Vaccination of the solid organ transplant recipient

Incidence and risk factors of de novo hepatitis E virus infection after receiving liver transplantation

Organ transplant recipients with hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection bears high risk to develop chronic hepatitis, which is generally associated with immunosuppressive therapies. This study aimed to identify the incidence and predictors of de novo HEV infection in patients after receiving transplantation. We performed a large retrospective study to investigate the prevalence of anti-HEV at baseline, incidence of de novo HEV infection after transplantation, and the risk factors of HEV infection among patients with liver transplant in China. A total of 407 liver transplant recipients were examined for the presence of anti-HEV immunoglobulin G, IgM antibodies, and HEV RNA in serum. Basal indexes in individuals with evidence of post-transplant HEV infection were compared with those without evidence of that, and risk factors associated with HEV infection were assessed. The prevalence of anti-HEV at pretransplant in liver transplant recipients was 25.8% (105/407). Serum-negative conversion occurred in 34 (32.38%) of 105 liver transplant patients. Sixty-five out of 302 patients had de novo HEV infection after transplantation, with a cumulative incidence of 42.74% during follow-up. After transplantation, HEV infection was associated with liver failure (p = 0.012), hypoproteinemia (p = 0.030) and higher level of r-glutamyl transferase (GGT) (p = 0.022) before transplantation. Graft rejection (OR = 0.075; p = 0.045) was negatively associated with serum-negative conversion in patients who had positive anti-HEV antibody before transplantation. The incidence of de novo HEV infection after transplantation were higher in China. Liver failure, hypoproteinemia, and GGT elevation may be associated with HEV infection after liver transplantation. This study suggests that prevention and control of HEV infection after liver transplantation should be paid attention in patients bearing these risk factors.

Early riser specific immune cell response by delayed-type hypersensitivity in a kidney transplant patient vaccinated against COVID-19

We present a female kidney transplant patient under conventional immunosuppression therapy. Her humoral immunity study (anti-spike-specific antibodies) was negative after the initial regimen and the third dose of vaccination against COVID-19. The specific ex vivo cellular immune study against spike of SARS-CoV-2 by interferon gamma release assay (IGRA) also remained at non-response levels at different time points despite an optimal non-specific cell immune response assessment. However, the cellular immunity test by delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) with spike of SARS-CoV-2 was always positive since the vaccination scheme began. Only after COVID-19 infection has there been a seroconversion of the patient’s antibody tests along with IGRA positivity. The use of DTH test to measure the immune response could be a better and earlier parameter of the actual immune status that helps us to predict the immune response in real life. Hybrid immunity combining vaccine and natural infection could be a stronger stimulator of the specific global immune response.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Liver Transplantation: Lessons from the First Year of the Pandemic

Over the last year, the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has continued to spread across the globe, causing significant morbidity and mortality among transplantation candidates and recipients. Patients with end-stage liver disease awaiting liver transplantation and patients with a history of liver transplantation represent vulnerable populations, especially given the high rates of associated medical comorbidities in these groups and their immunosuppressed status. In addition, concerns surrounding COVID-19 risk in this patient population have affected rates of transplantation and general transplantation practices. Here, we explore what we have learned about the impact of COVID-19 on liver transplantation candidates and recipients as well as the many key knowledge gaps that remain.

COVID-19 and Effect on Liver Transplant

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly impacted all aspects of liver transplantation. We reviewed the literature regarding COVID-19 clinical outcomes, treatment, and vaccination of liver transplant candidates and recipients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with chronic liver disease, especially with cirrhosis, have higher morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 than patients without liver disease. Increased mortality has not been consistently seen in liver transplant recipients, in whom severe disease is more strongly associated advanced age and medical comorbidities, rather than with transplant-specific factors. While several targeted COVID-19 therapies have reported hepatotoxicity, these therapies may be safe and effective in patients with liver disease and liver transplant recipients. Questions remain regarding whether SARS-CoV-2 can be transmitted via the donor liver and whether transplant is safe in patients and/or donors with recent or active COVID-19.

SUMMARY

COVID-19 has significantly affected the care of liver transplant candidates and recipients. Guidelines for the safe practice of liver transplantation are rapidly evolving, and current recommendations are discussed.

