Vaccination updates and special considerations for systemic lupus erythematosus patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

Approach to vaccination in systemic lupus erythematosus on biological treatment

In recent years, treat-to-target strategy and early intervention strategies with immunosuppressive agents have attempted to improve the prognosis and outcome in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases. However, infectious complications due to side effects of medication remain a major concern in routine practice. In this regard, vaccine immunity and vaccination programmes are of the utmost importance in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in terms of morbidity and mortality. Encouragingly, research investigations have increased exponentially, both in monitoring the vaccines efficacy, and in determining the immune response while patients are on immunosuppression., However, in this biological era in rheumatology, relatively little data have been published investigating these parameters in those receiving biological agents, therefore, no definitive consensus about a vaccination policy for patients with SLE is currently available. In this review, we aim to address what is established about vaccinating patients with SLE on biological agents and discuss potential problems.

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%).

Current Take on Systemic Sclerosis Patients' Vaccination Recommendations

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease. The prevalence of SSc ranges from 7 to 700 cases per million worldwide. Due to multiple organ involvement and constant inflammatory state, this group of patients presents an increased risk of infectious diseases. This paper aimed to gather the up-to-date evidence on vaccination strategies for patients with SSc and to be a useful tool for the prevention and management of infectious diseases. The authors conducted a scoping review in which each paragraph presents data on a specific vaccine’s safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy. The work deals with the following topics: SARS-CoV-2, seasonal influenza, S. pneumoniae, HAV, HBV, HZV, N. meningitidis, H. influenzae, HPV, and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.

Rheuma und Impfen

Patienten mit rheumatischen Erkrankungen sind durch Infektionen besonders gefährdet. Impfungen sind geeignet, dieses Risiko zu vermindern. Aktuelle Empfehlungen nationaler (STIKO und Wagner et al.) sowie internationaler Gremien (EULAR) stellen eine Basis für die sichere und effektive Anwendung von Impfungen dar. Wichtige neue Entwicklungen, wie die sequenzielle Impfung gegen Pneumokokken oder die Zulassung eines Impfstoffs gegen Herpes Zoster, verbessern die Möglichkeiten eines effektiven Infektionsschutzes. Besonders zu beachten sind die aktuellen Empfehlungen zur Anwendung von Lebendimpfstoffen wie der MMR-Impfung bei Patienten unter immunsuppressiver Therapie.

Rheuma und Impfen

Empfehlungen zur Impfung von Patienten mit rheumatologischen Erkrankungen Patienten mit rheumatischen Erkrankungen sind durch Infektionen besonders gefährdet. Impfungen sind geeignet, dieses Risiko zu vermindern. Aktuelle Empfehlungen nationaler (STIKO und Wagner et al.) sowie internationaler Gremien (EULAR) stellen eine Basis für die sichere und effektive Anwendung von Impfungen dar.

Wichtige neue Entwicklungen, wie die sequenzielle Impfung gegen Pneumokokken oder die Zulassung eines Impfstoffs gegen Herpes Zoster, verbessern die Möglichkeiten eines effektiven Infektionsschutzes. Besonders zu beachten sind die aktuellen Empfehlungen zur Anwendung von Lebendimpfstoffen wie der MMR-Impfung bei Patienten unter immunsuppressiver Therapie.

[Most important vaccinations in patients with rheumatological diseases and why]

Lange Zeit schienen die meisten Infektionen beherrschbar geworden zu sein. Hierzu haben besonders auch Impfungen beigetragen. In den letzten Jahren gefährden neu aufgetretene bakterielle Infektionen durch multiresistente Erreger und Virusinfektionen wie das Chikungunya-Virus, Influenzaepidemien oder aktuell auch COVID-19 die Weltbevölkerung. Dies gilt in besonderer Weise für von rheumatologischen Erkrankungen Betroffene, die oft zusätzlich einer immunsuppressiven Therapie bedürfen und damit besonders durch Infektionen gefährdet sind. Impfungen können die Betroffenen sowohl individuell wie auch durch die Erzeugung einer Herdenimmunität schützen und stellen somit ein wichtiges Instrument dar, um die Morbidität und Mortalität durch Infektionen zu vermindern. Die Kenntnis über Indikation und Anwendung der einzelnen Impfungen ist für eine konsequente Umsetzung der aktuellen Empfehlungen besonders wichtig.

Efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a systematic literature review for the 2019 update of EULAR recommendations

Aim

To present a systematic literature review (SLR) on efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD), aiming to provide a basis for updating the EULAR evidence-based recommendations.

Methods

An SLR was performed according to the standard operating procedures for EULAR-endorsed recommendations. Outcome was determined by efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in adult patients with AIIRD, including those receiving immunomodulating therapy. Furthermore, a search was performed on the effect of vaccinating household members of patients with AIIRD on the occurrence of vaccine-preventable infections in patients and their household members (including newborns). The literature search was performed using Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library (October 2009 to August 2018).

Results

While most investigated vaccines were efficacious and/or immunogenic in patients with AIIRD, some were less efficacious than in healthy control subjects, and/or in patients receiving immunosuppressive agents. Adverse events of vaccination were generally mild and the rates were comparable to those in healthy persons. Vaccination did not seem to lead to an increase in activity of the underlying AIIRD, but insufficient power of most studies precluded arriving at definite conclusions. The number of studies investigating clinical efficacy of vaccination is still limited. No studies on the effect of vaccinating household members of patients with AIIRD were retrieved.

Conclusion

Evidence on efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in patients with AIIRD was systematically reviewed to provide a basis for updated recommendations.

2019 update of EULAR recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases

To update the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD) published in 2011. Four systematic literature reviews were performed regarding the incidence/prevalence of vaccine-preventable infections among patients with AIIRD; efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccines; effect of anti-rheumatic drugs on the response to vaccines; effect of vaccination of household of AIIRDs patients. Subsequently, recommendations were formulated based on the evidence and expert opinion. The updated recommendations comprise six overarching principles and nine recommendations. The former address the need for an annual vaccination status assessment, shared decision-making and timing of vaccination, favouring vaccination during quiescent disease, preferably prior to the initiation of immunosuppression. Non-live vaccines can be safely provided to AIIRD patients regardless of underlying therapy, whereas live-attenuated vaccines may be considered with caution. Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination should be strongly considered for the majority of patients with AIIRD. Tetanus toxoid and human papilloma virus vaccination should be provided to AIIRD patients as recommended for the general population. Hepatitis A, hepatitis B and herpes zoster vaccination should be administered to AIIRD patients at risk. Immunocompetent household members of patients with AIIRD should receive vaccines according to national guidelines, except for the oral poliomyelitis vaccine. Live-attenuated vaccines should be avoided during the first 6 months of life in newborns of mothers treated with biologics during the second half of pregnancy. These 2019 EULAR recommendations provide an up-to-date guidance on the management of vaccinations in patients with AIIRD.

Hepatitis A virus vaccination in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus

Objectives: Vaccination of systemic lupus erythematosus patients with non-live vaccines may decrease vaccine-preventable infections and mortalities. In the present study, we aimed to compare the immunogenicity and safety of inactivated hepatitis A vaccination in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus and healthy subjects. Methods: A total of 30 childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus and 39 healthy participants who were seronegative for hepatitis A received two doses of the hepatitis A vaccine in a 0- and 6-month schedule. Hepatitis A virus (HAV) IgG antibodies were measured before vaccination and 7 months after the vaccination. Results: Although anti-HAV IgG antibody titers after vaccination were found to be somewhat lower in children with systemic lupus erythematosus than that of the healthy subjects ( p < 0.05), the difference in seroconversion rate was insignificant between childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus patients ( n = 24/30, 80%) and healthy controls ( n = 33/39, 84.6%). There was no increase in median Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI)-2K scores and anti-ds DNA levels after the vaccination procedure. Seroconversion rates in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus patients were not affected by medication, high disease activity (SLEDAI-2K >6) and anti-ds DNA positivity. None of the patients experienced any flare or adverse reaction throughout the study. Conclusions: According to these results, we conclude that inactivated hepatitis A vaccine is safe and well tolerated in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus patients, with no adverse events or increase in activity. Immunogenicity to the hepatitis A vaccine was adequate, with a seropositivity rate of 80%.

