Influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients: systematic review and meta-analysis by etiology

Vaccines and Other Preventative Strategies for Immunocompromised Pneumonia

Immunocompromised patients are more susceptible to infections. Although they have reduced immune response to vaccines, it is still essential to prioritize immunizations as one strategy to potentially reduce the impact of pneumonia in this vulnerable population. Response to immunizations in immunocompromised patients can be enhanced by increasing the dose of vaccines (eg, influenza) or by increasing the number of doses (eg, coronavirus disease 2019). Prophylactic use of antimicrobials, control of risk factors (avoidance of smoking), and stabilization of underlying conditions (eg, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) can also have a beneficial effect to reduce the likelihood of pneumonia in the immunocompromised host.

Effectiveness of the influenza vaccine for preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza infections in outpatient immunocompromised adults, 2017-2018

While the number of immunocompromised (IC) individuals continues to rise, the existing literature on influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) in IC populations is limited. Understanding the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of the seasonal influenza vaccines in immunocompromised (IC) populations remains paramount. Using 2017-2018 US Flu VE Network data, we examined the VE of the 2017-2018 seasonal influenza vaccine against symptomatic influenza in outpatient settings among IC adults. We used logistic regression and adjusted for enrollment site, race, self-reported general health status, age, and onset date of symptoms. The VE among non-IC was 31% (95% CI: 22, 39) and among IC participants was -4% (95% CI: -66, 35), though the difference was not statistically significant. This study demonstrates the capacity to study a large IC population using an existing influenza VE network and contributes to the literature to support large, multicenter VE studies for IC populations.

Immunogenicity and safety of the MF59-adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine in non-elderly adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

In Europe, the age indication for the MF59-adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine (aQIV) has recently been extended from ≥65 to ≥50 years. Considering that the earliest approval of its trivalent formulation (aTIV) in Italy was for people aged ≥12 years, we aimed to systematically appraise data on the immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety of aTIV/aQIV in non-elderly adults.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted according to the available guidelines and studies were searched in MEDLINE, Biological Abstracts, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and clinical trial registries. Studies on absolute and relative immunogenicity, efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of aTIV/aQIV in non-elderly adults (<65 years) were potentially eligible. These endpoints were analyzed by virus (sub)types and characteristics of vaccinees. Fixed- and random-effects meta-analyses were performed for data synthesis. Protocol registration: CRD42024512472.

RESULTS

Twenty-four publications were analyzed. aTIV/aQIV was more immunogenic than non-adjuvanted vaccines towards vaccine-like strains: the absolute differences in seroconversion rates were 8.8% (95% CI: 3.7%, 14.0%), 13.1% (95% CI: 6.7%, 19.6%) and 11.7% (95% CI: 7.2%, 16.2%) for A(H1N1), A(H3N2), and B strains, respectively. This immunogenicity advantage was more pronounced in immunosuppressed adults. Additionally, aTIV/aQIV was more immunogenic than non-adjuvanted counterparts towards heterologous A(H3N2) strains with a 10.7% (95% CI: 3.2%, 18.2%) difference in seroconversion rates. Data on antibody persistence and efficacy were limited and inconclusive. Overall, aTIV/aQIV was judged safe and well tolerated, although reactogenic events were more frequent in aTIV/aQIV recipients versus comparators. Serious adverse events were uncommon and no difference (risk ratio 1.02; 95% CI: 0.64, 1.63) between aTIV/aQIV and non-adjuvanted formulations was found.

CONCLUSIONS

In non-elderly adults, aTIV/aQIV is safe and generally more immunogenic than non-adjuvanted standard-dose vaccines.

Streptococcus pneumoniae and influenza vaccination rates in oncological patients - data from Germany

OBJECTIVES

Due to disease- or therapy-associated immunosuppression, oncological patients suffer from significantly higher morbidity and mortality due to infections transmitted by respiratory pathogens such as Streptococcus pneumoniae and influenza virus. Although the German Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO) provides specific recommendations for vaccination against these pathogens, there is no data on vaccination rates in this high-risk population.

METHODS

Data from the interventional EVO study were analyzed to provide information on vaccination rates against Streptococcus pneumoniae and influenza virus in oncological patients. Numbers presented in this publication summarize baseline and follow-up data of the control group; thus, data were not influenced by the intervention.

RESULTS

Data of 370 patients were analyzed; 20.5% of patients were treated for hematological malignancies and 79.5% for solid cancer. 28.1% of patients had received vaccination against influenza and 32.2% against Streptococcus pneumoniae; for the latter only 7.3% according recommendations. While vaccination rates where even lower for patients with thoracic carcinoma (influenza 26.7% and Streptococcus pneumoniae 6.0% according to STIKO recommendations), rates in patients with multiple myeloma were remarkably higher (39.0% and 14.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite strong recommendations to vaccinate and the clear clinical need to prevent infections in the vulnerable group of oncological patients, only the minority was vaccinated against Streptococcus pneumoniae or influenza, underlining the urgent need for better vaccination strategies in this high-risk population.

Contribution of immunoglobulin products in influencing seasonal influenza infection and severity in antibody immune deficiency patients receiving immunoglobulin replacement therapy

Seasonal and pandemic influenza infection present a potential threat to patients with antibody deficiency. The acceptance and effect of the current recommendation for annual vaccination against influenza for patients with antibody deficiency is not well investigated and due to antigenic drift or shift the protective capacity of regular IgG replacement therapy (IgRT) is considered low. This narrative review considers the effect of influenza vaccination in immunodeficient patients and discusses available information on the effect of immunoglobulin products on seasonal influenza infectivity and severity in antibody deficiency patients receiving IgRT. The humoral immune response to seasonal influenza vaccination is reduced in patients with antibody immune deficiency. However, there is no evidence that the proportion of patients with primary antibody deficiency who develop influenza illness, and the severity of such illness, is increased when compared with the general population. The IgRT that patients receive has been shown to contain neutralizing antibodies as a consequence of past flu infections against both the hemagglutinin and neuraminidase surface proteins and other viral internal proteins of different influenza A virus strains. Studies have demonstrated not only significant levels of specific but also cross-reactive antibodies against seasonal influenza virus strains. Thus, despite the yearly changes in influenza viral antigenicity that occur, IgRT could potentially contribute to the protection of patients against seasonal influenza. Currently, only limited clinical data are available confirming a preventative effect of IgRT with respect to seasonal influenza infection. In conclusion, there is some evidence that IgRT could contribute to protection against seasonal influenza in patients with antibody-related immunodeficiency. However, additional clinical data are needed to confirm the extent and relevance of this protection and identify the main responsible virus targets of that protection.

Humoral response after mRNA COVID-19 primary vaccination and single booster dose in people living with HIV compared to controls: A French nationwide multicenter cohort study-ANRS0001s COV-POPART

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the humoral responses to mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in people living with HIV (PWH) and HIV-negative individuals.

METHODS

We included PWH with an undetectable viral load under ART and HIV-negative participants from the French nationwide ANRS COV-POPART cohort who had received two doses of vaccine as a primary vaccination. We compared humoral response between controls and PWH, stratified by CD4 cell count (<200/mm3 and ≥200/mm3 CD4 cell counts) at 1, 6, and 12 months after primary vaccination.

RESULTS

A total of 1776 participants were included in this analysis, 684 PWH (99% were on ART, median CD4 counts 673 cells/mm3) and 1092 controls. At 1 month, after adjustment on age, sex, and BMI, PWH had lower seroneutralization titers than controls, and PWH with <200 CD4 cell/mm3 had lower anti-Spike SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Same results were found at 6 months. However, in participants who received a booster dose between 6 and 12 months postprimary vaccination, we did not observe differences between PWH and controls at 12 months.

CONCLUSION

PWH had high responses to primary mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. In those who received a booster dose after 6 months, the humoral response at 12 months increased to similar levels to controls, even in those with low CD4 counts at baseline.

Influenza Vaccine Hesitancy among Cancer Survivors in China: A Multicenter Survey

BACKGROUND

Cancer survivors are at higher risk of developing severe complications from influenza due to their compromised immune systems. Despite their increased vulnerability to influenza and the availability of vaccines, vaccine hesitancy among cancer survivors remains a significant public health concern in China.

METHODS

A multicenter, cross-sectional study was conducted among cancer survivors in China from January to December 2023. A total of 500 participants were recruited from the oncology departments of five tertiary hospitals. A structured, self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data on socio-demographic characteristics, cancer-related information, medical history, lifestyle factors, and influenza vaccine hesitancy. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with influenza vaccine hesitancy.