Serologic screening and infectious diseases consultation in renal transplant candidates for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella

Background. Renal transplant recipients are at increased risk for developing complications of vaccine-preventable diseases. They benefit from a comprehensive pre-transplant evaluation when they might safely receive live vaccines. The primary aim of our study was to investigate the number of renal transplant recipients who were evaluated for serologic status against measles, mumps, rubella (MMR), and varicella. Secondarily, we investigated if pre-transplant Infectious Diseases consultation (IDC) improved vaccination rates.Methods. We retrospectively analyzed 282 kidney-alone and kidney-plus adult transplant recipients who were born in or after 1957. Patients were evaluated at Mayo Clinic, Florida Transplant Center between January 2015 and December 2017. Serologic status evaluation and vaccination rates were compared in two groups created based on IDC and no ID consultation (NIDC).Results. 235 (83%) of a total 282 patients received an IDC pre-transplantation. Varicella IgG levels were screened in all 235 IDC candidates. Among the IDC patients, mumps, measles and rubella IgG serologies were performed in 7 (3%), 143 (61%) and 144 (61%), respectively. Among 44 patients seronegative for any of MMR, 24 (55%) were vaccinated. Ten (66%) of 15 varicella seronegative patients were vaccinated. Zostavax was not given to 18% of IDC patients. Zostavax and MMR were administered more frequently in the IDC group compared to NIDC (p < .001 and p = 0.0016, respectively).Conclusion. Although the majority of patients had IDC, the screening rate for MMR serologies was lower than varicella. A protocol-driven serologic screening similar to the one for VZV is required for MMR. Pre-transplant IDC increases vaccination rates.

Loss of antibodies to hepatitis E virus in organ transplant patients with hepatitis E

AIM

Studies regarding changes in antibodies to hepatitis E virus (HEV) after HEV infection in organ transplant patients are limited. This study aimed to clarify HEV infection trends in organ transplant patients who contracted HEV using data from a previous Japanese nationwide survey.

METHODS

This study was undertaken from 2012 to 2019. Among 4518 liver, heart, and kidney transplant patients, anti-HEV immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were positive in 164; data were collected from 106 of these patients, who consented to participate in the study. In total, 32 liver transplant patients, seven heart transplant patients, and 67 kidney transplant patients from 16 institutions in Japan were examined for IgG, IgM, and IgM antibodies to HEV and the presence of HEV RNA in the serum. The χ² -test was used to determine the relationship between the early and late postinfection groups in patients with anti-HEV IgG positive-to-negative conversion rates. The Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare clinical factors.

RESULTS

Anti-HEV IgG positive-to-negative conversion occurred in 25 (23.6%) of 106 organ transplant patients. Of eight patients with hepatitis E who tested positive for HEV RNA, one (14.0%) had anti-HEV IgG positive-to-negative conversion. Twenty-four (24.5%) of 98 patients negative for HEV RNA had anti-HEV IgG positive-to-negative conversion.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed, for the first time, the changes in HEV antibodies in organ transplant patients. Loss of anti-HEV IgG could often occur unexpectedly in organ transplant patients with previous HEV infection.

Seroprevalence of Antibodies against Diphtheria, Tetanus and Pertussis in Adult At-Risk Patients

Patients with chronic diseases are at increased risk of complications following infection. It remains, however, unknown to what extend they are protected against vaccine-preventable diseases. We assessed seroprevalence of antibodies against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis to evaluate whether current vaccination programs in Belgium are adequate. Antibody titers were assessed with a bead-based multiplex assay in serum of 1052 adults with chronic diseases. We included patients with diabetes mellitus type 1 (DM1) (n = 172), DM2 (n = 77), chronic kidney disease (n = 130), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (n = 170), heart failure (n = 77), HIV (n = 196) and solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients (n = 230). Factors associated with seroprevalence were analysed with multiple logistic regression. We found seroprotective titers in 29% for diphtheria (≥0.1 IU/mL), in 83% for tetanus (≥0.1 IU/mL) and 22% had antibodies against pertussis (≥5 IU/mL). Seroprotection rates were higher (p < 0.001) when vaccinated within the last ten years. Furthermore, diphtheria seroprotection decreased with age (p < 0.001). Tetanus seroprotection was less reached in women (p < 0.001) and older age groups (p < 0.001). For pertussis, women had more often a titer suggestive of a recent infection or vaccination (≥100 IU/mL, p < 0.01). We conclude that except for tetanus, the vast majority of at-risk patients remains susceptible to vaccine-preventable diseases such as diphtheria and pertussis.