Acetylcholine Receptor Antibody Titers and Clinical Course after Influenza Vaccination in Patients with Myasthenia Gravis: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial (ProPATIent-Trial)

BACKGROUND

It is a continuous matter of discussion whether immune activation by vaccination in general and Influenza vaccination in particular increases the risk for clinical deterioration of autoimmune diseases. This prospective study investigated the serological and clinical course of autoimmune Myasthenia gravis (MG) after a seasonal influenza vaccination.

METHODS

This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study enrolled MG patients with antibodies against acetylcholine-receptors (AChR-ab). They were allocated to receive seasonal influenza vaccine or placebo. The primary endpoint was the relative change of AChR-ab-titer over 12weeks. A relative increase of 20% was set as non-inferiority margin. Secondary endpoints were clinical changes in the modified Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis Score (QMG), increase of anti-influenza-ELISA-antibodies, and changes of treatment. The study is registered with Clinicaltrialsregister.eu, EudraCT number 2006-004374-27.

FINDINGS

62 patients were included. Mean±standard deviation (median) in the vaccine and placebo group were AChR-ab-titer changes of -6.0%±23.3% (-4.0%) and -2.8%±22.0% (-0.5%) and QMG score changes of -0.08±0.27 (0.17) and 0.11±0.31 (0.00), respectively. The difference between groups (Hodges-Lehmann estimate with 95% CI) was - for the AChR-ab-titer change 4·0% [-13.3%, 4.5%] (p=0.28 for testing a difference, p<0.0001 for testing non-inferiority) and for the QMG change 0·00 [-0.17, 0.00] (p=0.79 for testing a difference). The occurrence of 74 adverse events (AE) was comparable between groups. The most common AE was flu-like symptoms. One serious AE (hospitalisation following gastrointestinal haemorrhage) in the verum group was not related to the vaccine.

INTERPRETATION

Influenza vaccination in MG is safe. Uprating the potential risk of a severe course of MG exacerbation during influenza infection compared to the 95% CI differences for the endpoints, vaccination is principally indicated in this patient population.

Factors affecting immune responses to the influenza vaccine

Annual administration of the seasonal influenza vaccine is strongly recommended to reduce the burden of disease, particularly for persons at the highest risk for the viral infection. Even during years when there is a good match between the vaccine and circulating strains, host-related factors such as age, preexisting immunity, genetic polymorphisms, and the presence of chronic underlying conditions may compromise influenza vaccine responsiveness. The application of new methodologies and large-scale profiling technologies are improving the ability to measure vaccine immunogenicity and our understanding of the immune mechanisms by which vaccines induce protective immunity. This review attempts to summarize the general concepts of how host factors can contribute to the heterogeneity of immune responses induced by influenza vaccines.

[Guidelines for vaccination of immunocompromised individuals]

Immunosuppression of various origins is associated with an increased risk of infection; therefore the prevention of infectious diseases by vaccination is especially important in immunocompromised patients. However, the response to vaccinations is often reduced in these risk groups and the application of live vaccines is contraindicated during immunosuppression.In the following expert statement, recommendations for vaccination were created on the basis of current evidence and theoretical/immunological considerations. A first, general part elaborates on efficacy and safety of vaccinations during immunosuppression, modes of action of immunosuppressive medications and recommended time intervals between immunosuppressive treatments and vaccinations. A core piece of this part is a graduation of immunosuppression into three stages, i. e. no relevant immunosuppression, mild to moderate and severe immunosuppression and the assignment of various medications (including biologicals) to one of those stages; this is followed by an overview of possible and necessary vaccinations in each of those stages.The second part gives detailed vaccination guidelines for common diseases and therapies associated with immunosuppression. Primary immune deficiencies, chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus, solid and hematological tumors, hematopoetic stem cell transplantation, transplantation of solid organs, aspenia, rheumatological-, gastroenterologic-, dermatologic-, neurologic diseases, biologicals during pregnancy and HIV infection are dealt with.These vaccination guidelines, compiled for the first time in Austria, aim to be of practical help for physicians to facilitate and improve vaccination coverage in immunocompromised patients and their household members and contact persons.