RESULTS

The response rate was 97.0% (485/500). Among all participants, 204 (42.06%) reported vaccine hesitancy. The results of multiple logistic regression showed that the longer the end of anti-cancer treatment, without a history of adverse vaccine reactions, and the level of family support played a protective role in vaccine hesitancy. Current rehabilitation status, frequent colds, not being informed by doctors about vaccination, exercising, lack of community vaccination education programs, and concerns about vaccine safety were risk factors that increase vaccine hesitancy.

CONCLUSIONS

A high proportion of cancer survivors in our study reported influenza vaccine hesitancy. Addressing concerns about vaccine safety, improving access to vaccination services, and enhancing doctor-patient communication are crucial for increasing influenza vaccine uptake in this vulnerable population.

Hospitalizations for Acute Otitis and Sinusitis in Patients Living with HIV: A Retrospective Analysis of a Tertiary Center in Romania

Background/Objectives: Acute or chronic ear, nose and throat (ENT) conditions in people living with HIV can lead to hospitalization and affect their quality of life. The aim of our study was to determine the frequency and characteristics of hospitalizations for acute sinusitis (AS) and acute otitis (AO) in people living with HIV. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis over the course of six years (from January 2018 to December 2023), assessing all hospitalizations for AS and/or AO occurring in patients living with HIV, at the largest infectious diseases hospital in Romania. Results: We identified a total of 179 cases, among which 149 cases (83.2%) were attributed to AS and 41 cases (22.9%) were due to AO. Among cases of AS, maxillary sinuses were most frequently involved (n = 140/149, 94.0%), and among cases of AO, acute congestive otitis media (n = 14, 34.1%) and acute purulent otitis media (n = 13, 31.7%) were the most common forms. The underlying HIV infection was classified as stage C3 in 57.5% of cases. In 19.6% of cases, it was possible to identify either the trigger or the etiological agent, and the most frequent bacterial pathogens were Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, Haemophilus influenzae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Conclusions: In conclusion, this study highlights that hospitalizations due to acute sinus and ear involvement are not isolated events in people living with HIV. A prospective follow-up is needed to gain a deeper and more dynamic understanding of how ENT health is affected in people with HIV infection. Furthermore, promoting prevention through vaccination may reduce to a certain extent the burden of ENT infections in this population.

Improving Influenza Vaccination Coverage in Patients with Cancer: A Position Paper from a Multidisciplinary Expert Group

Patients with cancer can be immunocompromised because of their disease and/or due to anticancer therapy. In this population, severe influenza virus infections are associated with an elevated risk of morbidity and mortality. Influenza vaccination is therefore highly recommended in cancer patients, including those receiving anticancer therapy. However, vaccination coverage remains far below the recommended target for vulnerable subjects. Six specialists in oncology, hematology, immunology, and public health/vaccinology convened with the objective of developing strategies, based on evidence and clinical experience, for improving influenza vaccination coverage in cancer patients. This viewpoint provides an overview of current influenza vaccination recommendations in cancer patients, discusses barriers to vaccination coverage, and presents strategies for overcoming said barriers. New immunization issues raised by the COVID-19 pandemic are also addressed. Future directions include improving public education on influenza vaccination, providing the media with accurate information, improving knowledge among healthcare professionals, improving access to vaccines for cancer patients, co-administration of the influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, increased collaboration between oncologists and other health professionals, increased accessibility of digital vaccination registries to specialists, shared information platforms, and promoting immunization campaigns by healthcare systems with the support of scientific societies.

Plasmablastic Lymphoma. A State-of-the-Art Review: Part 2-Focus on Therapy

The objective of this two-part review is to present a current and comprehensive understanding of the diagnosis and management of plasmablastic lymphoma. The first part, which was published previously, focused on the study of epidemiology, etiology, clinicopathological characteristics, differential diagnosis, prognostic variables, and the impact of plasmablastic lymphoma on specific populations. This second part addresses the difficult topic of the treatment of plasmablastic lymphoma, specifically examining both the conventional, consolidated approach and the novel therapeutic strategy.

Vaccination strategies for patients under monoclonal antibody and other biological treatments: an updated comprehensive review based on EMA authorisations to January 2024

INTRODUCTION

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and other biological agents are being increasingly approved in the last years with very different indications. Their highly heterogeneous immunosuppressive effects, mechanisms of action and pharmacokinetics require comprehensive individualized vaccination schedules.

AREAS COVERED

Vaccination for immunocompromised patients. Prevention and treatment with mAbs and other biological therapies.

EXPERT OPINION

Current recommendations on vaccine schedules for patients under mAbs or other biological treatments are based on expert opinions and are not individualized according to each vaccine and treatment. No studies are focusing on the high heterogeneity of these agents, which are exponentially developed and used for many different indications. Recent paradigm changes in vaccine development (boosted by the COVID-19 pandemic) and in the mAbs use for prophylactic purposes (changing 'vaccination' by 'immunization' schedules) has been witnessed in the last years. We aimed at collecting all mAbs used for treatment or prevention, approved as of 1 January 2024, by the EMA. Based on available data on mAbs and vaccines, we propose a comprehensive guide for personalizing vaccination. Recent vaccine developments and current population strategies (e.g. zoster vaccination or prophylactic nirsevimab) are discussed. This review aims to be a practical guideline for professionals working in vaccine consultations for immunosuppressed patients.

Recommandations francophones pour la pratique clinique concernant la prise en charge des cancers du sein de Saint-Paul-de-Vence 2022-2023

With more than 60,000 new cases of breast cancer in mainland France in 2023 and 8% of all cancer deaths, breast cancer is the leading cancer in women in terms of incidence and mortality. While the number of new cases has almost doubled in 30 years, the percentage of patients at all stages alive at 5 years (87%) and 10 years (76%) testifies to the major progress made in terms of screening, characterisation and treatment. However, this progress, rapid as it is, needs to be evaluated and integrated into an overall strategy, taking into account the characteristics of the disease (stage and biology), as well as those of the patients being treated. These are the objectives of the St Paul-de-Vence recommendations for clinical practice. We report here the summary of the votes, discussions and conclusions of the Saint-Paul-de-Vence 2022-2023 RPCs.

Prognosis of critically ill immunocompromised patients with virus-detected acute respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is the leading cause of ICU admission. Viruses are increasingly recognized as a cause of pneumonia in immunocompromised patients, but epidemiologic data are scarce. We used the Groupe de Recherche en Réanimation Respiratoire en Onco-Hématologie's database (2003-2017, 72 intensive care units) to describe the spectrum of critically ill immunocompromised patients with virus-detected ARF and to report their outcomes. Then, patients with virus-detected ARF were matched based on clinical characteristics and severity (1:3 ratio) with patients with ARF from other origins.

RESULTS

Of the 4038 immunocompromised patients in the whole cohort, 370 (9.2%) had a diagnosis of virus-detected ARF and were included in the study. Influenza was the most common virus (59%), followed by respiratory syncytial virus (14%), with significant seasonal variation. An associated bacterial infection was identified in 79 patients (21%) and an invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in 23 patients (6%). The crude in-hospital mortality rate was 37.8%. Factors associated with mortality were: neutropenia (OR = 1.74, 95% confidence interval, CI [1.05-2.89]), poor performance status (OR = 1.84, CI [1.12-3.03]), and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation on the day of admission (OR = 1.97, CI [1.14-3.40]). The type of virus was not associated with mortality. After matching, patients with virus-detected ARF had lower mortality (OR = 0.77, CI [0.60-0.98]) than patients with ARF from other causes. This result was mostly driven by influenza-like viruses, namely, respiratory syncytial virus, parainfluenza virus, and human metapneumovirus (OR = 0.54, CI [0.33-0.88]).

CONCLUSIONS

In immunocompromised patients with virus-detected ARF, mortality is high, whatever the species, mainly influenced by clinical severity and poor general status. However, compared to non-viral ARF, in-hospital mortality was lower, especially for patients with detected viruses other than influenza.