Establishing best practices in measles, mumps, and rubella serologic screening for kidney transplant candidates

Optimizing immunity against vaccine-preventable diseases improves outcomes in kidney transplant (KT) patients (Arora et al, World J Transplant, 2019, 9:1; Sester et al, Transplant Rev, 2008, 22:274; Fishman, N Engl J Med, 2007, 357:2601). The American Society for Transplantation (AST) Clinical Practice Guidelines advises that serologic screening for measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) be conducted for all KT candidates, since live-attenuated vaccines are contraindicated post-transplantation (Malinis et al, Clin Transplant, 2019, 33:e13548). Our team at Mayo Clinic Florida (MCF) conducted a quality improvement (QI) initiative to establish a best MMR screening and immunizations clinical practice in KT candidates using a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) model. By retrospective chart review of all KT candidates evaluated at our institution from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017, baseline data determining the rate of MMR serologic screening was established. PDSA cycles were implemented to adopt protocol-driven testing for MMR serologies, immunization documentation, and vaccination in cases of seronegativity to any of the three MMR viruses in all pre-KT candidates. Two PDSA cycles were completed in 4 months. The study population totaled 447 patients (baseline n = 283, PDSA 1 n = 61, PDSA 2 n = 103). Baseline data showed that 83% (n = 235) of pre-KT candidates received infectious disease consultation (IDC). Complete MMR (all three viruses) serological screening in KT candidates improved from baseline 3.9%-87.4% post-PDSA cycle 2 (P < .001). Necessary immunizations per AST guidelines were ordered in only 41.1% (n = 23) of the control cohort vs 100% (n = 12) and 96.9% (n = 31) of PDSA cycles 1 and 2, respectively (P < .001). The data reflect significant practice improvements in MMR screening and immunization rates among KT candidates by using protocol-driven orders combined with our pre-existing IDCs.

Pretransplantation splenomegaly frequently persists after liver transplantation and can manifest as hypersplenism and graft fibrosis - a retrospective study

The risk factors and clinical impact of post-transplantation splenomegaly (SM) are poorly understood. We investigated the predictors and impacts of post-transplantation SM in 415 LT patients at Kyoto University Hospital from April 2006 to December 2015. First, the predictors and clinical consequences of SM three years post-transplantation were analyzed among spleen-preserved recipients. Second, the clinical data of surviving recipients three years post-transplantation were compared between splenectomized and spleen-preserved recipients. There was no difference in indication for liver transplantation between these two groups. Third, survival outcomes were compared between splenectomized and spleen-preserved recipients. SM was determined as a SV/body surface area (BSA) higher than 152 ml/m² . In the first analysis, preoperative SM occurred in 79.9% recipients and SM persisted three years post-transplantation in 72.6% recipients among them. Preoperative SV/BSA was the only independent predictor of three year post-transplantation SM, which was associated with lower platelet (PLT), white blood cell (WBC) counts and significant graft fibrosis (21.4% vs. 2.8%). In the second analysis, spleen-preservation was related to lower PLT, WBC counts and a higher proportion of significant graft fibrosis (26.7% vs. 7.1%) three years post-transplantation. In the third analysis, spleen-preserved recipients showed worse survival than splenectomized recipients. In conclusion, preoperative SM frequently persists more than three years post-transplantation and is associated with subclinical hypersplenism, graft fibrosis, graft loss, and even death.

A Nationwide Survey of Hepatitis E Virus Infection and Chronic Hepatitis in Heart and Kidney Transplant Recipients in Japan

Background.

Recently, chronic hepatitis E has been reported in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients in European countries. Previously, we clarified the prevalence of hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection in Japanese liver transplant recipients and identified 2 chronic hepatitis E patients infected by blood transfusion. However, the rate of HEV infection in recipients of SOTs other than liver in Japan remains unclear, so we conducted a nationwide survey to clarify the prevalence of chronic HEV infection in Japanese heart and kidney transplant recipients.

