Immunogenicity and safety of high-dose versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a randomised, double-blind, active-comparator trial

Immunogenicity of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 in Immunocompromised Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Using GRADE

INTRODUCTION

Immunocompromised (IC) patients mount poor immune responses to vaccination. Higher-dose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines may offer increased immunogenicity.

METHODS

A pairwise meta-analysis of 98 studies reporting comparisons of mRNA-1273 (50 or 100 mcg/dose) and BNT162b2 (30 mcg/dose) in IC adults was performed. Outcomes were seroconversion, total and neutralizing antibody titers, and cellular immune responses.

RESULTS

mRNA-1273 was associated with a significantly higher seroconversion likelihood [relative risk, 1.11 (95% CI, 1.08, 1.14); P < 0.0001; I2 = 66.8%] and higher total antibody titers [relative increase, 50.45% (95% CI, 34.63%, 66.28%); P < 0.0001; I2 = 89.5%] versus BNT162b2. mRNA-1273 elicited higher but statistically nonsignificant relative increases in neutralizing antibody titers and cellular immune responses versus BNT162b2.

CONCLUSION

Higher-dose mRNA-1273 had increased immunogenicity versus BNT162b2 in IC patients.

Vaccination updates and special considerations for systemic lupus erythematosus patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review the latest guidelines and note special considerations for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients when approaching vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, influenza, pneumococcus, herpes zoster, and potentially respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine in the future.

RECENT FINDINGS

SLE patients have unique infectious risks due to newer treatments and the nature of the disease itself. It is important to balance the benefit of additional protective immunity from updated vaccines against the possible risk of disease activity exacerbations.

SUMMARY

It is important to continuously evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of updated vaccines specifically for SLE patients. Additionally, the newly approved RSV vaccine should be considered for this population to reduce severe respiratory illness.

COVID-19 Vaccine in Immunosuppressed Adults with Autoimmune rheumatic Diseases (COVIAAD): safety, immunogenicity and antibody persistence at 12 months following Moderna Spikevax primary series

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety, immunogenicity and cellular responses following the Moderna Spikevax primary series in rheumatic disease.

METHODS

We conducted a 12-month, prospective, non-randomised, open-label, comparative trial of adults with either rheumatoid arthritis (RA, n=131) on stable treatment; systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE, n=23) on mycophenolate mofetil (MMF); other rheumatic diseases on prednisone ≥10 mg/day (n=8) or age-matched/sex-matched controls (healthy control, HC, n=58). Adverse events (AEs), humoral immune responses (immunogenicity: IgG positivity for anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and its receptor binding domain, neutralising antibodies (NAbs)), cellular responses (ELISpot) and COVID-19 infection rates were assessed.

RESULTS

Frequency of solicited self-reported AEs following vaccination was similar across groups (HC 90%, RA 86%, SLE 90%); among them, musculoskeletal AEs were more frequent in RA (HC 48% vs RA 66% (Δ95% CI CI 3 to 32.6)). Disease activity scores did not increase postvaccination. No vaccine-related serious AEs were reported. Postvaccination immunogenicity was reduced in RA and SLE (RA 90.2%, SLE 86.4%; for both, ΔCIs compared with HC excluded the null). Similarly, NAbs were reduced among patients (RA 82.6%, SLE 81.8%). In RA, age >65 (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.8) and rituximab treatment (OR 0.003, 95% CI 0.001 to 0.02) were negative predictors of immunogenicity. ELISpot was positive in 16/52 tested RA and 17/26 HC (ΔCI 11.2-53.3). During the study, 11 HC, 19 RA and 3 SLE patients self-reported COVID-infection.

CONCLUSION

In COVID-19 Vaccine in Immunosuppressed Adults with Autoimmune Diseases, the Moderna Spikevax primary series was safe. MMF, RA age >65 and rituximab were associated with reduced vaccine-induced protection.

Comparative effectiveness of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis using the GRADE framework

Introduction

Despite representing only 3% of the US population, immunocompromised (IC) individuals account for nearly half of the COVID-19 breakthrough hospitalizations. IC individuals generate a lower immune response after vaccination in general, and the US CDC recommended a third dose of either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccines as part of their primary series. Influenza vaccine trials have shown that increasing dosage could improve effectiveness in IC populations. The objective of this systematic literature review and pairwise meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of mRNA-1273 (50 or 100 mcg/dose) vs BNT162b2 (30 mcg/dose) in IC populations using the GRADE framework.