Humoral immune response following the inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccination among HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected adults

BACKGROUND

A limited amount of information is available about the immunogenicity of the quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals, especially in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

HIV-infected adults and HIV-uninfected adults received a dose of quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine including strains of H1N1, H3N2, BV and BY. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and hemagglutination-inhibition assay (HAI) were used to determine IgA, IgG antibody concentration and geometric mean titers (GMT) at day 0 and day 28, respectively. Associated factors contributing to seroconversion or GMT changes were analyzed using simple logistic regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 131 HIV-infected and 55 HIV-uninfected subjects were included in the study. In both HIV-infected and uninfected arms, IgG and IgA against influenza A and B all increased significantly at day 28 after receiving QIV (P < 0.001). GMTs of post-vaccination at day 28 showed that HIV-infected persons with CD4 + T cell counts ≤ 350 cells/mm3 were statistically less immunogenic to all strains of QIV than HIV-uninfected ones (P < 0.05). HIV-infected participants with CD4 + T cell counts ≤ 350 cells/mm3 were less likely to achieve seroconversion to QIV (H1N1, BY and BV) than HIV-uninfected individuals at day 28 after vaccination (P < 0.05). Compared with HIV-infected patients with baseline CD4 + T cell counts ≤ 350 cells/mm3, individuals with baseline CD4 + T cell counts > 350 cell/mm3 seemed more likely to generate antibody responses to H1N1 (OR:2.65, 95 %CI: 1.07-6.56) and BY (OR: 3.43, 95 %CI: 1.37-8.63), and showed a higher probability of seroconversion to BY (OR: 3.59, 95 %CI: 1.03-12.48). Compared with nadir CD4 + T cell count ≤ 350 cell/mm3, individuals with nadir CD4 + T cell count > 350 cell/mm3 showed a higher probability of seroconversion to H1N1(OR: 3.15, 95 %CI: 1.14-8.73).

CONCLUSION

Influenza vaccination of HIV-infected adults might be effective despite variable antibody responses. HIV-positive populations with CD4 + T cell counts ≤ 350 are less likely to achieve seroconversion. Further vaccination strategies could be developed for those with low CD4 T cell counts.

Main factors influencing long-term outcomes of liver transplantation in 2022

Liver transplant (LT) outcomes have markedly improved in the recent decades, even if long-term morbidity and mortality are still considerable. Most of late deaths are independent from graft function and different comorbidities, including complications of metabolic syndrome and de novo neoplasms, seem to play a key role in determining long-term outcomes in LT recipients. This review discusses the main factors associated with late mortality and suggests possible strategies to improve long-term management and follow-up after liver transplantation. In particular, the reduction of drug toxicity, the use of tools to identify high-risk patients, and setting up a multidisciplinary team also for long-term management of LT recipients may further improve survival after liver transplantation.

Long-Term Immunological Memory of SARS-CoV-2 Is Present in Patients with Primary Antibody Deficiencies for up to a Year after Vaccination

Some studies have found increased coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19)-related morbidity and mortality in patients with primary antibody deficiencies. Immunization against COVID-19 may, therefore, be particularly important in these patients. However, the durability of the immune response remains unclear in such patients. In this study, we evaluated the cellular and humoral response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antigens in a cross-sectional study of 32 patients with primary antibody deficiency (n = 17 with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) and n = 15 with selective IgA deficiency) and 15 healthy controls. Serological and cellular responses were determined using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and interferon-gamma release assays. The subsets of B and T lymphocytes were measured using flow cytometry. Of the 32 patients, 28 had completed the vaccination regimen with a median time after vaccination of 173 days (IQR = 142): 27 patients showed a positive spike-peptide-specific antibody response, and 26 patients showed a positive spike-peptide-specific T-cell response. The median level of antibody response in CVID patients (5.47 ratio (IQR = 4.08)) was lower compared to healthy controls (9.43 ratio (IQR = 2.13)). No difference in anti-spike T-cell response was found between the groups. The results of this study indicate that markers of the sustained SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific immune response are detectable several months after vaccination in patients with primary antibody deficiencies comparable to controls.

Role of mTOR inhibitor in the cellular and humoral immune response to a booster dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-1273 vaccine in kidney transplant recipients

Background

Immunocompromised patients have an increased risk of developing severe COVID disease, as well as a tendency to suboptimal responses to vaccines. The objective of this study was to evaluate the specific cellular and humoral adaptive immune responses of a cohort of kidney transplant recipients (KTR) after 3 doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine and to determinate the main factors involved.

Methods

Prospective observational study in 221 KTR (149 non infected), 55 healthy volunteers (HV) and 23 dialysis patients (DP). We evaluated anti-spike (by quantitative chemiluminescence immunoassay) and anti-nucleocapsid IgG (ELISA), percentage of TCD4⁺ and TCD8⁺ lymphocytes producing IFNγ against S-protein by intracellular flow cytometry after Spike-specific 15-mer peptide stimulation and serum neutralizing activity (competitive ELISA) at baseline and after vaccination.

Results

Among COVID-19 naïve KTR, 54.2% developed cellular and humoral response after the third dose (vs 100% in DP and 91.7% in HV), 18% only showed cell-mediated response, 22.2% exclusively antibody response and 5.6% none. A correlation of neutralizing activity with both the IgG titer (r=0.485, p<0.001) and the percentage of S-protein-specific IFNγ-producing CD8-T cells (r=0.198, p=0.049) was observed. Factors related to the humoral response in naïve KTR were: lymphocytes count pre-vaccination >1000/mm³ [4.68 (1.72-12.73, p=0.003], eGFR>30 mL/min [7.34(2.72-19.84), p<0.001], mTOR inhibitors [6.40 (1.37-29.86), p=0.018]. Infected KTR developed a stronger serologic response than naïve patients (96.8 vs 75.2%, p<0.001).

Conclusions

KTR presented poor cellular and humoral immune responses following vaccination with mRNA-1273. The immunosuppression degree and kidney function of these patients play an important role, but the only modifiable factor with a high impact on humoral immunogenicity after a booster dose was an immunosuppressive therapy including a mTOR inhibitor. Clinical trials are required to confirm these results.

Effect of medical staff training on vaccination coverage in outpatients with cancer: An interventional multicenter before-and-after study

Purpose

Despite widely disseminated guidelines, pneumococcal and influenza vaccination coverage (VC) remains insufficient in patients with cancer receiving cancer treatment. We performed an interventional study to evaluate VC in patients with cancer treated at the medical oncology departments of three North-of-France hospitals and to assess the effect of medical staff training on VC in these patients.

Methods

A standardized questionnaire assessed VC in adult patients with cancer receiving anticancer treatment at three day hospitals during December 2-7, 2019. Subsequently (January 2020), we organized educational training sessions for medical staff from each hospital to discuss the current vaccination guidelines. To assess the impact of training on pneumococcal and influenza VC, we re-administered the same questionnaire in March 2020. Because there are no specific guidelines on Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis (DTP) vaccination and no improvement was expected, DTP VC acted as an internal control.

Results

In total, 272 patients from all three hospitals were enrolled in the "before study"; 156 patients from only two hospitals were enrolled in the "after study" as medical training and data collection at the third were impossible because of administrative reasons and COVID-19 pandemic. The predictors were age for DTP VC; treatment center for pneumococcal VC; and age, sex, and tumor histology (adenocarcinoma vs. others) for influenza VC. Neither influenza VC (42.6% vs. 55.1%, p = 0.08), nor pneumococcal VC were significantly improved post-intervention (11.8% vs. 15.4%, p = 1). There seems to be a small effect in the most fragile for influenza VC.

Conclusion

As expected, VC was very low in patients with cancer, consistent with the literature. There was no impact of the intervention for pneumococcal and influenza VC.

Immune Response and Effects of COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Lung Cancer-COVID Lung Vaccine Study

Lung cancer patients represent a subgroup of special vulnerability in whom the SARS-CoV-2 infection could attain higher rates of morbidity and mortality. Therefore, those patients were recommended to receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccines once they were approved. However, little was known at that time regarding the degree of immunity developed after vaccination or vaccine-related adverse events, and more uncertainty involved the real need for a third dose. We sought to evaluate the immune response developed after vaccination, as well as the safety and efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in a cohort of patients with lung cancer. Patients were identified through the Oncology/Hematology Outpatient Vaccination Program. Anti-Spike IgG was measured before any vaccine and at 3-6-, 6-9- and 12-15-month time points after the 2nd dose. Detailed clinical data were also collected. In total, 126 patients with lung cancer participated and received at least one dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. At 3-6 months after 2nd dose, 99.1% of baseline seronegative patients seroconverted and anti-Spike IgG titers went from a median value of 9.45 to 720 UI/mL. At the 6-9-month time point, titers raised to a median value of 924 UI/mL, and at 12-15 months, after the boost dose, they reached a median value of 3064 UI/mL. Adverse events to the vaccine were mild, and no SARS- CoV-2 infection-related deaths were recorded. In this lung cancer cohort, COVID-19 vaccines were safe and effective irrespective of the systemic anticancer therapy. Most of the patients developed anti-Spike IgG after the second dose, and these titers were maintained over time with low infection and reinfection rates with a mild clinical course.

mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness Against Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalization Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

The study objective was to evaluate 2- and 3-dose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization among adult solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients.