Methods.

A total of 99 heart and 2526 kidney transplant recipients in 17 hospitals in Japan were examined for the presence of the IgG class of anti-HEV antibodies as well as for serum HEV RNA.

Results.

The prevalence of anti-HEV IgG among heart and kidney transplant recipients was 7.07% (7/99) and 4.08% (103/2526), respectively. One heart transplant patient (1.01%) and 11 kidney transplant patients (0.44%) were found to be positive for HEV RNA. The HEV isolates from all viremic patients were typed as genotype 3. Four patients developed chronic hepatitis E after transplantation. Three patients were treated with ribavirin; their liver enzymes normalized, and HEV RNA became negative immediately. Sustained virologic response was achieved in all cases.

Conclusions.

This is the first nationwide survey of HEV infection in Japanese heart and kidney transplant recipients. The prevalence of anti-HEV IgG and HEV RNA in heart and kidney transplant recipients in Japan was lower than that in European countries. Of note, 42% of viremic transplant patients developed chronic hepatitis.

Immunity to Vaccine-preventable Viral Infections in Australians Being Evaluated for Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Vaccine-preventable viral infections are associated with increased risk of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients. Current guidelines recommend routine screening and vaccination of all patients before solid organ transplantation. We studied rates of immunity against vaccine-preventable viruses in liver transplantation (LT) recipients.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied consecutive adult patients who underwent first deceased donor LT at a single center between August 2008 and October 2017. Viruses studied were hepatitis A (HAV), hepatitis B (HBV), varicella zoster virus (VZV), measles, and mumps. Hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs) <10 IU/mL in HBV surface antigen-negative patients and negative IgG to other viruses was regarded as absent immunity.

RESULTS

Five hundred and fifty-five patients underwent LT (72.4% male; median age, 55.0 y). Percentages of patients who lacked immunity to vaccine-preventable infections were HAV (31.8%), HBV (63.8%), measles (1.4%), mumps (6.6%), and VZV (3.8%). Age was positively associated with immunity (from either past exposure or vaccination) against most viruses, including HAV, measles, mumps, and VZV (P < 0.05 for all). In contrast, older age was marginally associated with anti-HBs <10 IU/mL (P = 0.046). No significant changes in immunity rates were observed during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial number of patients undergoing LT are not immune to vaccine-preventable viruses at the time of assessment. This presents an opportunity for pre-LT vaccination and in particular younger patients may need to be targeted.

Serologic screening and infectious disease consultation (IDC): Indicated in heart, lung, liver (HLL) solid organ transplants (SOT) for measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella

BACKGROUND

Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are a special group of patients who require comprehensive evaluation for preventable infectious diseases before transplantation. The main aim of our study was to investigate the number of heart, lung, and liver (HLL) transplant recipients who were evaluated for their immune status against measles, mumps, rubella (MMR), and varicella (VZV). As a secondary aim, we investigated whether pre-transplant infectious disease consultation (IDC) improves vaccination rates.

METHODS

This study was an institution-based retrospective analysis of HLL transplant recipients born in or after 1957 and evaluated at Mayo Clinic, FL Transplant Center between January 1st, 2016 and December 31st, 2017. Data collection was obtained from electronic medical records. The vaccination rates were compared by univariate analysis based on IDC and no ID consultation (NIDC).

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-seven (77%) of a total 242 patients received an IDC pre-transplantation. Varicella IgG levels were screened in all 187 IDC candidates. Among the 187 IDC patients, mumps, measles, and rubella IgG serologies were performed in 9 (5%), 21 (11%), and 51 (27%), respectively. Among all 242 patients, vaccines given included 2 (0.8%) MMR, 10 (4.1%) varicella and 85 (35.12%) Zostavax. Univariate analysis revealed that Zostavax was given to 76 (40.6%) pre-transplant IDC patients and only in 9 (16.7%) NIDC patients (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the relatively high IDC rate, patients' screened numbers for MMR IgG levels were low. Results pointed out the need for MMR protocol-driven serologic screening as well as for VZV and IDC prior to transplantation to increase vaccination rates.

