Updates on vaccinating the inflammatory bowel disease patient

Impact of mesalazine on the response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: Results of a prospective multicentre study of GETECCU (VACOVEII study)

OBJECTIVE

The recommendations of the Spanish Ministry of Health on vaccination in risk groups include mesalazine among the treatments with a possible negative effect on its effectiveness. However, this is not the recommendation of most experts. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of mesalazine on the humoral response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

VACOVEII is a Spanish, prospective, multicenter study promoted by GETECCU, which evaluates the effectiveness of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with IBD. This study includes IBD patients who have recieved the full vaccination schedule and without previous COVID-19 infection. Seroconversion was set at 260BAU/mL (centralized determination) and was assessed 6 months after full vaccination. In this subanalysis of the study, we compare the effectiveness of the vaccine between patients treated with mesalazine and patients without treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients without immunosuppressive therapy were included, of which 32 did not receive any treatment and 92 received only mesalazine. Six months after full vaccination, no significant differences are observed in the mean concentrations of IgG anti-S between both groups. In the multivariate analysis, antibody titers were independently associated with the use of mRNA vaccines and with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

CONCLUSION

Mesalazine does not have a negative effect on the response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in IBD patients.

A booster dose of SARS-COV-2 vaccine improves suboptimal seroconversion rates in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Results of a prospective multicenter study of GETECCU (VACOVEII study)

BACKGROUND

The response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination decreases in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients, specially under anti-TNF treatment. However, data on medium-term effectiveness are limited, specially using new recommended seroconversion rate (>260BAU/mL). Our aim was to evaluate the 6-month>260 BAU-seroconversion rate after full vaccination and after booster-dose.

METHODS

VACOVEII is a Spanish multicenter, prospective study promoted by GETECCU. IBD patients full vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 and without previous COVID-19 infection, treated or not with immunosuppressants, were included. The booster dose was administered 6 months after the full vaccination. Seroconversion was set at 260BAU/mL, according to most recent recommendations and was assessed 6 months after the full vaccination and 6 months after booster-dose.

RESULTS

Between October 2021 and March 2022, 313 patients were included (124 no treatment or mesalazine; 55 immunomodulators; 87 anti-TNF; 19 anti-integrin; and 28 ustekinumab). Most patients received mRNA-vaccines (86%). Six months after full vaccination, overall seroconversion rate was 44.1%, being significantly lower among patients on anti-TNF (19.5%, p<0.001) and ustekinumab (35.7%, p=0.031). The seroconversion rate after booster was 92%. Again, anti-TNF patients had a significantly lower seroconversion rate (67%, p<0.001). mRNA-vaccine improved seroconversion rate (OR 11.720 [95% CI 2.26-60.512]).

CONCLUSION

The full vaccination regimen achieves suboptimal response in IBD patients, specially among those anti-TNF or ustekinumab. The booster dose improves seroconversion rate in all patients, although it remains limited in those treated with anti-TNF. These results reinforce the need to prioritize future booster doses in patients on immunosuppressants therapy, specially under anti-TNF, and using mRNA-vaccines.

Protective role of flavonoids quercetin and silymarin in the viral-associated inflammatory bowel disease: an updated review

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic recurrent inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT). IBD patients are susceptible to various infections such as viral infections due to the long-term consumption of immunosuppressive drugs and biologics. The antiviral and IBD protective traits of flavonoids have not been entirely investigated. This study objective included an overview of the protective role of flavonoids quercetin and silymarin in viral-associated IBD. Several viral agents such as cytomegalovirus (CMV), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), varicella zoster virus (VZV) and enteric viruses can be reactivated and thus develop or exacerbate the IBD conditions or eventually facilitate the disease remission. Flavonoids such as quercetin and silymarin are non-toxic and safe bioactive compounds with remarkable anti-oxidant, anti-inflammatory and anti-viral effects. Mechanisms of anti-inflammatory and antiviral effects of silymarin and quercetin mainly include immune modulation and inhibition of caspase enzymes, viral binding and replication, RNA synthesis, viral proteases and viral assembly. In the nutraceutical sector, natural flavonoids low bioavailability and solubility necessitate the application of delivery systems to enhance their efficacy. This review study provided an updated understanding of the protective role of quercetin and silymarin against viral-associated IBD.