METHODS

We conducted a 21-site case-control analysis of 10 425 adults hospitalized in March to December 2021. Cases were hospitalized with COVID-19; controls were hospitalized for an alternative diagnosis (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-negative). Participants were classified as follows: SOT recipient (n = 440), other immunocompromising condition (n = 1684), or immunocompetent (n = 8301). The VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was calculated as 1-adjusted odds ratio of prior vaccination among cases compared with controls.

RESULTS

Among SOT recipients, VE was 29% (95% confidence interval [CI], -19% to 58%) for 2 doses and 77% (95% CI, 48% to 90%) for 3 doses. Among patients with other immunocompromising conditions, VE was 72% (95% CI, 64% to 79%) for 2 doses and 92% (95% CI, 85% to 95%) for 3 doses. Among immunocompetent patients, VE was 88% (95% CI, 87% to 90%) for 2 doses and 96% (95% CI, 83% to 99%) for 3 doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines was lower for SOT recipients than immunocompetent adults and those with other immunocompromising conditions. Among SOT recipients, vaccination with 3 doses of an mRNA vaccine led to substantially greater protection than 2 doses.

Characteristics and methodological standards across systematic reviews with Meta-analysis of efficacy and/or effectiveness of influenza vaccines: an overview of reviews

BACKGROUND

While systematic reviews (SR) generally suggest that vaccination is an effective way to prevent influenza infection, it is not clear if these conclusions are based on high quality SR methods. As such, we systematically identified, critically appraised, and summarised the characteristics and adherence to methodological standards in SRs with meta-analysis of efficacy/effectiveness of influenza vaccines.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Global Health, and CDSR for English-language SR publications up to July 11, 2022. We summarised the characteristics, adherence to methodological standards and SR quality (AMSTAR 2).

RESULTS

From 11,193 retrieved citations, we included 48 publications (47 SRs). Seventy-five percent were of a critically low quality, 19% of a low quality, 2% of a moderate quality, and 4% of a high quality. Thirteen percent were industry-funded, about 13% co-authored by industry employee(s), and 4% commissioned by an organisation or authority. Only 45% percent reported protocol registration, 6% reported collaboration with a knowledge synthesis librarian/information specialist, and 60% utilised a reporting checklist (e.g. PRISMA).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

SRs with meta-analysis of efficacy/effectiveness of influenza vaccines are mostly of critically low quality and even the more recent reviews did not follow current best SR practices. These findings are significant in view of the controversies that surround influenza vaccines, and the use of SRs in informed decision-making. However, the findings do not justify curtailment or cessation of influenza vaccine use as vaccines continue to offer substantial net public health benefit.HighlightsWe systematically identified, critically appraised, and summarised the characteristics and adherence to methodological standards in 47 systematic reviews with meta-analysis of efficacy/effectiveness of influenza vaccines.13% of the reviews were industry-funded.About 13% of the reviews were co-authored by industry employee(s).4% of the reviews were commissioned by an organisation/authority.45% of the reviews reported protocol registration.6% of the reviews reported collaborating with a knowledge synthesis librarian/information specialist to prepare the search strategy.60% of the reviews reported using the PRISMA (or similar) checklist.75% of the reviews were judged to be of critically low quality; 19% of low quality; 2% of moderate quality; 4% of high quality.

The Protective Effects of Influenza Vaccination in Elderly Patients with Breast Cancer in Taiwan: A Real-World Evidence-Based Study

In elderly patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer, clarity is lacking regarding the effects of influenza vaccines, particularly on clinical outcomes. This study conducted two nationwide, population-based, and propensity score-matched cohorts to estimate and compare the protective effects of influenza vaccine in elderly women and elderly patients with breast cancer. Data were derived from the National Health Insurance Research Database and Cancer Registry Database. Generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were used to compare outcomes between the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were used to estimate the relative risks, and stratified analyses in the breast cancer cohort were performed to further evaluate elderly breast cancer patients undergoing a variety of adjuvant therapies. The GEE analysis showed that the aORs of death and hospitalization, including for influenza and pneumonia, respiratory diseases, respiratory failure, and heart disease, did not significantly decrease in vaccinated elderly patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Conversely, the aORs of all influenza-related clinical outcomes were significantly decreased in elderly women. No protective effects of influenza vaccination were found in the elderly patients with a newly diagnosed breast cancer. More studies focusing on identifying strategies to improve the real-world effectiveness of influenza vaccination to the immunocompromised are needed. Our clinical outcomes will be valuable for future public health policy establishment and shared decision making for influenza vaccine use in elderly patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. According to our findings, regular influenza vaccine administration for elderly patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer may be reconsidered, with potential contraindications for vaccination. On the other hand, implementing the vaccination of close contacts of patients with breast cancer may be a more important strategy for enhancing protection of those fragile patients.

Spinal region corticosteroid injections are not associated with increased risk for influenza

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Spinal region corticosteroid injections (CSI) are intended to act locally to relieve radicular or axial back pain, however some systemic absorption occurs, potentially placing recipients at risk for immunosuppressive effects of corticosteroids. No previous studies examine whether patients undergoing spinal region CSI are at increased risk for viral infections, particularly influenza-a common viral illness with potentially serious consequences, especially for patients with multimorbidity.

PURPOSE

To examine odds of influenza in patients who received spinal region CSI compared to matched controls.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Adults (n=9,196) who received a spinal CSI (epidural, facet, sacroiliac, paravertebral block) during influenza seasons occurring from 2000 to 2020 were 1:1 matched to controls without spinal CSI.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was odds of influenza diagnosis in spinal CSI patients compared to matched controls. Predetermined subgroup analyses examined odds of influenza diagnosis based on vaccination status and injection location.

METHODS

An institutional database was queried to identify patients that received spinal CSI during influenza season (September 1 to April 30) from 2000 to 2020. Patients were matched by age, sex, and influenza vaccination status to controls without spinal CSI within the specified influenza season. Influenza diagnosis was ascertained using International Classification of Disease codes and data was analyzed using multiple logistic regression adjusted for comorbidities associated with increased risk for influenza.

RESULTS

A total of 9,196 adults (mean age 60.8 years, 60.4% female) received a spinal CSI and were matched to a control. There were no increased odds of influenza for spinal CSI patients as compared to matched controls (OR 1.13, [95% CI, 0.86-1.48]). When subgroups were examined, there were also no increased odds of influenza for spinal CSI patients based on immunization status (unvaccinated or vaccinated) or spinal injection location (epidural or non-epidural).

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal region CSI was not associated with increased odds of influenza or reduced vaccine efficacy. This is reassuring given the analgesic and functional restoration benefits of these injections. Assessing risk of viral infection associated with spinal CSI is particularly relevant in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic, and further work is needed to address this issue.

Vaccination of Immunocompromised Cats

Immunocompromise is a common condition in cats, especially due to widespread infections with immunosuppressive viruses, such as feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) and feline leukaemia virus (FeLV), but also due to chronic non-infectious diseases, such as tumours, diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease, as well as treatment with immunosuppressive drugs, such as glucocorticoids, cyclosporins, or tumour chemotherapy. In this review, the European Advisory Board on Cat Diseases (ABCD), a scientifically independent board of experts in feline medicine from eleven European countries, discusses the current knowledge and rationale for vaccination of immunocompromised cats. So far, there are few data available on vaccination of immunocompromised cats, and sometimes studies produce controversial results. Thus, this guideline summarizes the available scientific studies and fills in the gaps with expert opinion, where scientific studies are missing. Ultimately, this review aims to help veterinarians with their decision-making in how best to vaccinate immunocompromised cats.

Use of Systemic Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in People Living with Controlled HIV: Inference-Based Guidance from a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel

Background

People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) have a similar prevalence of psoriasis as the general population, though incidence and severity correlate with HIV viral load. Adequately treating HIV early renders the infection a chronic medical condition and allows PLHIV with a suppressed viral load (PLHIV-s) to live normal lives. Despite this, safety concerns and a lack of high-level data have hindered the use of systemic psoriasis therapies in PLHIV-s.

Objectives

We aim to provide a structured framework that supports healthcare professionals and patients discussing the risks and benefits of systemic psoriasis therapy in PLHIV-s. Our goal was to address the primary question, are responses to systemic therapies for the treatment of psoriasis in PLHIV-s similar to those in the non-HIV population?

