First case of vaccine-strain varicella infection as manifestation of HIV in healthcare worker: a case report and review of the literature

Immunogenicity and safety of live attenuated and recombinant/inactivated varicella zoster vaccines in people living with HIV: A systematic review

Few papers focus their attention on VZV vaccination effectiveness among people living with HIV (PLWH). Flanking the live attenuated vaccine (VZL) available, a newly recombinant vaccine (RZV) was recently introduced and approved for HZ prevention among adults. PLWH represents a population on which a particular attention should be applied, in order to guarantee the vaccine efficacy and safety. We performed a literature search in USNLM, PubMed, PubMed Central, PMC and Cochrane Library. From all the publications found eligible, data were extracted and processed per population, vaccine type, immunogenicity and ADRs. The review of the 13 included studies shows that both RZV and VZL are immunogenic and have an acceptable safety profile in adults and children living with HIV. However, given the lack of research available about vaccine efficacy in preventing VZV and HZ in PLWH, additional studies need to be performed, in order to achieve a full completeness of data.

Safety and protective efficacy of PfSPZ Vaccine administered to HIV-negative and -positive Tanzanian adults

BACKGROUNDSanaria PfSPZ Vaccine, composed of attenuated Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) sporozoites (SPZ), protects against malaria. We conducted this clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of PfSPZ Vaccine in HIV-positive (HIV+) individuals, since the HIV-infection status of participants in mass vaccination programs may be unknown.METHODSThis randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolled 18- to 45-year-old HIV-negative (HIV-) and well-controlled HIV+ Tanzanians (HIV viral load <40 copies/mL, CD4 counts >500 cells/μL). Participants received 5 doses of PfSPZ Vaccine or normal saline (NS) over 28 days, followed by controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) 3 weeks later.RESULTSThere were no solicited adverse events in the 9 HIV- and 12 HIV+ participants. After CHMI, 6 of 6 NS controls, 1 of 5 HIV- vaccinees, and 4 of 4 HIV+ vaccinees were Pf positive by quantitative PCR (qPCR). After immunization, anti-Pf circumsporozoite protein (anti-PfCSP) (isotype and IgG subclass) and anti-PfSPZ antibodies, anti-PfSPZ CD4+ T cell responses, and Vδ2+ γδ CD3+ T cells were nonsignificantly higher in HIV- than in HIV+ vaccinees. Sera from HIV- vaccinees had significantly higher inhibition of PfSPZ invasion of hepatocytes in vitro and antibody-dependent complement deposition (ADCD) and Fcγ3B binding by anti-PfCSP and ADCD by anti-cell-traversal protein for ookinetes and SPZ (anti-PfCelTOS) antibodies.CONCLUSIONSPfSPZ Vaccine was safe and well tolerated in HIV+ vaccinees, but not protective. Vaccine efficacy was 80% in HIV- vaccinees (P = 0.012), whose sera had significantly higher inhibition of PfSPZ invasion of hepatocytes and enrichment of multifunctional PfCSP antibodies. A more potent PfSPZ vaccine or regimen is needed to protect those living with HIV against Pf infection in Africa.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov NCT03420053.FUNDINGEquatorial Guinea Malaria Vaccine Initiative (EGMVI), made up of the Government of Equatorial Guinea Ministries of Mines and Hydrocarbons, and Health and Social Welfare, Marathon Equatorial Guinea Production Limited, Noble Energy, Atlantic Methanol Production Company, and EG LNG; Swiss government, through ESKAS scholarship grant no. 2016.0056; Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIH; NIH grant 1U01AI155354-01.

Safety Surveillance of Varicella Vaccines in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, United States, 2006-2020

BACKGROUND

. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is the United States national passive vaccine safety surveillance system. We updated the data on the safety of single-antigen varicella vaccine (VAR) and assessed the safety of combination measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella vaccine (MMRV) licensed in the United States using VAERS data.

METHODS

US VAERS reports received after administration of VAR and MMRV during 2006-2020 were identified. Reports were analyzed by vaccine type, age, seriousness, most common adverse events (AEs), and concomitant vaccines. We reviewed medical records of selected reports of AEs of special interest and conducted empirical Bayesian data mining to identify disproportionally reported AEs.

RESULTS

During 2006-2020, approximately 132.8 million VAR doses were distributed; 40 684 reports were received in VAERS (30.6/100 000 doses distributed), with 4.1% classified as serious (1.3/100 000 doses distributed). Approximately 35.5 million MMRV doses were distributed; 13 325 reports were received (37.6/100 000 doses distributed) with 3.3% classified as serious (1.3/100 000 doses distributed). The most common adverse health events after both VAR and MMRV were injection site reactions (31% and 27%), rash (28% and 20%), and fever (12% and 14%), respectively. Vaccination errors accounted for 23% of reports after VAR administration and 41% after MMRV administration, but ≥95% of them did not describe an adverse health event. AEs associated with evidence of vaccine strain varicella-zoster virus (vVZV) infection included meningitis, encephalitis, herpes zoster, and 6 deaths (all in immunocompromised persons with contraindications for vaccination). No new or unexpected AE was disproportionally reported.

CONCLUSIONS

No new or unexpected safety findings were detected for VAR and MMRV given as recommended, reinforcing the favorable safety profiles of these vaccines. Providers should obtain specimens for viral testing and strain-typing for serious AEs if they consider vVZV as the possible causative agent.

Ocular adverse events following vaccination: overview and update

The Food and Drug Administration has licensed, approved, and expanded guidelines for dozens of vaccines since 2010. Although advancements in biotechnology have made vaccines more effective and safer, none are completely free from adverse effects. Many vaccines have been implicated in causing ocular adverse events based on the temporal association of exposure and putative complication. Determination of causality is difficult. We provide an overview of vaccine side effects and also examine the English literature and the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) from 2010 through 2020 for vaccine-implicated ocular adverse events. While reactions of eyelids and conjunctiva are commonly reported, the most frequently implicated serious adverse events are optic neuritis and various patterns of intraocular inflammation. Live attenuated vaccines have the potential to cause ocular infection from vaccine-strain organisms, particularly in those immunosuppressed. While postmarketing registries for suspect vaccination adverse events, such as VAERS, are unable to determine causal associations, they are a mainstay in signaling suspected trends that require investigation. The majority of probable and possible serious ocular adverse effects are distinctly uncommon.