Efficacy of Hepatitis B Vaccination with a Novel Immunostimulatory Sequence Adjuvant (Heplisav-B) in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Owing to the use of immunosuppressive agents, patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have an increased risk of vaccine preventable diseases, including infection with hepatitis B virus (HBV). Heplisav-B, an FDA-approved vaccine, is more effective (90% to 100%) than Engerix-B (70.5% to 90.2%) at inducing immunity to HBV in clinical studies. Available data on efficacy of Heplisav-B vaccine in patients with IBD are limited.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included patients age 18 years and older with ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn's disease (CD) who received 1 or 2 doses of Heplisav-B vaccine and had postvaccination serologic testing. Prior to immunization, all participants were seronegative for HBsAb antibodies (HBsAb) measured as <10 IU/mL. Postvaccination HBsAb of ≥10 IU/mL was considered successful vaccination. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, and medications were abstracted.

RESULTS

One hundred six patients were included in the analysis. Median age was 43 years, and 44 (42%) were female. Thirty-nine patients (37%) had UC, whereas 67 (63%) had CD. Eighty-three patients (78.3%) had active immunity after vaccination with Heplisav-B, with median postvaccination HBsAb levels of 114 IU/L. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus, immunomodulator use, or those on 2 or more of immunosuppressive medications were less likely to respond to Heplisav-B, though these findings were not statistically significant on a multivariate analysis aside from chronic kidney disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Heplisav-B, a 2-dose vaccine, is an effective vaccine for HBV in patients with IBD. In our study, its overall efficacy (78.3%) is greater than that reported for the presently available 3-dose vaccination (Engerix) in patients with IBD.

Patients with IBD have a more cautious attitude towards COVID-19 vaccination

Background

To understand the awareness of COVID-19 vaccine, the willingness to vaccinate and the influencing factors of willingness to vaccinate in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients.

Methods

The online questionnaire was distributed to conduct a survey to analyze and evaluate the willingness, awareness and trust in vaccines of IBD patients. Bivariate analyses and logistic regression models were used to analysis influencing factors.

Results

We sent the questionnaire to the WeChat group for patient management and 304 patients responded, out of which 16 respondents had to be excluded and 288 respondents were included for the analysis. Among them, 209 patients vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccine. Among the non-vaccinated 79 patients, the main reasons for their concerns were afraid of vaccination aggravating IBD and fear of adverse effects. Our results showed that IBD patients with long disease duration were more willing to receive COVID-19 vaccination (P<0.05). We also observed that a high perception of benefits and cues to action to receive the vaccine were the two most important constructs affecting a definite intention for COVID-19 vaccination (P<0.05).

Conclusions

Patients with IBD have a more cautious attitude towards COVID-19 vaccination, which may lead to a higher rate of vaccine hesitancy. Further efforts should be made to protect patients with IBD from COVID-19 infections and achieve adequate vaccination coverage.

Vaccination strategies for Korean patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are vulnerable to vaccine-preventable infectious diseases. Immunosuppressive drugs, which are often used to manage IBD, may increase this vulnerability and attenuate vaccine efficacy. Thus, healthcare providers should understand infectious diseases and schedule vaccinations for them to reduce the infection-related burden of patients with IBD. All patients with IBD should be assessed in terms of immunity to vaccine-preventable diseases at the time of IBD diagnosis, and be vaccinated appropriately. Vaccination is becoming more important because of the unprecedented coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global health crisis. This review focuses on recent updates to vaccination strategies for Korean patients with IBD.

Primary Care Professionals' Attitudes Towards Vaccination Recommendation for Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Immunization among patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is suboptimal. We sought to characterize attitudes of US primary care professionals (PCPs) towards immunization practices for patients with IBD.