Methods

The systematic literature search was conducted in the World Health Organization COVID-19 Research Database. Studies were included in the pairwise meta-analysis if they reported comparisons of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 in IC individuals ≥18 years of age; outcomes of interest were symptomatic, laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, SARS-CoV-2 infection, severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization due to COVID-19, and mortality due to COVID-19. Risk ratios (RR) were pooled across studies using random-effects meta-analysis models. Outcomes were also analyzed in subgroups of patients with cancer, autoimmune disease, and solid organ transplant. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework.

Results

Overall, 17 studies were included in the pairwise meta-analysis. Compared with BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 was associated with significantly reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.75-0.97]; P=0.0151; I2 = 67.7%), severe SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.77-0.93]; P=0.0009; I2 = 0%), COVID-19-associated hospitalization (RR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.79-0.97]; P<0.0001; I2 = 0%), and COVID-19-associated mortality (RR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.44-0.90]; P=0.0119; I2 = 0%) in IC populations. Results were consistent across subgroups. Because of sample size limitations, relative effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in IC populations cannot be studied in randomized trials. Based on nonrandomized studies, evidence certainty among comparisons was type 3 (low) and 4 (very low), reflecting potential biases in observational studies.

Conclusion

This GRADE meta-analysis based on a large number of consistent observational studies showed that the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine is associated with improved clinical effectiveness in IC populations compared with BNT162b2.

2022 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for Vaccinations in Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of vaccinations in children and adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

METHODS

This guideline follows American College of Rheumatology (ACR) policy guiding management of conflicts of interest and disclosures and the ACR guideline development process, which includes the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. It also adheres to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. A core leadership team consisting of adult and pediatric rheumatologists and a guideline methodologist drafted clinical population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. A review team performed a systematic literature review for the PICO questions, graded the quality of evidence, and produced an evidence report. An expert Voting Panel reviewed the evidence and formulated recommendations. The panel included adult and pediatric rheumatology providers, infectious diseases specialists, and patient representatives. Consensus required ≥70% agreement on both the direction and strength of each recommendation.

RESULTS

This guideline includes expanded indications for some vaccines in patients with RMDs, as well as guidance on whether to hold immunosuppressive medications or delay vaccination to maximize vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. Safe approaches to the use of live attenuated vaccines in patients taking immunosuppressive medications are also addressed. Most recommendations are conditional and had low quality of supporting evidence.

CONCLUSION

Application of these recommendations should consider patients' individual risk for vaccine-preventable illness and for disease flares, particularly if immunosuppressive medications are held for vaccination. Shared decision-making with patients is encouraged in clinical settings.

2022 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for Vaccinations in Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of vaccinations in children and adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

METHODS

This guideline follows American College of Rheumatology (ACR) policy guiding management of conflicts of interest and disclosures and the ACR guideline development process, which includes the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. It also adheres to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. A core leadership team consisting of adult and pediatric rheumatologists and a guideline methodologist drafted clinical population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. A review team performed a systematic literature review for the PICO questions, graded the quality of evidence, and produced an evidence report. An expert Voting Panel reviewed the evidence and formulated recommendations. The panel included adult and pediatric rheumatology providers, infectious diseases specialists, and patient representatives. Consensus required ≥70% agreement on both the direction and strength of each recommendation.

RESULTS

This guideline includes expanded indications for some vaccines in patients with RMDs, as well as guidance on whether to hold immunosuppressive medications or delay vaccination to maximize vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. Safe approaches to the use of live attenuated vaccines in patients taking immunosuppressive medications are also addressed. Most recommendations are conditional and had low quality of supporting evidence.

CONCLUSION

Application of these recommendations should consider patients' individual risk for vaccine-preventable illness and for disease flares, particularly if immunosuppressive medications are held for vaccination. Shared decision-making with patients is encouraged in clinical settings.

Vaccinations in Patients with Rheumatic Disease: Consider Disease and Therapy

Patients with rheumatic diseases are susceptible to infections due to their underlying disease states as well as from immunosuppressive medications, highlighting the importance of vaccination, these same factors also pose challenges to vaccine efficacy, safety, and uptake. This article reviews the impact of immunosuppressive therapies and rheumatic disease on vaccine efficacy in this vulnerable patient population as well as discusses best practices.