Methods

We implemented an inference-based approach relying on indirect evidence when direct clinical trial data were absent. In this instance, we reviewed indirect evidence supporting inferences on the status of immune function in PLHIV. Recommendations on systemic treatment for psoriasis in PLHIV were derived using an inferential heuristic.

Results

We identified seven indirect indicators of immune function informed by largely independent bodies of evidence: (1) functional assays, (2) vaccine response, (3) life expectancy, (4) psoriasis manifestations, (5) rate of infections, (6) rate of malignancies, and (7) organ transplant outcomes.

Conclusions

Drug-related benefits and risks when treating a patient with systemic psoriasis therapies are similar for non-HIV patients and PLHIV with a suppressed viral load and normalized CD4 counts. Prior to initiating psoriasis treatment in PLHIV, HIV replication should be addressed by an HIV specialist. Exercise additional caution for patients with a suppressed viral load and discordant CD4 responses on antiretroviral therapy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13555-022-00722-0.

People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) develop psoriasis as often as everyone else. We asked: what are effective and safe treatments when PLHIV need systemic therapy (pills or injections) for their psoriasis?

HIV infection attacks the immune system. When HIV is not treated, the immune system declines. A less effective immune system makes it harder for the body to fight infections and certain cancers. Psoriasis is a skin condition caused by overactive immune cells. Effective psoriasis treatments reduce immune-cell activity. There are some concerns that treatments for psoriasis may not work and could worsen infections or cancers.

To answer the question, we gathered 11 dermatologists and 4 HIV specialists. We reviewed the international scientific literature on PLHIV and psoriasis. The absence of direct evidence and volume of information to review made the process challenging. The end results were worthwhile.

We concluded that people who are diagnosed early and take antiretroviral therapy to control their HIV infection (PLHIV-c) can live long, healthy lives. Accordingly, we determined that PLHIV-c can likely expect the same safety and efficacy for systemic psoriasis treatments as the general population. Treatment decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis through consultation with the patient and treating physician(s).

Pillars of modern medicine are evidence-based care and collaborative decision-making. Too often, neither care provider nor patient are adequately informed. We have tried to fill one information gap for PLHIV and psoriasis. This process may help answer questions in other disease populations where direct evidence is scarce or absent.

Efficacy of covid-19 vaccines in immunocompromised patients: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of covid-19 vaccines between immunocompromised and immunocompetent people.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Central Register of Controlled Trials, COVID-19 Open Research Dataset Challenge (CORD-19), and WHO covid-19 databases for studies published between 1 December 2020 and 5 November 2021. ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched in November 2021 to identify registered but as yet unpublished or ongoing studies.

STUDY SELECTION

Prospective observational studies comparing the efficacy of covid-19 vaccination in immunocompromised and immunocompetent participants.

METHODS

A frequentist random effects meta-analysis was used to separately pool relative and absolute risks of seroconversion after the first and second doses of a covid-19 vaccine. Systematic review without meta-analysis of SARS-CoV-2 antibody titre levels was performed after first, second, and third vaccine doses and the seroconversion rate after a third dose. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed.

RESULTS

82 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Of these studies, 77 (94%) used mRNA vaccines, 16 (20%) viral vector vaccines, and 4 (5%) inactivated whole virus vaccines. 63 studies were assessed to be at low risk of bias and 19 at moderate risk of bias. After one vaccine dose, seroconversion was about half as likely in patients with haematological cancers (risk ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.50, I²=80%; absolute risk 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.20 to 0.40, I²=89%), immune mediated inflammatory disorders (0.53, 0.39 to 0.71, I²=89%; 0.29, 0.11 to 0.58, I²=97%), and solid cancers (0.55, 0.46 to 0.65, I²=78%; 0.44, 0.36 to 0.53, I²=84%) compared with immunocompetent controls, whereas organ transplant recipients were 16 times less likely to seroconvert (0.06, 0.04 to 0.09, I²=0%; 0.06, 0.04 to 0.08, I²=0%). After a second dose, seroconversion remained least likely in transplant recipients (0.39, 0.32 to 0.46, I²=92%; 0.35, 0.26 to 0.46), with only a third achieving seroconversion. Seroconversion was increasingly likely in patients with haematological cancers (0.63, 0.57 to 0.69, I²=88%; 0.62, 0.54 to 0.70, I²=90%), immune mediated inflammatory disorders (0.75, 0.69 to 0.82, I²=92%; 0.77, 0.66 to 0.85, I²=93%), and solid cancers (0.90, 0.88 to 0.93, I²=51%; 0.89, 0.86 to 0.91, I²=49%). Seroconversion was similar between people with HIV and immunocompetent controls (1.00, 0.98 to 1.01, I²=0%; 0.97, 0.83 to 1.00, I²=89%). Systematic review of 11 studies showed that a third dose of a covid-19 mRNA vaccine was associated with seroconversion among vaccine non-responders with solid cancers, haematological cancers, and immune mediated inflammatory disorders, although response was variable in transplant recipients and inadequately studied in people with HIV and those receiving non-mRNA vaccines.

CONCLUSION

Seroconversion rates after covid-19 vaccination were significantly lower in immunocompromised patients, especially organ transplant recipients. A second dose was associated with consistently improved seroconversion across all patient groups, albeit at a lower magnitude for organ transplant recipients. Targeted interventions for immunocompromised patients, including a third (booster) dose, should be performed.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021272088.

Assessing influenza vaccination coverage and predictors in persons living with HIV/AIDS in Louisiana, June 2002-June 2013

Background

Despite the burden of disease and increased risk of influenza-associated morbidity and mortality among PLWHA, influenza vaccination has been understudied in this population.

Methods

We built an 11-year cohort of HIV-infected adults from medical records of PLWHA seeking care within the Louisiana State University medical system from June 2002-June 2013. Influenza vaccination uptake among PLWHA was calculated overall and for each medical facility for each influenza season. Linear regression was used to assess influenza vaccination uptake over time, both overall and by facility. Data were restricted to the final influenza season (2012-13) to assess predictors of PLWHA vaccination. Individuals were nested within medical facilities in order to assess the amount of variability in influenza vaccination rates across medical facilities.

Results

Influenza vaccination uptake among PLWHA increased over the study period (p < 0.01). The overall proportion of PLWHA vaccinated during the 2012-13 influenza season was 33.7%. 37.9% of the variability in the model occurred at the facility-level.

Conclusions

Although there was an increase in influenza vaccination within the PLWHA cohort over the course of the study, vaccination rates remained low overall. Special efforts must be made to increase vaccination uptake among PLWHA, with particular focus on those within the population who are likely to be at highest risk. The substantial variability at the facility-level indicates that there are unmeasured facility-level factors that contribute significantly to PLWHA vaccination.

Influenza Vaccination in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Efficacy, Effectiveness, Safety, Utilization, and Barriers

Influenza increases morbidity and mortality in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and lupus nephritis but is preventable through vaccination. This systematic review of PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, WHO Clinical Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov publications until August 2021 identified 45 reports (16,596 patients), including 8.5% with renal involvement or lupus nephritis: 9 studies (10,446 patients) on clinical effectiveness, 20 studies (1327 patients) on vaccine efficacy, 22 studies (1116 patients) on vaccine safety, 14 studies (4619 patients) on utilization rates, and 5 studies (3220 patients) on barriers. Pooled seroconversion rates ranged between 46% and 56%, while seroprotection rates ranged from 68% to 73% and were significantly associated with age and disease duration. Influenza infection was lower in vaccinated patients with systemic lupus erythematosus compared with unvaccinated patients. Disease activity scores did not change significantly after vaccination and reported flares were mild to moderate. Pooled current vaccination rate was 40.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 33.7%-46.5%) with significant heterogeneity and associated with the gross domestic product (P = .002) and disease duration (P = .001). Barriers to vaccination were the lack of doctor recommendation (57.4%) and concerns over the safety or efficacy of the vaccine (12.7%).

Efficacy of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 Vaccine in Patients With Thoracic Cancer: A Prospective Study Supporting a Third Dose in Patients With Minimal Serologic Response After Two Vaccine Doses

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease 2019 resulted in a 30% mortality rate in patients with thoracic cancer. Given that patients with cancer were excluded from serum antisevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine registration trials, it is still unknown whether they would develop a protective antispike antibody response after vaccination. This prospective vaccine monitoring study primarily aimed to assess humoral responses to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with thoracic cancer.