Immunogenicity and impact on disease activity of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines in systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to assess the immunogenicity and the impact on disease activity of pneumococcal and influenza vaccines in SLE patients.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the humoral response of either pneumococcal (serotype 23F) or influenza (AH1N1, AH3N2 and B strains) vaccines between SLE patients and healthy controls, assessed by a seroconversion or a seroprotection rate 3-6 weeks after vaccination. The impact on disease activity was assessed by the comparison of the SLEDAI score before and 3-8 weeks after vaccination. Odds ratios (ORs), risk ratios and their 95% CIs were pooled using the generic inverse variance method.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were included, three for pneumococcal vaccine and 17 for influenza vaccine, gathering 1665 SLE patients and 826 healthy controls. For pneumococcal vaccination, no significant difference was observed, either for seroconversion rate between SLE patients and controls or for the SLEDAI score. For influenza vaccination, the response against AH1N1 was significantly reduced in SLE patients, with a lower rate of seroconversion (OR = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.27, 0.54; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 39%) and seroprotection (OR = 0.36; 95% CI: 0.28, 0.47; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 25%). For AH3N2, only seroprotection rate was significantly lower in SLE patients (OR = 0.26; 95% CI: 0.14, 0.50; P < 0.0001, I(2) = 21%). For B strain, neither seroconversion nor seroprotection rates were significantly different. Influenza vaccine did not modify the SLEDAI score.

CONCLUSION

The immunogenicity of influenza vaccine in SLE patients depends on the viral strains. A reduced immunogenicity against influenza A is noted, while the immunogenicity against the B strain is preserved. The pneumococcal vaccine against 23F serotype has a preserved immunogenicity. These vaccines have no impact on the SLEDAI score.

Vaccine-preventable infections in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) is characterized by abnormal autoantibody production and clearance. Infections are among the most important causes of morbidity and mortality in SLE patients; they have an increased frequency of severe bacterial and viral infections possibly due to inherited genetic and immunologic defects and to immunosuppressive therapies. In addition, infectious agents can switch on lupus disease expression and activity. Among the strategies to reduce the risk of infection, vaccination can be considered the most reliable option. Most vaccines are effective and safe in SLE patients, although in certain cases immunogenicity may be sub-optimal and vaccination can trigger a flare. Although these issues are currently unresolved, the risk benefit balance is in favor for vaccination to reduce the risk of infection in SLE patients. In the present review we discuss the preventive strategies currently recommended to reduce bacterial and viral infections in SLE.

Immunogenicity and Safety of Influenza Vaccination in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Patients Compared with Healthy Controls: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the immunogenicity and safety of influenza vaccine in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

METHODS

Relevant articles were retrieved from electronic databases. Seroprotection rate, seroconversion rate and factors that increase antibody geometric mean titer (GMT) were used as indices to measure the immunogenicity. The safety of vaccine was assessed through monitoring adverse events, which included side effects and SLE exacerbations. We performed a meta-analysis of influenza vaccine seroprotection, seroconversion and adverse effects. SLE exacerbation after vaccination was comprehensively described. We used the Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP) guidelines to determine whether influenza can induce adequate immunogenicity in patients with SLE.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies with 1966 subjects met the inclusion criteria. At least 565 of the subjects were patients with low-to-moderate SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) score or stable SLE disease. Compared with the general population, seroprotection rate in SLE patients was significantly decreased in patients with H1N1 [odds ratio (OR) = 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27-0.50] and H3N2 vaccination (OR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.24-0.93), but not influenza B vaccination (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.24-1.25). Seroconversion rate also significantly decreased in patients with H1N1 (OR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.27-0.57) and influenza B (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.29-0.76) vaccination, but not H3N2 vaccination (OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.21-1.79). However, the immunogenicity of influenza vaccine in SLE patients almost reached that of the CPMP guidelines. The OR for side effects (patients versus healthy controls) was 3.24 (95% CI: 0.62-16.76). Among 1966 patients with SLE, 32 experienced mild exacerbation of SLE and five had serious side effects for other reasons.

CONCLUSION

Influenza vaccine has moderate effect on protecting patients with SLE. The side effects of influenza vaccine are not serious and are manageable. With consideration of a higher risk of SLE exacerbation and a more severe course of infection among SLE patients, influenza vaccination should be promoted among SLE patients with a low-to-moderate SLEDAI score or stable disease.

