knowledge about the safety and immunogenicity of vaccines in children treated with biologic therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

A recent retrospective, multicentre study reported that the booster dose of live-attenuated vaccine (MMR/V) was safe for patients with rheumatic diseases treated with biologic therapy. Recent publications revealed that immunogenicity of vaccines in children treated with biologics was lower than in the healthy population, especially on long-term follow-up. Children treated with biologic therapy are at greater danger of infections, compared to the healthy population. Therefore, they should be vaccinated according to national guidelines. Regardless of the therapy, non-live vaccines are recommended. However, it is common practice to advise postponing vaccination with live-attenuated vaccines in children while they are on immunosuppressive therapy. Newly published data suggest that booster dose MMR/V is safe for children treated with biologic therapy.

S2k guidelines for the treatment of psoriasis in children and adolescents - Short version part 2

The present guidelines are aimed at residents and board-certified physicians in the fields of dermatology, pediatrics, pediatric dermatology and pediatric rheumatology as well as policymakers and insurance funds. They were developed by dermatologists and pediatric dermatologists in collaboration with pediatric rheumatologists using a formal consensus process (S2k). The guidelines highlight topics such as disease severity, quality of life, treatment goals as well as problems associated with off-label drug therapy in children. Trigger factors and diagnostic aspects are discussed. The primary focus is on the various topical, systemic and UV-based treatment options available and includes recommendations for use and treatment algorithms. Other aspects addressed herein include vaccinations in children and adolescents with psoriasis as well as various disease subtypes such as guttate psoriasis, diaper psoriasis, pustular psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Finally, we also provide recommendations for imaging studies and the diagnostic workup to rule out tuberculosis prior to initiating systemic treatment. Note: This article constitutes part 2 of the Sk2 guidelines for the treatment of psoriasis in children and adolescents. Part 1 was published in last month's issue. It contained introductory remarks and addressed aspects of diagnosis and topical treatment.

Maintenance of antibody response to diphtheria/tetanus vaccine in patients aged 2-5 years with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis receiving subcutaneous abatacept

BACKGROUND

Patients with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA), receiving disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs with immunosuppressive effects, may be at increased risk of vaccine-preventable infections. This substudy assessed protective antibody responses to diphtheria and tetanus vaccination given prior to study enrolment in patients with pJIA.

FINDINGS

This was a substudy of a 24-month, single-arm, open-label, multicenter, Phase III trial (NCT01844518) of subcutaneous abatacept in children with active pJIA (N = 219). Patients aged 2-5 years, with ≥2 continuous months of weekly weight-tiered (10-< 25 kg [50 mg], 25-< 50 kg [87.5 mg]) subcutaneous abatacept treatment (with/without methotrexate and/or low-dose corticosteroids), who received diphtheria/tetanus vaccine prior to enrolment, were eligible. Protective antibody levels to diphtheria/tetanus (> 0.1 IU/mL), and safety, were assessed. Overall, 29 patients were analyzed: 19 (65.5%), 1 (3.4%) and 9 (31.0%) patients had > 12, 6-12 and 2-< 6 months of abatacept exposure, respectively. All patients had protective antibody levels to tetanus and 26 (89.7%) patients had protective antibody levels to diphtheria. Of the 3 patients without protective antibody levels to diphtheria, each had an antibody level of 0.1 IU/mL, bordering the lower threshold of protection. Concomitant use of methotrexate and/or low-dose corticosteroids had no evident effect on antibody levels. No unexpected adverse events, including cases of diphtheria or tetanus, were reported during the 24-month period.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients aged 2-5 years with pJIA who received 2-24 months of weekly subcutaneous abatacept, with or without concomitant methotrexate and/or low-dose corticosteroids, maintained effective diphtheria and tetanus vaccination protection without new safety signals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01844518); registered May 1, 2013; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01844518?term=NCT01844518&rank=1.

Live attenuated MMR/V booster vaccines in children with rheumatic diseases on immunosuppressive therapy are safe: Multicenter, retrospective data collection

PURPOSE

To collect retrospective data of patients with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) and other rheumatic diseases who received live attenuated booster measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) or measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMR/V) during treatment with immunosuppressive therapy.

RESULTS

Data from 13 pediatric rheumatology centers in 10 countries, including 234 patients, were collected. Mean age at diagnosis was 5 ± 2.7 years, 67% were girls. Among them, 211 (90.2%) had JIA and 110 (47%) were in remission on medication. Disease activity was low in 37%, high in 8%, and moderate in 8%. One hundred-twenty-four received MMR/V booster while on methotrexate (MTX); 3 reported local mild adverse events (AE). Among 62 on MTX + biologics and 9 patients who received a combination of 2 disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), 9 reported mild AE. Among 39 on biologics, 1 reported fever one day after booster vaccination. No vaccine-related infection of measles, rubella, mumps or varicella was reported, none of the patients developed disease flare, including those with high disease activity.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective study, live-attenuated MMR/V booster vaccines were safe for children with rheumatic diseases, on immunosuppressive therapies. This strengthens the Paediatric Rheumatology European Society (PReS) recommendation that vaccination with live attenuated vaccines in patients on immunosuppressive therapies can be considered individually, weighing the benefit of vaccination against the risk of inducing infection through vaccination. These data provide the basis for a prospective data collection study, planned by the PReS vaccination study group.