METHODS

Using a web-based opt-in panel of PCPs (DocStyles survey, spring 2021, cross-sectional study), we assessed likelihood of PCPs' recommending influenza, pneumococcal disease, herpes zoster, and human papilloma virus vaccinations for IBD patients by PCP characteristics and availability of clinical tools. Reasons for unlikelihood of recommending vaccines and approaches to improve vaccine recommendation were examined.

RESULTS

Among 1503 PCPs, 64% recommended all vaccines. Herpes zoster vaccine was most likely to be recommended (89.8%) and pneumococcal vaccine was least likely (74.0%). Clinical tools including decision support based on electronic health records (EHRs; 48.9%) and staff tracking of patients' vaccine needs (36.3%) were significantly associated with likelihood of recommending vaccines (P < .001). A greater likelihood of vaccine recommendation was observed for pediatricians vs other medical specialties, group outpatient clinic vs other worksites, and seeing >50 patients/week (P < .05). One-third of PCPs were unlikely to recommend ≥1 vaccine, and the top reason reported was unfamiliarity with vaccine guidelines for patients with IBD (48.0%). A review of guidelines or continued medical education (63.0%) and decision support from EHRs (51.2%) were the most frequently selected approaches identified to improve certainty of vaccine recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

There is room for improvement of vaccination recommendations by PCPs. Promoting continuing education and use of clinical tools may help support PCP immunization practices for patients with IBD.

Immunomodulatory Agents for Treatment of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (Review safety of anti-TNF, Anti-Integrin, Anti IL-12/23, JAK Inhibition, Sphingosine 1-Phosphate Receptor Modulator, Azathioprine / 6-MP and Methotrexate)

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

As treatment options for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) expand each class of medication will have specific safety concerns and side-effect profiles that need to be considered for optimal treatment of patients. We will review the most recent safety data for the newly approved immunomodulator therapies for the treatment of IBD.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are a growing number of publications outlining safety concerns for medications used to treat IBD. We reviewed safety profile of anti-tumor necrosis factor antibodies (TNF) with specific attention to combination therapy (anti-TNF plus immunomodulator). Recent publications have demonstrated increased risk of serious infection and malignancy (lymphoma and overall cancer rates) in patients receiving anti-TNF combination therapy when compared with patients receiving anti-TNF monotherapy or immunomodulator monotherapy. Recent publications on Janus Kinase Inhibitors indicate an increased risk of infection, specifically Herpes Zoster, and increased risk of major cardiovascular events and venous thromboembolic events resulting in a black box warning for the medication. In contrast, anti-interleukin 12/23 agents and gut selective anti-integrin antibody agents have demonstrated a favorable side-effect profile with low rates of infection and malignancy. The latest class of medications to be approved, sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) receptor modulators, have cardiac and infectious precautions. The field of IBD treatment is rapidly evolving with several mechanistic classes of medications now available. While corticosteroids continue to be associated with the greatest, overall, safety risks, each of the newer mechanistic classes have unique safety concerns. In the future, as we gain more experience with these agents, we will need to continue to evaluate the safety profile of our therapies used alone or in combination to make informed treatment decisions with our patients.

The Impact of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinic On-site Vaccination Services

Background

Despite being susceptible to vaccine-preventable diseases, patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have low vaccination rates. The aims of this study are to examine the rates of vaccine discussion and completion among patients of an IBD clinic that offers on-site vaccinations.

Methods

This is a retrospective study from March 1, 2019 to February 1, 2020 comparing vaccination discussion and completion rates for patients with IBD who visited 2 clinics-1 that offers on-site vaccination (Clinic A) and 1 that does not (Clinic B). Both clinics are staffed by the same IBD physicians and utilize an identical IBD vaccine checklist.