Successful management of visceral disseminated varicella zoster virus infection during treatment of membranous nephropathy: a case report

BACKGROUND

Visceral disseminated varicella zoster virus (VDVZV) infection is a rare disease with a high mortality rate (55%) in immunocompromised patients, but it is not yet widely recognized in the field of nephrology. We report a case of VDVZV contracted during immunosuppressive therapy for membranous nephropathy.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 36-year-old woman was diagnosed with membranous nephropathy and was being treated with immunosuppressive therapy consisting of 60 mg/day prednisolone, 150 mg/day mizoribine, and 150 mg/day cyclosporine. Nephrosis eased; therefore, the prednisolone dosage was reduced. However, 50 days after starting immunosuppressive therapy, the patient suddenly developed strong and spontaneous abdominal pain, predominantly in the epigastric area, without muscular guarding or rebound tenderness. Blood data indicated neutrophil-dominant elevated white blood cell count, reduced platelet count, elevated transaminase and lactate dehydrogenase, slightly increased C-reactive protein, and enhanced coagulability. Abdominal computed tomography revealed a mildly increased enhancement around the root of the superior mesenteric artery with no perforation, intestinal obstruction, or thrombosis. The cause of the abdominal pain was unknown, so the patient was carefully monitored and antibiotic agents and opioid analgesics administered. The following day, blisters appeared on the patient's skin, which were diagnosed as varicella. There was a marked increase in the blood concentration of VZV-DNA; therefore, the cause of the abdominal pain was diagnosed as VDVZV. Treatment with acyclovir and immunoglobulin was immediately started, and the immunosuppressive therapy dose reduced. The abdominal pain resolved rapidly, and the patient was discharged 1 week after symptom onset.

DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

This patient was VZV-IgG positive, but developed VDVZV due to reinfection. Abdominal pain due to VDVZV precedes the skin rash, which makes it difficult to diagnose before the appearance of the rash, but measuring the VZV-DNA concentration in the blood may be effective. Saving the patient's life requires urgent administration of sufficient doses of acyclovir and reduced immunosuppressive therapy.

Vaccinations in kidney transplant recipients: Clearing the muddy waters

Vaccine preventable diseases account for a significant proportion of morbidity and mortality in transplant recipients and cause adverse outcomes to the patient and allograft. Patients should be screened for vaccination history at the time of pre-transplant evaluation and vaccinated at least four weeks prior to transplantation. For non-immune patients, dead-vaccines can be administered starting at six months post-transplant. Live attenuated vaccines are contraindicated after transplant due to concern for infectious complications from the vaccine and every effort should be made to vaccinate prior to transplant. Since transplant recipients are on life-long immunosuppression, these patients may have lower rates of serological conversion, lower mean antibody titers and waning of protective immunity over shorter period as compared to general population. Recommendations regarding booster dose in kidney transplant recipients with sub-optimal serological response are lacking. Travel plans should be part of routine post-transplant assessment and pre-travel vaccines and counseling should be provided. More studies are needed on vaccination schedules, serological response, need for booster doses and safety of live attenuated vaccines in this special population.

Immunization of Solid Organ Transplant Candidates and Recipients: A 2018 Update

This article discusses the recommended vaccines used before and after solid organ transplant period, including data regarding vaccine safety and efficacy and travel-related vaccines. Vaccination is an important part of the preparation for solid organ transplantation, because vaccine-preventable diseases contribute to the morbidity and mortality of these patients. A pretransplantation protocol should be encouraged in every transplant center. The main goal of vaccination is to provide seroprotection before transplantation, because iatrogenically immunosuppressed patients posttransplant have a lower seroresponse to vaccines.

A Nationwide Survey of Hepatitis E Virus Infection and Chronic Hepatitis E in Liver Transplant Recipients in Japan

Background

Recently, chronic hepatitis E has been increasingly reported in organ transplant recipients in European countries. In Japan, the prevalence of hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection after transplantation remains unclear, so we conducted a nationwide cross-sectional study to clarify the prevalence of chronic HEV infection in Japanese liver transplant recipients.