Role of vaccinations and prophylaxis in rheumatic diseases

Targeted strategies for reducing the increased risk of infection in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases include vaccinations as well as antibiotic prophylaxis in selected patients. However, there are still issues under debate: Is vaccination in patients with rheumatic diseases immunogenic? Is it safe? What is the impact of immunosuppressive drugs on vaccine immunogenicity and safety? Does vaccination cause disease flares? In which cases is prophylaxis against Pneumocystis jirovecii required? This review addresses these important questions to which clinicians and researchers still do not have definite answers. The first part includes immunization recommendations and reviews current data on vaccine efficacy and safety in patients with rheumatic diseases. The second part discusses prophylaxis for Pneumocystis pneumonia.

Vaccination of patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases

Patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) are at increased risk of infections. This risk has been further increased by the introduction of biologic agents over the past two decades. One of the most effective strategies to prevent infection is vaccination. However, patients with an AIRD have a compromised immune system, which is further impaired by medication. Another important issue is the possibility of triggering a broad nonspecific response by vaccination, potentially resulting in increased activity of the underlying autoimmune disease. In this Review, we provide an analysis of data on vaccination of patients with an AIRD. Both the efficacy and the safety of vaccination are addressed, together with the epidemiology of vaccine-preventable infectious diseases in different subgroups of adults with AIRDs. Special attention is given to vaccination of patients who are treated with biologic agents.

2013 IDSA clinical practice guideline for vaccination of the immunocompromised host

An international panel of experts prepared an evidenced-based guideline for vaccination of immunocompromised adults and children. These guidelines are intended for use by primary care and subspecialty providers who care for immunocompromised patients. Evidence was often limited. Areas that warrant future investigation are highlighted.

Factors influencing the efficacy of two injections of a pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) nonadjuvanted vaccine in systemic lupus erythematosus

OBJECTIVE

To assess the factors influencing the efficacy of 2 injections of a pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) vaccine in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, observational prospective study of 111 patients who were vaccinated with a monovalent, inactivated, nonadjuvanted, split-virus vaccine during December 2009 and January 2010 and received a second dose of vaccine 3 weeks later. The antibody response was evaluated using the hemagglutination inhibition assay according to the guidelines recommended for the pandemic vaccine, consisting of 3 immunogenicity criteria (i.e., a seroprotection rate of 70%, a seroconversion rate of 40%, and a geometric mean ratio [GMR] of 2.5).

RESULTS

The 3 immunogenicity criteria were met on day 42 (seroprotection rate 80.0% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 72.5-87.5%], seroconversion rate 71.8% [95% CI 63.4-80.2%], and GMR 10.3 [95% CI 2.9-14.2]), while only 2 criteria were met on day 21 (seroprotection rate 66.7% [95% CI 57.9-75.4%], seroconversion rate 60.4% [95% CI 51.3-69.5%], and GMR 8.5 [95% CI 3.2-12.0]). The vaccine was well tolerated. Disease activity, assessed by the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment version of the SLE Disease Activity Index, the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group score, and the Systemic Lupus Activity Questionnaire, did not increase. In the multivariate analysis, vaccination failure was significantly associated with immunosuppressive treatment or a lymphocyte count of ≤ 1.0 × 10⁹/liter. The second injection significantly increased the immunogenicity in these subgroups, but not high enough to fulfill the seroprotection criterion in patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that the efficacy of the vaccine was impaired in patients who were receiving immunosuppressive drugs or who had lymphopenia. A second injection increased vaccine immunogenicity without reaching all efficacy criteria for a pandemic vaccine in patients receiving an immunosuppressive agent. These results open possibilities for improving anti-influenza vaccination in SLE.

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

Many national guidelines recommend annual influenza vaccination of immunocompromised patients, although the decision to vaccinate is usually at clinical discretion. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses to assess the evidence for influenza vaccination in this group, and we report our results by etiology. Meta-analyses showed significantly lower odds of influenza-like illness after vaccination in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, patients with cancer, and transplant recipients and of laboratory-confirmed influenza in HIV-positive patients, compared with patients receiving placebo or no vaccination. Pooled odds of seroconversion and seroprotection were typically lower in HIV-positive patients, patients with cancer, and transplant recipients, compared with immunocompetent controls. Vaccination was generally well tolerated, with variation in mild adverse events between etiological groups. Limited evidence of a transient increase in viremia and a decrease in the percentage of CD4(+) cells in HIV-positive patients was found although not accompanied by worsening of clinical symptoms. Clinical judgment remains important when discussing the benefits and safety profile with immunocompromised patients.