METHODS

SARS-CoV-2-spike antibodies were measured using the Abbot Architect SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G immunoassay before the first injection of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, at week 4, and 2 to 16 weeks after the second vaccine dose administration. The factors associated with antibody response were analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, 306 patients, with a median age of 67.0 years (interquartile range: 58-74), were vaccinated. Of these, 283 patients received two vaccine doses at 28-day intervals. After a 6.7-month median follow-up, eight patients (2.6%) contracted proven symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, with rapid favorable evolution. Of the 269 serologic results available beyond day 14 after the second vaccine dose administration, 17 patients (6.3%) were still negative (<50 arbitrary units/mL, whereas 34 (11%) were less than 300 arbitrary units/mL (12.5th percentile). In multivariate analysis, only age (p < 0.01) and long-term corticosteroid treatment (p = 0.01) were significantly associated with a lack of immunization. A total of 30 patients received a third vaccine dose, with only three patients showing persistently negative serology thereafter, whereas the others exhibited clear seroconversion.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV2 vaccines were found to be efficient in patients with thoracic cancer, most of them being immunized after two doses. A third shot given to 1% of patients with persistent low antibody titers resulted in an 88% immunization rate.

Prevention of viral infections in solid organ transplant recipients in the era of COVID-19: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

In solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, viral infections are associated with direct morbidity and mortality and may influence long-term allograft outcomes. Prevention of viral infections by vaccination, antiviral prophylaxis, and behavioral measures is therefore of paramount importance.

AREAS COVERED

We searched Pubmed to select publications to review current preventive strategies against the most important viral infections in SOT recipients, including SARS-CoV-2, influenza, CMV, and other herpesvirus, viral hepatitis, measles, mumps, rubella, and BK virus.

EXPERT OPINION

The clinical significance of the reduced humoral response following mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in SOT recipients still needs to be better clarified, in particular with regard to the vaccines' efficacy in preventing severe disease. Although a third dose improves immunogenicity and is already integrated into routine practice in several countries, further research is still needed to explore additional interventions. In the upcoming years, further data are expected to better delineate the role of virus-specific cell mediated immune monitoring for the prevention of CMV and potentially other viral diseases, and the role of the letermovir in the prevention of CMV in SOT recipients. Future studies including clinical endpoints will hopefully facilitate the integration of successful new influenza vaccination strategies into clinical practice.

"World in motion" - emulsion adjuvants rising to meet the pandemic challenges

Emulsion adjuvants such as MF59 and AS03 have been used for more than two decades as key components of licensed vaccines, with over 100 million doses administered to diverse populations in more than 30 countries. Substantial clinical experience of effectiveness and a well-established safety profile, along with the ease of manufacturing have established emulsion adjuvants as one of the leading platforms for the development of pandemic vaccines. Emulsion adjuvants allow for antigen dose sparing, more rapid immune responses, and enhanced quality and quantity of adaptive immune responses. The mechanisms of enhancement of immune responses are well defined and typically characterized by the creation of an "immunocompetent environment" at the site of injection, followed by the induction of strong and long-lasting germinal center responses in the draining lymph nodes. As a result, emulsion adjuvants induce distinct immunological responses, with a mixed Th1/Th2 T cell response, long-lived plasma cells, an expanded repertoire of memory B cells, and high titers of cross-neutralizing polyfunctional antibodies against viral variants. Because of these various properties, emulsion adjuvants were included in pandemic influenza vaccines deployed during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, are still included in seasonal influenza vaccines, and are currently at the forefront of the development of vaccines against emerging SARS-CoV-2 pandemic variants. Here, we comprehensively review emulsion adjuvants, discuss their mechanism of action, and highlight their profile as a benchmark for the development of additional vaccine adjuvants and as a valuable tool to allow further investigations of the general principles of human immunity.

Flu and Pneumococcal Vaccine Coverage in Scleroderma Patients Still Need to Be Prompted: A Systematic Review

Systemic sclerosis (scleroderma, SSc) is an autoimmune connective tissue disease characterized by excessive production of collagen and multiorgan involvement. Scleroderma patients are at increased risk of influenza complications and pneumonia; thus, vaccinations are recommended. This systematic review evaluated the influenza and pneumococcus vaccination coverage for SSc patients. We included all studies from Pubmed reporting on influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rate in Scleroderma patients up to May 2021. The 14 studies thus selected identified a suboptimal vaccination rate in autoimmune and SSc patients, ranging from 28 to 59% for the flu vaccine, and from 11 to 58% for the pneumo vaccine in absence of specific vaccination campaigns, variously considering also other variables such as age, gender, vaccination settings, and possible vaccination campaigns. We also considered the reasons for low coverage and the approaches that might increase the vaccination rates. A lack of knowledge about the importance of vaccination in these patients and their doctors underlined the need to increase the awareness for vaccination in this patients' category. Current guidelines recommend vaccination in elderly people and people affected by particular conditions that widely overlap with SSc, yet autoimmune diseases are not always clearly mentioned. Improving this suboptimal vaccination rate with clear guidelines is crucial for SSc patients and for clinicians to immunize these categories based principally on the pathology, prior to the age. Recommendations by the immunologist and the direct link to the vaccine providers can highly improve the vaccine coverage.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Against Hospitalization in the United States, 2019-2020

BACKGROUND

Influenza causes significant morbidity and mortality and stresses hospital resources during periods of increased circulation. We evaluated the effectiveness of the 2019-2020 influenza vaccine against influenza-associated hospitalization in the United States.

METHODS

We included adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illness at 14 hospitals and tested for influenza viruses by reserve-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated by comparing the odds of current-season influenza vaccination in test-positive influenza cases vs test-negative controls, adjusting for confounders. VE was stratified by age and major circulating influenza types along with A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic subgroups.

RESULTS

A total of 3116 participants were included, including 18% (n = 553) influenza-positive cases. Median age was 63 years. Sixty-seven percent (n = 2079) received vaccination. Overall adjusted VE against influenza viruses was 41% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27%-52%). VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses was 40% (95% CI, 24%-53%) and 33% against B viruses (95% CI, 0-56%). Of the 2 major A(H1N1)pdm09 subgroups (representing 90% of sequenced H1N1 viruses), VE against one group (5A + 187A,189E) was 59% (95% CI, 34%-75%) whereas no VE was observed against the other group (5A + 156K) (-1% [95% CI, -61% to 37%]).

CONCLUSIONS

In a primarily older population, influenza vaccination was associated with a 41% reduction in risk of hospitalized influenza illness.

Patients avec cancers thoraciques et COVID-19 : au cœur de la tempête

A meta-analysis of the Chinese studies in April 2020, including 3600 patients with cancer and COVID-19, first reported an increase of the COVID-19 risk and the case-fatality in these patients. Then, North-American and European series confirmed the increased COVID-19 risk for patients with cancer, as the increased risk of severe COVID-19 and death, when compared with general population, adjusting for age. Patients with lung cancer have the highest risk of severe respiratory forms, and the highest risk of SARS-CoV2-induced death (25 to 30%), after patients with hematological cancers. Metastatic patients, with poor PS, and those having received a cytotoxic chemotherapy within the weeks preceding SARSCoV2 infection, are those with the highest risk of death. Conversely, being treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors would not favor the cytokine storm, which makes the severity of COVID-19. SARS-CoV2 pandemic, beyond having needed the generalization of drastic social distancing measures in hospitals, also needed organizational changes, to allow healthcare continuity for cancer patients. Adaptation of therapeutic protocols was needed, with increased intervals between cycles, the choice of less toxic protocols, the systematic use of hematological growth factors, and teleconsultations follow-up. Lastly, mRNA-based SARS-CoV2 vaccines are efficient in patients with thoracic cancer, provided the interval of 21/28 days between the two injections is maintained, since protective immunization seems delayed, especially after cytotoxic chemotherapy. Only 13% of patients with very low protective antibodies titers would need a third booster injection, with a clear rise in protective antibodies titers induced by such a third injection.© 2021 SPLF. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Association of host factors with antibody response to seasonal influenza vaccination in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccination efficacy is reduced after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and patient factors determining vaccination outcomes are still poorly understood.

METHODS

We investigated the antibody response to seasonal influenza vaccination in 135 HSCT patients and 69 healthy volunteers (HVs) in a prospective observational multicenter cohort study. We identified patient factors associated with hemagglutination inhibition titers against A/California/2009/H1N1, A/Texas/2012/H3N2, and B/Massachusetts/2012 by multivariable regression on the observed titer levels and on seroconversion/seroprotection categories for comparison.