Methods

A total of 1893 liver transplant recipients in 17 university hospitals in Japan were examined for the presence of immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgM and IgA classes of anti-HEV antibodies, and HEV RNA in serum.

Findings

The prevalence of anti-HEV IgG, IgM and IgA class antibodies was 2.9% (54/1893), 0.05% (1/1893) and 0% (0/1893), respectively. Of 1651 patients tested for HEV RNA, two patients (0.12%) were found to be positive and developed chronic infection after liver transplantation. In both cases, HEV RNA was also detected in one of the blood products transfused at the perioperative period. Analysis of the HEV genomes revealed that the HEV isolates obtained from the recipients and the transfused blood products were identical in both cases, indicating transfusion-transmitted HEV infection.

Interpretation

The prevalence of HEV antibodies in liver transplant recipients was 2.9%, which is low compared with the healthy population in Japan and with organ transplant recipients in European countries; however, the present study found, for the first time, two Japanese patients with chronic HEV infection that was acquired via blood transfusion during or after liver transplantation.

•

We conducted the multicenter survey for HEV infection in liver transplant recipients.

•

Though the chronic HEV infection is rare, transfusion-transmitted cases were detected.

•

Blood products can be a risk of chronic HEV infection in transplant recipients.

Vaccination strategies in patients with solid organ transplant: evidences and future perspectives

Solid organ transplant recipients need emphases on immunization that result in certainly decrease the risk of vaccine preventable diseases. Organ transplant candidate should complete the recommended full vaccination schedule as early as possible during the courses of underlying disease because the patients with end stage liver or renal disease have reduced immune response to vaccine. Furthermore, live attenuated vaccines are generally contraindicated after transplantation. This review summarizes current information and the evidences regarding the efficacy and safety of immunization in adult solid organ transplant candidates and recipients.

Travel vaccination recommendations and endemic infection risks in solid organ transplantation recipients

BACKGROUND

Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are often heavily immunosuppressed and consequently at risk of serious illness from vaccine preventable viral and bacterial infections or with endemic fungal and parasitic infections. We review the literature to provide guidance regarding the timing and appropriateness of vaccination and pathogen avoidance related to the immunological status of SOT recipients.

METHODS

A PUBMED search ([Vaccination OR vaccine] AND/OR ["specific vaccine"] AND/OR [immunology OR immune response OR cytokine OR T lymphocyte] AND transplant was performed. A review of the literature was performed in order to develop recommendations on vaccination for SOT recipients travelling to high-risk destinations.

RESULTS

Whilst immunological failure of vaccination in SOT is primarily the result of impaired B-cell responses, the role of T-cells in vaccine failure and success remains unknown. Vaccination should be initiated at least 4 weeks prior to SOT or more than 6 months post-SOT. Avoidance of live vaccination is generally recommended, although some live vaccines may be considered in the specific situations (e.g. yellow fever). The practicing physician requires a detailed understanding of region-specific endemic pathogen risks.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide a vaccination and endemic pathogen guide for physicians and travel clinics involved in the care of SOT recipients. In addition, recommendations based on timing of anticipated immunological recovery and available evidence regarding vaccine immunogenicity in SOT recipients are provided to help guide pre-travel consultations.

Seasonal influenza vaccination of high-risk adults

INTRODUCTION

Adults at a high risk of severe influenza, because of their age and/or underlying health disorders, should receive seasonal influenza vaccination in order to reduce the incidence of severe illness and premature death. However, because current influenza vaccines are perceived to have suboptimal efficacy, vaccine coverage is below the recommended level in this population. Areas covered: This review examines, for each high-risk group, available data on influenza infection, vaccine efficacy and safety, and vaccine coverage. We conducted a literature search in the PubMed database to identify randomized controlled trials, observational studies and reviews published from 2000 through 2015 on both seasonal and pandemic influenza. Only studies published in English were considered. While the topic of this review is seasonal influenza, data on pandemics are included when relevant. Expert Commentary: Current seasonal influenza vaccines are only moderately protective, and vaccines eliciting broader and more durable immunity are therefore needed. Research on the use of higher doses, adjuvants, and a universal influenza vaccine is ongoing. Influenza vaccine coverage needs to be increased. Vaccination of contacts of high-risk individuals, including healthcare workers, should be encouraged.