Immunization of patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (the EULAR recommendations)

The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD) have been recently published. These evidence-based recommendations were based on existing literature in combination with expert opinion. Although patients with AIIRD are at increased risk of suffering from (complicated) infectious diseases – and vaccination seems a tool to reduce this risk – still many questions and controversies remain for the individual patient. In this overview, taking influenza as an example, the background of the recommendations, their clinical implications, and the direction of future research are discussed. The increase in knowledge on vaccine-preventable infections will allow us to further improve vaccination strategies.

Influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients: systematic review and meta-analysis from a public health policy perspective

BACKGROUND

Immunocompromised patients are vulnerable to severe or complicated influenza infection. Vaccination is widely recommended for this group. This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients in terms of preventing influenza-like illness and laboratory confirmed influenza, serological response and adverse events.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Electronic databases and grey literature were searched and records were screened against eligibility criteria. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed in duplicate. Results were synthesised narratively and meta-analyses were conducted where feasible. Heterogeneity was assessed using I(2) and publication bias was assessed using Begg's funnel plot and Egger's regression test. Many of the 209 eligible studies included an unclear or high risk of bias. Meta-analyses showed a significant effect of preventing influenza-like illness (odds ratio [OR]=0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.16-0.34; p<0.001) and laboratory confirmed influenza infection (OR=0.15; 95% CI=0.03-0.63; p=0.01) through vaccinating immunocompromised patie nts compared to placebo or unvaccinated controls. We found no difference in the odds of influenza-like illness compared to vaccinated immunocompetent controls. The pooled odds of seroconversion were lower in vaccinated patients compared to immunocompetent controls for seasonal influenza A(H1N1), A(H3N2) and B. A similar trend was identified for seroprotection. Meta-analyses of seroconversion showed higher odds in vaccinated patients compared to placebo or unvaccinated controls, although this reached significance for influenza B only. Publication bias was not detected and narrative synthesis supported our findings. No consistent evidence of safety concerns was identified.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Infection prevention and control strategies should recommend vaccinating immunocompromised patients. Potential for bias and confounding and the presence of heterogeneity mean the evidence reviewed is generally weak, although the directions of effects are consistent. Areas for further research are identified.

Glucocorticoid: major factor for reduced immunogenicity of 2009 influenza A (H1N1) vaccine in patients with juvenile autoimmune rheumatic disease

OBJECTIVE

To assess the immunogenicity and safety of non-adjuvanted influenza A H1N1/2009 vaccine in patients with juvenile autoimmune rheumatic disease (ARD) and healthy controls, because data are limited to the adult rheumatologic population.

METHODS

A total of 237 patients with juvenile ARD [juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus (JSLE), juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM), juvenile scleroderma, and vasculitis] and 91 healthy controls were vaccinated. Serology for anti-H1N1 was performed by hemagglutination inhibition assay. Seroprotection rate, seroconversion rate, and factor-increase in geometric mean titer (GMT) were calculated. Adverse events were evaluated.

RESULTS

Age was comparable in patients and controls (14.8 ± 3.0 vs 14.6 ± 3.7 years, respectively; p = 0.47). Three weeks after immunization, seroprotection rate (81.4% vs 95.6%; p = 0.0007), seroconversion rate (74.3 vs 95.6%; p < 0.0001), and the factor-increase in GMT (12.9 vs 20.3; p = 0.012) were significantly lower in patients with juvenile ARD versus controls. Subgroup analysis revealed reduced seroconversion rates in JSLE (p < 0.0001), JIA (p = 0.008), JDM (p = 0.025), and vasculitis (p = 0.017). Seroprotection (p < 0.0001) and GMT (p < 0.0001) were decreased only in JSLE. Glucocorticoid use and lymphopenia were associated with lower seroconversion rates (60.4 vs 82.9%; p = 0.0001; and 55.6 vs 77.2%; p = 0.012). Multivariate logistic regression including diseases, lymphopenia, glucocorticoid, and immunosuppressants demonstrated that only glucocorticoid use (p = 0.012) remained significant.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest study to demonstrate a reduced but adequate immune response to H1N1 vaccine in patients with juvenile ARD. It identified current glucocorticoid use as the major factor for decreased antibody production. The short-term safety results support its routine recommendation for patients with juvenile ARD. ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01151644.