Results

A total of 356 patients were included (64.6% Crohn's, 31.7% ulcerative colitis, 1.1% indeterminate colitis, and 2.5% pouchitis). Overall vaccine discussion rate was 77.6% in Clinic A vs 70.9% in Clinic B (P = .15). Herpes zoster (HZ), pneumococcal, and tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap) vaccine discussion rates were higher in Clinic A compared to Clinic B (17.8% vs 5%, P < .001, 56.3% vs 43.4%; P = .01, and 41.4% vs 21.4%, P < .001), respectively. Influenza vaccine completion and hepatitis A immunization rates were higher in Clinic A compared to Clinic B (67.8% vs 47.8%, P < .001 and 36.2% vs 22.5%, P = .005), respectively. A numerically higher percentage of patients completed the pneumococcal, HZ, and hepatitis B vaccination in Clinic A, but this difference did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusions

IBD clinic on-site vaccination services enhanced vaccine discussion and completion rates. IBD clinics should offer on-site vaccination services as part of the comprehensive care of the IBD patient.

Cost-Effectiveness of an Adjuvanted Hepatitis B Vaccine (HEPLISAV-B) in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Background

Compare the cost-effectiveness of 2 recombinant hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccines in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Methods

Markov models were developed for 2 IBD cohorts: (1) 40-year-old patients prior to starting IBD treatment and (2) 40-year-old patients already receiving therapy. Cohort A received full vaccination series, cohort B had primary vaccine failure and received a vaccine booster. Two vaccines were compared: adjuvanted HEPLISAV-B and nonadjuvanted Engerix-B. Clinical probabilities of acute hepatitis, chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, fulminant hepatic failure and death, treatment costs, and effectiveness estimates were obtained from published literature. A lifetime analysis and a US payer perspective were used. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed for different hypothetical scenarios.

Results

Analysis of cohort A showed moderate cost-effectiveness of HEPLISAV-B ($88,114 per quality-adjusted life year). Analysis of cohort B showed increased cost-effectiveness ($35,563 per quality-adjusted life year). Changing Engerix-B to HEPLISAV-B in a hypothetical group of 100,000 patients prevented 6 and 30 cases of acute hepatitis; and 4 and 5 cases of chronic hepatitis annually for cohorts A and B, respectively. It also prevented 1 and 2 cases of cirrhosis, and 1 and 2 deaths over 20 years for each cohort. Cost-effectiveness was determined by vaccination costs, patient age, and progression rate from chronic hepatitis to cirrhosis.

Conclusions

HEPLISAV-B is cost-effective over Engerix-B in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy for IBD. Benefits increase with population aging and lower costs of vaccines. We advocate measuring levels of HBV antibodies in patients with IBD and favor adjuvanted vaccines when vaccination is needed.

Predicting, Preventing, and Managing Treatment-Related Complications in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Risk of complications from specific classes of drugs for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) can be kept low by respecting contraindications. Patients with IBD frequently develop serious infections resulting from the disease itself or its treatment. At the time of diagnosis, patients' vaccination calendars should be updated according to IBD guidelines-live vaccines should be postponed for patients receiving immunosuppressive drugs. Opportunistic infections should be detected and the vaccine against pneumococcus should be given before patients begin immunosuppressive therapy. Thiopurines promote serious viral infections in particular, whereas tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists promote all types of serious and opportunistic infections. Severe forms of varicella can be prevented by vaccinating seronegative patients against varicella zoster virus. Detection and treatment of latent tuberculosis is mandatory before starting anti-TNF therapy and other new IBD drugs. Tofacitinib promotes herpes zoster infection in a dose- and age-dependent manner. Physicians should consider giving patients live vaccines against herpes zoster before they begin immunosuppressive therapy or a recombinant vaccine, when available, at any time point during treatment. The risk of thiopurine-induced lymphomas can be lowered by limiting the use of thiopurines in patients who are seronegative for Epstein-Barr virus (especially young men) and in older men. The risk of lymphoma related to monotherapy with anti-TNF agents is still unclear. There are no robust data on the carcinogenic effects of recently developed IBD drugs. For patients with previous cancer at substantial risk of recurrence, physicians should try to implement a pause in the use of immunosuppressive therapy (except in patients with severe disease and no therapeutic alternative) and prioritize use of IBD drugs with the lowest carcinogenic effects. Finally, sun protection and skin surveillance from the time of diagnosis are recommended.