Influenza vaccines: where we are, where we are going

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Influenza vaccines are the most useful strategy for preventing influenza illness, especially in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. For the coming year (2021/2022) all vaccines will be quadrivalent and contain two influenza A strains [(H1N1)pdm09-like and (H3N2)-like viruses] and two influenza B strains (Victoria lineage-like and Yamagata lineage-like viruses). However, the currently licensed have suboptimal efficacy due to the emergence of new strains and vaccine production limitations. In this review, we summarize the current recommendations as well as new advancements in influenza vaccinations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent advances have been aimed at moving away from egg-based vaccines and toward cell culture and recombinant vaccines. This removes egg adaptations that decrease vaccine efficacy, removes the reliance on egg availability and decreases the time necessary to manufacture vaccines. However, even more radical changes are needed if we are to reach the ultimate goal of a universal vaccine capable of providing long-lasting protection against all or at least most influenza strains. We discuss various strategies, including using more stable influenza antigens such as the hemagglutinin stalk and internal proteins as well as new adjuvants, new vaccine formulations, and DNA/RNA-based vaccines that are currently being developed.

SUMMARY

The currently available vaccines have suboptimal efficacy and do not provide adequate protection against drifted and shifted strains. Thus, the development of a universal influenza vaccine that induces long-lasing immunity and protects against a broad range of strains is crucial.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of high-dose seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age

This review sought to assess the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of high-dose inactivated influenza vaccines (HD-IIV) for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals aged 18 years or older. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) were included. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 36 studies were included. HD-IIV was shown to have higher relative vaccine efficacy in preventing influenza compared with standard-dose influenza vaccines (SD-IIV3) in older adults (Vaccine effectiveness (VE) = 24%, 95% CI 10-37, one RCT). One NRSI demonstrated significant effect for HD-IIV3 against influenza B (VE = 89%, 95% CI 47-100), but not for influenza A(H3N2) (VE = 22%, 95% CI -82 to 66) when compared with no vaccination in older adults. HD-IIV3 showed significant relative effect compared with SD-IIV3 for influenza-related hospitalisation (VE = 11.8%, 95% CI 6.4-17.0, two NRSIs), influenza- or pneumonia-related hospitalisation (VE = 13.7%, 95% CI 9.5-17.7, three NRSIs), influenza-related hospital encounters (VE = 13.1%, 95% CI 8.4-17.7, five NRSIs), and influenza-related office visits (VE = 3.5%, 95% CI 1.5-5.5, two NRSIs). For safety, HD-IIV were associated with significantly higher rates of local and systemic adverse events compared with SD-IIV (combined local reactions, pain at injection site, swelling, induration, headache, chills and malaise). From limited data, compared with SD-IIV, HD-IIV were found to be more effective in the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza, for a range of proxy outcome measures, and associated with more adverse events.

Review Article: vaccination for patients with inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Poor immune responses are frequently observed in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving established vaccines; risk factors include immunosuppressants and active disease.

AIMS

To summarise available information regarding immune responses achieved in patients with IBD receiving established vaccines. Using this information, to identify risk factors in the IBD population related to poor vaccine-induced immunity that may be applicable to vaccines against COVID-19.

METHODS

We undertook a literature review on immunity to currently recommended vaccines for patients with IBD and to COVID-19 vaccines and summarised the relevant literature.

RESULTS

Patients with IBD have reduced immune responses following vaccination compared to the general population. Factors including the use of immunomodulators and anti-TNF agents reduce response rates. Patients with IBD should be vaccinated against COVID-19 at the earliest opportunity as recommended by International Advisory Committees, and vaccination should not be deferred because a patient is receiving immune-modifying therapies. Antibody titres to COVID-19 vaccines appear to be reduced in patients receiving anti-TNF therapy, especially in combination with immunomodulators after one vaccination. Therefore, we should optimise any established risk factors that could impact response to vaccination in patients with IBD before vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Ideally, patients with IBD should be vaccinated at the earliest opportunity against COVID-19. Patients should be in remission and, if possible, have their corticosteroid dose minimised before vaccination. Further research is required to determine the impact of different biologics on vaccine response to COVID-19 and the potential for booster vaccines or heterologous prime-boost vaccinations in the IBD population.

Impact of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs on vaccine immunogenicity in patients with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

Patients with rheumatic diseases are at increased risk of infectious complications; vaccinations are a critical component of their care. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs may reduce the immunogenicity of common vaccines. We will review here available data regarding the effect of these medications on influenza, pneumococcal, herpes zoster, SARS-CoV-2, hepatitis B, human papilloma virus and yellow fever vaccines. Rituximab has the most substantial impact on vaccine immunogenicity, which is most profound when vaccinations are given at shorter intervals after rituximab dosing. Methotrexate has less substantial effect but appears to adversely impact most vaccine immunogenicity. Abatacept likely decrease vaccine immunogenicity, although these studies are limited by the lack of adequate control groups. Janus kinase and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors decrease absolute antibody titres for many vaccines, but do not seem to significantly impact the proportions of patients achieving seroprotection. Other biologics (interleukin-6R (IL-6R), IL-12/IL-23 and IL-17 inhibitors) have little observed impact on vaccine immunogenicity. Data regarding the effect of these medications on the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immunogenicity are just now emerging, and early glimpses appear similar to our experience with other vaccines. In this review, we summarise the most recent data regarding vaccine response and efficacy in this setting, particularly in light of current vaccination recommendations for immunocompromised patients.