Hepatitis A virus vaccination in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus

Objectives: Vaccination of systemic lupus erythematosus patients with non-live vaccines may decrease vaccine-preventable infections and mortalities. In the present study, we aimed to compare the immunogenicity and safety of inactivated hepatitis A vaccination in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus and healthy subjects. Methods: A total of 30 childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus and 39 healthy participants who were seronegative for hepatitis A received two doses of the hepatitis A vaccine in a 0- and 6-month schedule. Hepatitis A virus (HAV) IgG antibodies were measured before vaccination and 7 months after the vaccination. Results: Although anti-HAV IgG antibody titers after vaccination were found to be somewhat lower in children with systemic lupus erythematosus than that of the healthy subjects ( p < 0.05), the difference in seroconversion rate was insignificant between childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus patients ( n = 24/30, 80%) and healthy controls ( n = 33/39, 84.6%). There was no increase in median Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI)-2K scores and anti-ds DNA levels after the vaccination procedure. Seroconversion rates in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus patients were not affected by medication, high disease activity (SLEDAI-2K >6) and anti-ds DNA positivity. None of the patients experienced any flare or adverse reaction throughout the study. Conclusions: According to these results, we conclude that inactivated hepatitis A vaccine is safe and well tolerated in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus patients, with no adverse events or increase in activity. Immunogenicity to the hepatitis A vaccine was adequate, with a seropositivity rate of 80%.

Glucocorticoid treatment in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common chronic rheumatic disease of joints in childhood. Glucocorticoids are being used in JIA treatment effectively for decades. Although systemic glucocorticoid use decreased with the introduction of biologic drugs, intraarticular glucocorticoid injections (IAGI) with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and non-biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) still remain the primary treatment in JIA, especially in oligoarticular subcategory. Systemic glucocorticoids are used mainly for severe JIA-associated complications such as macrophage activation syndrome (MAS), myocarditis, pericarditis, pleuritis, peritonitis, and severe anemia; as bridging therapy while waiting for the full therapeutic effect of DMARDs; and in certain occasions for patients with severe refractory uveitis. Since glucocorticoid administration is associated with many adverse events, it is important to use glucocorticoids in an optimum way balancing the risks and benefits. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge on glucocorticoid treatment in JIA. A comprehensive literature search was conducted utilizing the Cochrane Library and MEDLINE/PubMed databases. The main topics include mechanism of action, dose, duration, adverse events, vaccination during glucocorticoid treatment, the place of glucocorticoids in JIA treatment guidelines and consensus treatment plans, glucocorticoid use in JIA-associated uveitis, MAS, and IAGI. Data from the literature provide guidance on how to use glucocorticoids in JIA treatment especially for IAGI and systemic use in systemic JIA and MAS. However, there is lack of evidence and need for prospective randomized studies in most parts including the indications in different JIA subcategories, optimum dose/route of administration/duration of treatment, and tapering strategies.

Juvenile arthritis management in less resourced countries (JAMLess): consensus recommendations from the Cradle of Humankind

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most prevalent chronic rheumatic disease in children and young people (CYP) and a major cause of pain and disability. The vast majority of the world's children and their families live in less resourced countries (LRCs) and face significant socioeconomic and healthcare challenges. Current recommendations for standards of care and treatment for children with JIA do not consider children living in less resourced countries. In order to develop appropriate recommendations for the care of CYP with JIA in less resourced countries a meeting of experienced pediatric rheumatologists from less resourced countries was convened with additional input from a steering group of international pediatric rheumatologists with experience in developing recommendations and standards of care for JIA. Following a needs assessment survey of healthcare workers caring for CYP with JIA in LRC, a literature review was carried out and management recommendations formulated using Delphi technique and a final consensus conference. Responses from the needs assessment were received from 121/483 (25%) practitioners from 25/49 (51%) less resourced countries. From these responses, the initial 84 recommendations were refined and expanded through a series of 3 online Delphi rounds. A final list of 90 recommendations was proposed for evaluation. Evidence for each statement was reviewed, graded, and presented to the consensus group. The degree of consensus, level of agreement, and level of evidence for these recommendations are reported. Recommendations arrived at by consensus for CYP with JIA in less resourced countries cover 5 themes: (1) diagnosis, (2) referral and monitoring, (3) education and training, (4) advocacy and networks, and (5) research. Thirty-five statements were drafted. All but one statement achieved 100% consensus. The body of published evidence was small and the quality of evidence available for critical appraisal was low. Our recommendations offer novel insights and present consensus-based strategies for the management of JIA in less resourced countries. The emphasis on communicable and endemic diseases influencing the diagnosis and treatment of JIA serves as a valuable addition to existing JIA guidelines. With increasing globalization, these recommendations as a whole provide educational and clinical utility for clinicians worldwide. The low evidence base for our recommendations reflects a shortage of research specific to less resourced countries and serves as an impetus for further inquiry towards optimizing care for children with JIA around the world.