RESULTS

Both regression approaches yield consistent results but regression on titers estimated associations with higher precision. HSCT patients required two vaccine doses to achieve average responses comparable to a single dose in HVs. Pre-vaccination titers were positively associated with time after transplantation, confirming that HSCT patients can elicit potent antibody responses. However, an unrelated donor, absolute lymphocyte counts below the normal range and treatment with calcineurin inhibitors lower the odds of responding.

CONCLUSIONS

HSCT patients show a highly heterogeneous vaccine response, but overall, patients benefited from the booster shot and can acquire seroprotective antibodies over the years after transplantation. Several common patient factors lower the odds of responding, urging to identify additional preventive strategies in the poorly responding groups.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Inpatient and Outpatient Settings in the United States, 2015-2018

BACKGROUND

Demonstration of influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalized illness in addition to milder outpatient illness may strengthen vaccination messaging. Our objective was to compare patient characteristics and VE between United States (US) inpatient and outpatient VE networks.

METHODS

We tested adults with acute respiratory illness (ARI) for influenza within 1 outpatient-based and 1 hospital-based VE network from 2015 through 2018. We compared age, sex, and high-risk conditions. The test-negative design was used to compare vaccination odds in influenza-positive cases vs influenza-negative controls. We estimated VE using logistic regression adjusting for site, age, sex, race/ethnicity, peak influenza activity, time to testing from, season (overall VE), and underlying conditions. VE differences (ΔVE) were assessed with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) determined through bootstrapping with significance defined as excluding the null.

RESULTS

The networks enrolled 14 573 (4144 influenza-positive) outpatients and 6769 (1452 influenza-positive) inpatients. Inpatients were older (median, 62 years vs 49 years) and had more high-risk conditions (median, 4 vs 1). Overall VE across seasons was 31% (95% CI, 26%-37%) among outpatients and 36% (95% CI, 27%-44%) among inpatients. Strain-specific VE (95% CI) among outpatients vs inpatients was 37% (25%-47%) vs 53% (37%-64%) against H1N1pdm09; 19% (9%-27%) vs 23% (8%-35%) against H3N2; and 46% (38%-53%) vs 46% (31%-58%) against B viruses. ΔVE was not significant for any comparison across all sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Inpatients and outpatients with ARI represent distinct populations. Despite comparatively poor health among inpatients, influenza vaccination was effective in preventing influenza-associated hospitalizations.

Seasonal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine with topical imiquimod in immunocompromised patients: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The effect of the Toll-like receptor 7 agonist imiquimod before intradermal (ID) or intramuscular (IM) influenza vaccine in immunocompromised hosts is unknown.

METHODS

In this open-label randomized controlled trial, kidney transplant recipients (KT) and people living with HIV (PLWH) were randomized to receive IM trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine alone (IM), IM vaccine after topical imiquimod (imi+IM) or ID vaccine after topical imiquimod (imi+ID). Immunogenicity was assessed by hemagglutination inhibition assay. The primary outcome was vaccine response, defined as seroconversion to at least one viral strain at day 21.

RESULTS

Seventy patients (35 KT and 35 PLWH) received IM (24), imi+IM (22), or imi+ID (24) vaccine. Vaccine response was 61% (14/23) with IM, 59% (13/22) with imi+IM, and 65% (15/23) with imi+ID vaccine (P = 0.909). Vaccine response was associated with HIV infection compared to kidney transplantation (adjusted-OR 3.74, 95% CI 1.25 - 11.23, P = 0.019), but not with imiquimod application nor ID injection. After vaccination, seroprotection to all viral strains was 79% (19/24) with IM, 68% (15/22) with imi+IM, and 70% (16/23) with imi+ID (P = 0.657). We did not observe any vaccine-related severe adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, topical imiquimod did not improve the immunogenicity of influenza vaccine in KT and in PLWH.

EASL position paper on the use of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with chronic liver diseases, hepatobiliary cancer and liver transplant recipients

According to a recent World Health Organization estimate, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, which originated in China in 2019, has spread globally, infecting nearly 100 million people worldwide by January 2021. Patients with chronic liver diseases (CLD), particularly cirrhosis, hepatobiliary malignancies, candidates for liver transplantation, and immunosuppressed individuals after liver transplantation appear to be at increased risk of infections in general, which in turn translates into increased mortality. This is also the case for SARS-CoV-2 infection, where patients with cirrhosis, in particular, are at high risk of a severe COVID-19 course. Therefore, vaccination against various pathogens including SARS-CoV-2, administered as early as possible in patients with CLD, is an important protective measure. However, due to impaired immune responses in these patients, the immediate and long-term protective response through immunisation may be incomplete. The current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has led to the exceptionally fast development of several vaccine candidates. A small number of these SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates have already undergone phase III, placebo-controlled, clinical trials in healthy individuals with proof of short-term safety, immunogenicity and efficacy. However, although regulatory agencies in the US and Europe have already approved some of these vaccines for clinical use, information on immunogenicity, duration of protection and long-term safety in patients with CLD, cirrhosis, hepatobiliary cancer and liver transplant recipients has yet to be generated. This review summarises the data on vaccine safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy in this patient population in general and discusses the implications of this knowledge on the introduction of the new SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

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.

Prevention of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection in Healthy Adults by a Single Immunization of Ad26.RSV.preF in a Human Challenge Study

BACKGROUND

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a significant cause of severe lower respiratory tract disease in children and older adults, but has no approved vaccine. This study assessed the potential of Ad26.RSV.preF to protect against RSV infection and disease in an RSV human challenge model.

METHODS

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, healthy adults aged 18-50 years were randomized 1:1 to receive 1x1011 vp Ad26.RSV.preF or placebo intramuscularly. Twenty-eight days post-immunization, volunteers were challenged intranasally with RSV-A (Memphis 37b). Assesments included viral load (VL), RSV infections, clinical symptom score (CSS), safety and immunogenicity.

RESULTS

Post-challenge, VL, RSV infections and disease severity were lower in Ad26.RSV.preF (n=27) versus placebo (n=26) recipients: median VL-AUC (area under the curve) qRT-PCR: 0.0 versus 236.0 (P=.012; predefined primary endpoint); median VL-AUC quantitative culture: 0.0 versus 109; RSV infections 11 (40.7%) versus 17 (65.4%); median RSV AUC-CSS 35 versus 167, respectively. From baseline to 28 days post-immunization, geometric mean fold-increases in RSV A2 neutralizing antibody titers of 5.8 and 0.9 were observed in Ad26.RSV.preF and placebo, respectively. Ad26.RSV.preF was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Ad26.RSV.preF demonstrated protection from RSV infection through immunization in a human challenge model, and therefore could potentially protect against natural RSV infection and disease.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT03334695.

Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccine for Preventing Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza Hospitalizations in Immunocompromised Adults

BACKGROUND

Yearly influenza immunization is recommended for immunocompromised (IC) individuals, although immune responses are lower than that for the non-immunocompromised and the data on vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the IC is scarce. We evaluated VE against influenza-associated hospitalization among IC adults.

METHODS

We analyzed data from adults ≥ 18 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness (ARI) during the 2017-2018 influenza season at 10 hospitals in the United States. IC adults were identified using pre-specified case-definitions, utilizing electronic medical record data. VE was evaluated with a test-negative case-control design using multivariable logistic regression with PCR-confirmed influenza as the outcome and vaccination status as the exposure, adjusting for age, enrolling site, illness onset date, race, days from onset to specimen collection, self-reported health, and self-reported hospitalizations.

RESULTS

Of 3,524 adults hospitalized with ARI, 1,210 (34.3%) had an immunocompromising condition. IC adults were more likely to be vaccinated than non-IC (69.5% vs 65.2%), and less likely to have influenza (22% vs 27.8%). The mean age did not differ among IC and non-IC (61.4 vs 60.8 years old). The overall VE against influenza hospitalization, including immunocompetent adults, was 33% (95% CI, 21% to 44%). VE among IC vs non-IC adults was lower at 5% (-29% to 31%) vs. 41% (27% to 52%) (p<0.05 for interaction term).

CONCLUSIONS

VE in one influenza season was very low among IC individuals. Future efforts should include evaluation of VE among the different immunocompromising conditions and whether enhanced vaccines improve the suboptimal effectiveness among the immunocompromised.

Altered immune response to the annual influenza A vaccine in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms

The seasonal influenza A vaccine is recommended for patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). We hypothesised that immune deregulation associated with MPNs may affect the immune response gained following vaccinations when compared to healthy controls. Using deep immunophenotyping with high-dimensional single-cell analysis and mass cytometry we could demonstrate an altered immune response in MPN patients following vaccination. We found that prior to vaccination, MPN patients had reduced numbers of naive CD4 T cells. Furthermore, at 3-weeks and 3-months post-vaccination there was evidence of both delayed and impaired B- and T-memory cells responses. Thus, although, the immune systems of MPN patients can 'recognise' the Influenza A vaccine, the response appears inferior compared to healthy controls.