Acute and chronic inflammatory neuropathies and COVID-19 vaccines: Practical recommendations from the task force of the Italian Peripheral Nervous System Association (ASNP)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To develop recommendations for vaccination for coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) in patients with inflammatory neuropathies.

METHODS

Key questions were formulated in order to perform a literature review on the safety and efficacy of vaccines in patients with inflammatory neuropathies. Based on the best evidence and expert opinion, a list of recommendations was formulated to inform decision on vaccination for COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory neuropathies and increase adherence to vaccination programmes.

RESULTS

Recommendations addressing safety and efficacy of vaccination in patients with inflammatory neuropathies were formulated. No data are currently available on the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with inflammatory neuropathies or other immune-mediated conditions. There is only sparse data on the safety of previous available vaccines in patients with inflammatory neuropathies, but studies on other autoimmune disorders indicate that these are safe and mostly efficacious. Patients with inflammatory neuropathies might be at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19.

INTERPRETATION

Patients with inflammatory neuropathies should be encouraged to adhere to the vaccination campaign for COVID-19. These recommendations provide guidance on the management of vaccinations for COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory neuropathies. More research is needed regarding the safety and efficacy of vaccination in patients with inflammatory neuropathies and other immune conditions.

Vaccinations in Patients with Rheumatic Disease: Consider Disease and Therapy

Patients with rheumatic diseases are susceptible to infections due to their underlying disease states as well as from immunosuppressive medications, highlighting the importance of vaccination, these same factors also pose challenges to vaccine efficacy, safety, and uptake. This article reviews the impact of immunosuppressive therapies and rheumatic disease on vaccine efficacy in this vulnerable patient population as well as discusses best practices.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and autoimmune diseases amidst the COVID-19 crisis

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become challenging even for the most durable healthcare systems. It seems that vaccination, one of the most effective public-health interventions, presents a ray of hope to end the pandemic by achieving herd immunity. In this review, we aimed to cover aspects of the current knowledge of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines and vaccine candidates in the light of autoimmune inflammatory diseases (AIIDs) and to analyze their potential in terms of safety and effectiveness in patients with AIIDs. Therefore, a focused narrative review was carried out to predict the possible implications of different types of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines which confer distinct immune mechanisms to establish immune response and protection against COVID-19: whole virus (inactivated or weakened), viral vector (replicating and non-replicating), nucleic acid (RNA, DNA), and protein-based (protein subunit, virus-like particle). Still, there is uncertainty among patients with AIIDs and clinicians about the effectiveness and safety of the new vaccines. There are a variety of approaches towards building a protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2. Only high-quality clinical trials would clarify the underlying immunological mechanisms of the newly implemented vaccines/adjuvants in patients living with AIIDs.

Influenza vaccination in immunocompromised populations: Strategies to improve immunogenicity

Immunocompromised individuals are at high risk of severe illness and complications from influenza infection. For this reason, immunization using inactivated influenza vaccines is recommended for transplant patients, individuals receiving immunosuppressant treatments, and other persons with immunodeficiency. However, these immunocompromised populations are more likely to have lower and non-protective responses to annual vaccination with a standard influenza vaccine. Here, we review strategies aimed to improve the immunogenicity of influenza vaccines in immunocompromised populations. The different strategies employed have included adjuvanted vaccines, high-dose vaccines, booster doses, intradermal vaccination, and temporary discontinuation of immunosuppressant treatment regimens. High-dose trivalent, inactivated, split-virus influenza vaccine (IIV3-HD) is so far one of the leading strategies for improving vaccine responses in HIV patients, transplant patients, and persons receiving immunosuppressant therapies for inflammatory diseases. Several studies in these populations have shown stronger humoral responses with IIV3-HD than existing standard-dose trivalent vaccine, and comparable safety. Accordingly, some scientific societies have stated that high-dose influenza vaccine could be a preferred option for immunocompromised patients. However, larger randomized controlled studies are needed to validate relative immunogenicity and safety of IIV3-HD and other enhanced vaccines and vaccination strategies in immunocompromised individuals.