Complications of Treatments for Pediatric Rheumatic Diseases

Medications to treat children with rheumatic disease include disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, glucocorticosteroids, and biologic response modifiers that target mediators and cells involved in autoimmunity and inflammation. Although usually well-tolerated, such medications have many possible side effects, of which primary care and emergency providers should be aware. Both disease and immunosuppression contribute to susceptibility to unusual and opportunistic infections, in addition to usual childhood infections for which these children should receive all applicable nonlive vaccines. Close coordination between the rheumatologist and other medical care providers is essential, because medication side effects, infections, and disease flares are difficult to distinguish, and may occur together.

Methotrexate in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: advice and recommendations from the MARAJIA expert consensus meeting

BACKGROUND

Conventional pharmacological therapies for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) consist of non-biological, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, among which methotrexate (MTX) is the most commonly prescribed. However, there is a lack of consensus-based clinical and therapeutic recommendations for the use of MTX in the management of patients with JIA. Therefore, the Methotrexate Advice and RecommendAtions on Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (MARAJIA) Expert Meeting was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations for the use of MTX in the treatment of JIA.

METHODS

The preliminary executive committee identified a total of 9 key clinical issues according to the population, intervention, comparator, outcome (PICO) approach, and performed an evidence-based, systematic, literature review. During the subsequent Expert Meeting, the relevant evidence was assessed and graded, and 10 recommendations were made.

RESULTS

Recommendations relating to the efficacy, optimal dosing and route of administration and duration of treatment with MTX in JIA, and to the issue of folic acid supplementation to prevent MTX side effects, use of MTX in the treatment of chronic JIA-associated uveitis, combination treatment with biologic agents, and the use of vaccinations in patients with JIA were developed. The selected topics were considered to represent clinically important issues facing clinicians caring for patients with JIA. Evidence was insufficient to formulate recommendations for the use of biomarkers predictive of treatment response.

CONCLUSIONS

These consensus recommendations provide balanced and evidence-based recommendations designed to have broad value for physicians and healthcare clinicians involved in the clinical management of patients with JIA.

Improving a process to obtain hepatitis B serology among patients treated with infliximab at a large urban children's hospital

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B infection is a significant public health challenge despite improvements in vaccination efforts. Patients such as those on chronic immunosuppressive therapy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or rheumatic disease may incur greater risk. The risk of reactivation of hepatitis B while on immunosuppressive therapy may have mortality rates up to 25%. These patients should be screened for acute or chronic infection and vaccinated if necessary. Our aim was to reliably complete hepatitis B screenings in patients receiving infliximab at Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (CCHMC).

METHODS

Eligible patients included all patients with gastroenterology (GI) IBD and rheumatology receiving infliximab between October 2015 and March 2016. Using quality improvement methodology and the 'plan-do-study-act' (PDSA) approach, interventions centred around education of clinical providers, previsit planning and the development of 'talking points' for patients.

RESULTS

An initial screen of the IBD population revealed that 48% of the IBD patient population had been screened for anti-HBs alone, but no patients from GI or rheumatology divisions had a complete set of hepatitis B serology prior to the intervention including anti-Hep B Core and Hep B Surface Antigen. Seven PDSA cycles were performed during the 32-week intervention period, resulting in an increase in patients screened from 0% to ~85%. By March 2016, a total of 251 patients (201 GI, 50 rheumatology) had up-to-date hepatitis B serology screening. Automated ordering of the hepatitis B serology and 'talking points' for the provider had the greatest impact on successful screening.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a method to obtain hepatitis B serology on at-risk patients on infliximab within two subspecialty divisions within a large children's hospital. Next steps will be to develop a process to reliably provide vaccines for patients who are seronegative, expand this process to all patients who are identified as immunocompromised within GI and rheumatology and then expand this process to other divisions at the CCHMC.

HPV infection and vaccination in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus patients: what we really should know

Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) are at increased risk for infections. Vaccination is a powerful tool to prevent infections, even in immunocompromised patients. Most non-live vaccines are immunogenic and safe in patients with SLE, even if antibody titres are frequently lower than those of healthy controls. Human papillomavirus (HPV) infections are more prevalent in SLE patients when compared to the healthy population. Low-risk types of this virus cause anogenital warts, while high risk types are strongly related to pre-malignant cervical abnormalities and cervical cancer. HPV vaccines have been developed to prevent these conditions. Although little is known about HPV vaccination in SLE, few studies in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) have shown that HPV vaccines are safe, and capable to induce an immunogenic response in this group of patients. To date, available data suggest that HPV vaccines can be given safely to SLE patients. Given the increased incidence of cervical abnormalities due to HPV in SLE patients, this vaccination should be encouraged.