Management of cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemic at developing countries

Cancer patient care requires a multi-disciplinary approach and multiple medical and ethical considerations. Clinical care during a pandemic health crisis requires prioritising the use of resources for patients with a greater chance of survival, especially in developing countries. The coronavirus disease 2019 crisis has generated new challenges given that cancer patients are normally not prioritised for admission in critical care units. Nevertheless, the development of new cancer drugs and novel adjuvant/neoadjuvant protocols has dramatically improved the prognosis of cancer patients, resulting in a more complex decision-making when prioritising intensive care in pandemic times. In this context, it is essential to establish an effective and transparent communication between the oncology team, critical care, and emergency units to make the best decisions, considering the principles of justice and charity. Concurrently, cancer treatment protocols must be adapted to prioritise according to oncologic response and prognosis. Communication technologies are powerful tools to optimise cancer care during pandemics, and we must adapt quickly to this new scenario of clinical care and teaching. In this new challenging pandemic scenario, multi-disciplinary work and effective communication between clinics, technology, science, and ethics is the key to optimising clinical care of cancer patients.

Cytomegalovirus Viremia in Renal Transplant Recipients After Influenza Vaccination

Vaccination with the inactivated influenza vaccine is routinely recommended for all patients before and after transplant, with reduction in complications noted in transplant recipients. The vaccine is relatively well tolerated with few mild side effects. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection can reactivate in both solid organ transplant and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients, with some patients progressing to disease. There are multiple factors known to contribute to reactivation and subsequent CMV disease, however vaccination has not been reported as a specific risk factor.

We report on two renal transplant recipients who were seen to develop CMV viremia and CMV disease after receiving the Influenza vaccine. We review the literature regarding viremia occurring after vaccination in HIV patients (a similar group of immunocompromised patients).

A comprehensive review of vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases: An Indian perspective

The disease burden of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) in India is estimated to be one of the highest in the world in the near future. Patients with IBD, particularly those on immunosuppressive therapy, are at increased risk for developing vaccine-preventable illnesses. Adult vaccination policy and vaccination in patients with IBD are presently being at a very low level in India. This review discusses in detail the need for vaccination, levels of immunosuppression, a brief account of live and inactivated vaccines, available vaccines, and their utility in patients with IBD, with a special focus on recent recommendations.

Vaccination in patients under monoclonal antibody treatment: an updated comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have become an increasing source of biological treatments. Clinicians should make an effort to update their knowledge on mechanisms of action, indications, and adverse events of these novel therapies. Most of them have immunosuppressive effects and, therefore, vaccination is indicated.

AREAS COVERED

vaccination of patients under mAbs therapies.

EXPERT OPINION

Recommendations on vaccination are still based on expert recommendations and have not been updated in recent years. Specific recommendations for each mAb have not been addressed in the current literature. The aim of this comprehensive review was to collect all the therapeutic mAbs approved up to 1 January 2020 and, based on previous recommendations and the pharmaceutical characteristics of each drug, to propose an updated guide with recommendations on vaccination. Influenza, sequential pneumococcal and Hepatitis B vaccination in patients with negative serology were the only consistent recommendations. Hepatitis A vaccination was proposed for mAbs with special hepatotoxic characteristics. Other vaccines are reviewed and discussed. Several non-immunosuppressive mAbs were detected and, therefore, vaccinations not recommended. We hope that this review can serve as a starting point for compiling updated vaccination recommendations and collecting all the therapeutic mAbs approved up to 2020.

Analysis of MarketScan Data for Immunosuppressive Conditions and Hospitalizations for Acute Respiratory Illness, United States

Increasing use of immunosuppressive biologic therapies poses a challenge for infectious diseases. Immunosuppressed patients have a high risk for influenza complications and an impaired immune response to vaccines. The total burden of immunosuppressive conditions in the United States, including those receiving emerging biologic therapies, remains unknown. We used the national claims database MarketScan to estimate the prevalence of immunosuppressive conditions and risk for acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs). We studied 47.2 million unique enrollees, representing 115 million person-years of observation during 2012–2017, and identified immunosuppressive conditions in 6.2% adults 18–64 years of age and 2.6% of children <18 years of age. Among 542,105 ARI hospitalizations, 32% of patients had immunosuppressive conditions. The risk for ARI hospitalizations was higher among enrollees with immunosuppression than among nonimmunosuppressed enrollees. Future efforts should focus on developing improved strategies, including vaccines, for preventing influenza in immunosuppressed patients, who are an increasing population in the United States.

Preserved Cellular Immunity Upon Influenza Vaccination in Most Patients with Common Variable Immunodeficiency

BACKGROUND

Vaccination against influenza is recommended for patients with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID), although humoral immune responses in these patients are impaired and the evidence of effective T-cell responses in CVID is not well established.

OBJECTIVE

To determine plasmablast and T-cellular vaccination responses against influenza in patients with CVID.

METHODS

Patients with CVID and healthy controls were vaccinated with the quadrivalent vaccine Influsplit Tetra 2018/2019. Before and 1 week after vaccination plasmablasts and circulating inducible costimulator-expressing T follicular helper cells were measured to determine positive vaccine responses in these patients. In addition, antigen-specific T cells were determined by their upregulation of CD25 and OX40 after in vitro restimulation with the vaccine.

RESULTS

Most healthy controls but only 1 patient with CVID mounted a positive humoral immune response, measured by an increase in plasmablasts 1 week after vaccination. In contrast, most patients with CVID showed an increase in inducible costimulator⁺ T follicular helper cells and/or an increase in antigen-specific CD25⁺OX40⁺ T cells 1 week after vaccination, demonstrating a positive T-cellular immune response.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the remaining challenge of accurately assessing the complexity of T-cell responses, the recommendation of vaccinating patients with CVID against influenza is reasonable.

Efficacy of influenza vaccine (Fluvax) in cancer patients on treatment: a prospective single arm, open-label study

PURPOSE

Influenza virus infection has significant morbidity and mortality in patients with medical co-morbidities who are also immunosuppressed. The efficacy of the seasonal influenza vaccine has not been well studied in patients receiving chemotherapy. We assessed the efficacy of seasonal influenza vaccine in patients with non-haematological malignancy on active treatment (chemotherapy and targeted therapy).

METHODS

A prospective single arm, open label study with 53 patients with non-haematological cancers recruited during the 2011 and 2012 influenza seasons. Participants had one dose of 2011/2012 trivalent vaccine containing strains A/California/7/2009(H1N1), A/Perth/16/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Fluvax) prior to or in-between treatment cycles. Haemagglutination inhibition antibody (HIA) titres in serum were measured at baseline 3, 6 and 24 weeks. Primary endpoint: seroconversion rate (SCR) at 3 weeks. Secondary endpoints: late SCR at 6 weeks. rate of sustained sero-protection titres (SPR) at 24 weeks. Seroconversion was defined as postvaccination ≥ 4-fold increase in HIA titre and sero-protection defined as a HIA ≥ 1:40.

RESULTS

The SCR at 3 weeks were 35%, 30% and 22.5% to the H1N1, H3N2 and B/Bris strains, respectively. There were no new cases of late SC at 6 weeks or 24 weeks. The SPR at 3 weeks were 72.5%, 65% and 40%, respectively, to H1N1, H3N2 and B/Bris. The SPR at 24 weeks to H1N1, H3N2 and B/Bris were 40%, 52.5% and 17.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients on various solid tumour treatments achieve sero-protection rate congruent with the general population. The sero-protection HIA titres were not sustained at 24 weeks postvaccination.

Influenza, Measles, SARS, MERS, and Smallpox

Influenza, measles, SARS, MERS, and smallpox illnesses are caused by highly infectious viral pathogens that induce critical illness. These biologically diverse viruses enter and replicate within host cells triggering viral- and host-mediated damage that results in pneumonia and multiorgan failure in severe cases. Early case identification and strict infection control limit healthcare transmission. Vaccination allowed smallpox eradication and limits global measles and seasonal influenza mortality. While SARS-coronavirus (CoV) is no longer circulating, MERS-CoV and zoonotic influenza viruses, with pandemic potential, remain persistent threats. Supportive critical care is the mainstay of treatment for severe disease due to these viral infections.