Immunizations for renal transplant candidates and recipients

Use of oseltamivir in lung transplant recipients with suspected or proven influenza infection: a 1-year observational study of outcomes and safety

BACKGROUND

Influenza virus infections in lung transplant recipients (LTRs) have an increased risk of unfavourable outcomes. Early initiation of treatment is associated with improved outcomes. In clinical practice, empirical oseltamivir treatment is therefore commonly started prior to diagnostic microbiological confirmation. There is limited data on the patient characteristics, outcomes and safety of this practice. This study investigated outcomes and safety of this pre-emptive treatment strategy using oseltamivir.

METHODS

Descriptive analysis of LTRs who received oseltamivir for ≥2 days for suspected influenza infection between July 2011 and June 2012. Analyses were based on data from electronic medical records and our standardized LTR database with prospective documentation of clinical information including medication, laboratory and radiological results, outcomes and adverse events.

RESULTS

We included 133 patients with a total of 261 oseltamivir treatment episodes (87.4% as outpatients). Median duration of oseltamivir treatment was 4 days (range 2 to 67) and 98.5% had concomitant antibiotic pharmacotherapy. Indications for oseltamivir included acute respiratory infection (66.7%), non-distinctive inflammatory reaction (51.3%) and influenza-like illness (2.7%). Influenza virus infection was confirmed by PCR in only 7%. Rhinovirus was the most frequent pathogen detected (14.9%). We discovered a wide range of adverse events but none occurred in >5%, and most were mild and of questionable causal relationship to oseltamivir administration.

CONCLUSIONS

This non-controlled retrospective analysis suggests that the pre-emptive use of oseltamivir for respiratory tract infections pending microbiological results is safe in LTRs.

Management of Infection in Patients With Kidney Transplant

With the pervasive nature of chronic kidney disease, kidney transplantation is likely to continue to increase in the coming years. There are many infectious risks related to kidney transplant, including reactivation of latent infections, surgical complications, infectious risks related to immunosuppression, and nosocomial and community-acquired infections. These are described classically via timeline with early infections (first month), middle (1 to 6 months), and late (after 6 months). Kidney transplant patients may suffer from infections secondary to a vast array of organisms, including bacteria, fungi, and viruses. Certain infections, particularly viral infections such as cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, and BK virus, may portend acute and chronic implications of the infection and its subsequent impact on graft function. Critical care physicians and nephrologists caring for patients with a renal transplant must understand the broad array of possible infections, atypical presentations, and nuanced implications for appropriate evaluation and subsequent therapy, combined with the need for possible prophylaxis and/or suppression. Multidisciplinary teams, including transplant physicians and infectious diseases physicians, are encouraged strongly.

Does vaccination in solid-organ transplant recipients result in adverse immunologic sequelae? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines recommend vaccinations for solid-organ transplant recipients. However, concern exists that vaccination may stimulate adverse alloimmune responses.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the published literature regarding this aspect of vaccine safety. Electronic databases were searched for interventional and observational studies assessing de novo donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and rejection episodes after vaccination against infectious pathogens. Graft loss was also assessed. A meta-analysis was conducted for prospective, controlled studies. PRISMA reporting guidelines were followed.

RESULTS

Ninety studies (15,645 vaccinated patients and 42,924 control patients) were included. Twelve studies included control groups. The incidence of de novo DSA (14 studies) was 23 of 1,244 patients (1.85%) at 21 to 94 days. The incidence of rejection (83 studies) was 107 episodes in 5,116 patients (2.1%) at 0.7 to 6 months. Meta-analysis of prospective controlled studies (n = 8) showed no increased rejection risk with vaccination compared with no vaccination (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.70). This finding was supported by data from 3 registry analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the current evidence lacks high-quality, controlled studies, the currently available data provide reassurance that clinicians should recommend appropriate vaccination for their transplant patients as the risk of de novo DSA and rejection is relatively low.

Antibody responses to influenza vaccine in pre- and post-lung transplant patients

BACKGROUND

Although pre-transplant immunization is routinely recommended, this recommendation is based on little data. The primary objective of this study was to compare antibody responses in lung transplant patients who received influenza vaccine before the transplant, within the first six months of transplant, between 13 and 60 months post-transplant, and 110 months or beyond transplant.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 357 total immunization events performed over five yr to measure H1N1, H3N2, and B antibody responses to the influenza vaccine in pre- and post-lung transplant patients. Geometric mean titers, seroprotection (antibody titer at least 1:40), seroconversion (fourfold increase between pre and post), and mean fold increases were compared.

RESULTS

The geometric mean titer distributions were different for H3N2 and B (ANOVA; p = 0.002 for both). Pre-transplant antibody concentrations were higher compared to the 13- to 60-month group for H3N2 (corrected p = 0.002) and the healthy group for B (corrected p = 0.001). The ≥110-month group had higher seroconversion rates compared to the 13- to 60-month group for H3N2 and B viruses.

CONCLUSION

Lung pre-transplant patients and the long-term survivors have higher responses to the influenza vaccine than early post-transplant and the transplant control groups.

Immunization in end-stage renal disease: opportunity to improve outcomes

Infection is the second most common cause of death in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), following cardiovascular causes. Immunization is a fairly simple, but underutilized, strategy for prevention of infectious morbidity and mortality in patients with kidney failure. It is imperative for nephrologists and primary care providers to have an understanding of immunization as an essential component of preventive healthcare measures in this high-risk population. Patients with ESRD represent a unique population due to their immunosuppressed state, dialysis-related exposures and suboptimal response to routine vaccines. While the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) provides guidelines for vaccination of patients with renal disease against Hepatitis B, influenza and pneumococcal disease, the data on immunization against other commonly preventable infectious diseases are lacking. This article reviews the recent evidence on immunization in the ESRD population and synthesizes the related implications for maximizing prevention of infectious diseases in this high-risk population.

Topics in transplantation medicine for general nephrologists

Before transplantation, the general nephrologist is the primary resource for potential kidney transplantation recipients. After transplantation, the general nephrologist is increasingly managing transplant medications and complications. We provide evidence-based management strategies for common clinical issues. Linking our approach with the data allows the clinician to explore each subject in greater depth to tailor care to individual patients.