Vaccine-preventable infection morbidity of patients with chronic kidney disease and cocoon vaccination strategies

Individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are vulnerable to vaccine-preventable infections due to impaired immunity, immunosuppressive treatments and dialysis. Protection of CKD patients by vaccination is hampered by reduced efficacy of vaccines and safety concerns for transplant candidates or recipients. 'Cocooning' vaccination policies, targeting the protection of a vulnerable individual through immunization of close contacts, have recently been introduced for infants and, to a lesser degree, for high-risk groups of immunocompromised individuals. In this article, we discuss the potentiality of implementing cocoon strategies for the high-risk group of CKD patients and conclude that this not yet officially recommended policy can substantially contribute to protection against infection and motivate vaccination among families and healthcare workers.

Live virus vaccines in transplantation: friend or foe?

Solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients may be exposed to diseases which may be prevented through live attenuated virus vaccines (LAVV). Because of their immunosuppression, these diseases can lead to severe complications in transplant recipients. Despite increasing evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of certain LAVV, these vaccines are still contraindicated for immunocompromised patients, such as transplant recipients. We review the available studies on LAVV, such as varicella zoster, measles-mumps-rubella, influenza, yellow fever, polio, and Japanese encephalitis vaccines in transplant patients. We discuss the current recommendations and the potential risks, as well as the expected benefits of LAVV immunization in this population.

Serologic response to hepatitis B vaccination among lung transplantation candidates

BACKGROUND

Optimal hepatitis B (HBV) vaccination strategies for lung transplantation (LT) candidates are not well established.

METHODS

LT candidates with negative anti-HBs and anti-HBc antibody titers at baseline who received standard-dose HBV vaccination (Recombivax-HB 10 mcg/mL or Engerix-B 20 mcg/mL) administered at months 0, 1, and 6 or an accelerated vaccination schedule on days 0, 7 to 14, and 21 to 28 between June 1988 and October 2012 were studied. Patients who were more likely to undergo LT within 6 months of evaluation received the accelerated vaccination schedule starting in August 2009.

RESULTS

Ninety-six HBV-seronegative patients who completed the vaccination series and had postvaccination anti-HBs titers available were identified. Median age was 60 years; 55.2% were female, and 92.7% were white. Underlying lung diseases included COPD (44.8%), idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (22.9%), interstitial lung disease (15.6%), and cystic fibrosis (8.3%). The overall anti-HBs response rate was 54.2%. There was no significant difference in vaccine responses between accelerated and standard vaccination schedules (54.2% vs. 54.1%; P=1.0). Patients who received steroids or other immunosuppressants before transplantation had lower response rates compared with those who did not (38.9% vs. 63.3%; P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Better vaccination strategies to improve response rate are needed in this population. The accelerated HBV vaccination schedule elicited similar anti-HBs responses as the standard schedule and could be advantageous in this population, given current organ allocation practices, and it could allow repeat vaccination series for initial nonresponders before transplantation.

Serial influenza-vaccination reveals impaired maintenance of specific T-cell memory in patients with end-stage renal failure

To investigate correlates for the well-known impaired response of haemodialysis-patients to a variety of recommended vaccinations, the induction of antigen-specific cellular and humoral immunity was characterised after influenza-vaccination in two following seasons where the identical vaccine-composition was used. Influenza-specific T-cells were flow-cytometrically characterised from whole blood of 24 healthy controls and 26 haemodialysis-patients by proliferation-assays, induction of IFN-γ and TNF-α, and maturation markers. Antibody-titres were quantified using ELISA and hemagglutination-inhibition test. Influenza-specific CD4 T-cells were recently activated CD45RO+/CD27+ Th1-cells. Specific T-cell frequencies significantly increased 1-2 weeks after the first vaccination in both controls (mean increase by 0.50±0.64%, max: 3.01%) and haemodialysis-patients (by 0.55±0.71%, max: 3.44%). Thereafter, T-cell levels continuously decreased to pre-vaccination levels within approximately 7 weeks, whereas antibody-titres were more stable over time. By 6 months, haemodialysis-patients had significantly lower precursor-frequencies of proliferating influenza-specific memory T-cells (p=0.006). In the following season, memory-maintenance in immunocompetent individuals led to a significantly less pronounced increase in cellular immunity after re-vaccination (by only 0.12±0.09%, p=0.003), whereas the vaccine induced a strong increase in a second group of vaccination-naïve controls. Of note, haemodialysis-patients responded like vaccination-naïve individuals, as they showed a strong increase in cellular immunity after re-vaccination that was as pronounced as in the year before. In conclusion, the less pronounced T-cell increase after re-vaccination in controls may indicate maintenance of sufficient immunological memory. In contrast, the more rapid loss of proliferating cells in haemodialysis-patients may represent a sign of relative immunodeficiency and contribute to an increased incidence of recurrent infectious complications.

Deficient long-term response to pandemic vaccine results in an insufficient antibody response to seasonal influenza vaccination in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the long-term antibody response to the 2009-H1N1 vaccine in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR) and its clinical repercussion on the efficacy of following 2010-2011 influenza vaccine.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter prospective study in SOTR receiving one dose of the nonadjuvant 2010-2011 seasonal influenza vaccine and determined the immunological response at 5 weeks after vaccination.

RESULTS

One hundred SOTR were included. Long-term antibody titers to the previous vaccine were only detected in one third of the patients. Patients with baseline titers had significantly higher seroprotection for the 2009-H1N1 strain (100% vs. 73%, relative risks [RR] 1.37, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.19-1.57; P=0.006), for H3N2 strain (100% vs. 62.2%, RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.36-1.90; P=0.005), and for B strain (100% vs. 69%; P=0.02). The seroconversion rate in patients with baseline titers was 90.9% vs. 73% (RR 2.97, 95% CI 0.75-11.74; P=0.07) for the 2009-H1N1 strain, 92.2% vs. 62.2% (RR 5.29, 95% CI 0.8-35.7; P=0.02) for the H3N2 strain, and 58.3% vs. 69% (P=0.45) for the B strain.

CONCLUSIONS

SOTR response to the 2010-2011 influenza vaccine was not optimal. The response was related to baseline titers; however, most of the patients did not exhibit detectable antibodies at vaccination lacking long-term response. New strategies are necessary to improve vaccination efficacy.

An update on immunizations before and after transplantation in the pediatric solid organ transplant recipient

Vaccination offers a unique opportunity to decrease the burden of infectious complications following solid organ transplantation. In this paper we review the current guidelines for routine immunizations before and after solid organ transplantation, including the recent updates and changes to recommendations for certain vaccines. We also address the issue of waning immunity in solid organ transplant recipients and discuss the current data on vaccinating this patient population with live vaccines after transplantation.

Immunization in the adult immunocompromised host

The number of patients with impaired immune response has been steadily increasing within the last years, not only with the onset of the AIDS epidemic, but also due to increasing numbers of subjects on immunosuppressive therapies. These patients are at an increased risk for infections, many of which are preventable by immunization. Inactivated vaccines are generally safe in subjects with underlying immunosuppression. However, immune response and protection may be hampered, depending on the extent of immunosuppression. In contrast, live vaccines such as yellow fever, measles, rubella, herpes zoster, and cholera may lead to severe reactions in immunocompromised patients and have been shown to deteriorate some immune-mediated diseases such as multiple sclerosis. Data on the efficacy of vaccines in biological therapies is scarce. Where necessary vaccines should be updated before immunosuppressive therapies are started. To improve the vaccination status several guidelines exist for immunosuppressed patients at risk such as those with rheumatic diseases, asplenia or solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

The management of patients awaiting liver transplantation

Since it was first performed in 1963, liver transplantation has become the only effective curative treatment in patients with liver failure. During the interval between being added to the waiting list and receiving a graft, the patient's condition may deteriorate as a result of disease progression or complications of the underlying liver disease. Both may result in death, removal from the waiting list because of futility of the procedure or, a worsened outcome following transplantation. The main aims during this period are to delay or prevent further deterioration in the patient's condition, to optimize their general medical health, to prevent, detect and treat any complications, and to offer treatment for specific conditions to improve the patient's overall outcome following liver transplantation.