Impact of synthetic and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs on antibody responses to the AS03-adjuvanted pandemic influenza vaccine: a prospective, open-label, parallel-cohort, single-center study

OBJECTIVE

To identify the determinants of antibody responses to adjuvanted split influenza A (H1N1) vaccines in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

METHODS

One hundred seventy-three patients (82 with rheumatoid arthritis, 45 with spondylarthritis, and 46 with other inflammatory rheumatic diseases) and 138 control subjects were enrolled in this prospective single-center study. Controls received 1 dose of adjuvanted influenza A/09/H1N1 vaccine, and patients received 2 doses of the vaccine. Antibody responses were measured by hemagglutination inhibition assay before and 3-4 weeks after each dose. Geometric mean titers (GMTs) and rates of seroprotection (GMT≥40) were calculated. A comprehensive medical questionnaire was used to identify the determinants of vaccine responses and adverse events.

RESULTS

Baseline influenza A/09/H1N1 antibody levels were low in patients and controls (seroprotection rates 14.8% and 14.2%, respectively). A significant response to dose 1 was observed in both groups. However, the GMT and the seroprotection rate remained significantly lower in patients (GMT 146 versus 340, seroprotection rate 74.6% versus 87%; both P<0.001). The second dose markedly increased antibody titers in patients, with achievement of a similar GMT and seroprotection rate as elicited with a single dose in healthy controls. By multivariate regression analysis, increasing age, use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (except hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine), and recent (within 3 months) B cell depletion treatment were identified as the main determinants of vaccine responses; tumor necrosis factor α antagonist treatment was not identified as a major determinant. Immunization was well tolerated, without any adverse effect on disease activity.

CONCLUSION

DMARDs exert distinct influences on influenza vaccine responses in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Two doses of adjuvanted vaccine were necessary and sufficient to elicit responses in patients similar to those achieved with 1 dose in healthy controls.

Influenza vaccination responses in human systemic lupus erythematosus: impact of clinical and demographic features

OBJECTIVE

Vaccination against common pathogens, such as influenza, is recommended for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) to decrease infections and improve health. However, most reports describing the vaccination response are limited to evaluations of SLE patients with quiescent disease. This study focuses on understanding the clinical, serologic, therapeutic, and demographic factors that influence the response to influenza vaccination in SLE patients with a broad range of disease activity.

METHODS

Blood specimens and information on disease activity were collected from 72 patients with SLE, at baseline and at 2, 6, and 12 weeks after influenza vaccination. Influenza-specific antibody responses were assessed by determining the total serum antibody concentration (B(max)), relative affinity (K(a)), and level of hemagglutination inhibition in the plasma. Using a cumulative score, the patients were evenly divided into groups of high or low vaccine responders. Autoantibody levels were evaluated at each time point using immunofluorescence tests and standard enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays.

RESULTS

Compared to high responders, low responders to the vaccine were more likely to have hematologic criteria (P = 0.009), to have more American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for SLE (P = 0.05), and to be receiving concurrent prednisone treatment (P = 0.04). Interestingly, European American patients were more likely to be low responders than were African American patients (P = 0.03). Following vaccination, low responders were more likely to experience disease flares (P = 0.01) and to have increased titers of antinuclear antibodies (P = 0.04). Serum interferon-α activity at baseline was significantly higher in patients in whom a flare occurred after vaccination compared to a matched group of patients who did not experience a disease flare (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Ancestral background, prednisone treatment, hematologic criteria, and evidence of increased likelihood of disease flares were associated with low antibody responses to influenza vaccination in SLE patients.

[Vaccinations in rheumatology]

Patients with autoimmune or rheumatic diseases are at increased risk for infectious complications due to immunosuppressive therapy and/or the underlying immunological disease itself. To date, the consistent use of vaccinations in this patient group has been limited due to concerns about flair-ups or lack of efficacy. In prospective studies neither an increased risk of disease flair-ups nor of initiation of autoimmune disorders was found as yet; however, the data is still considered insufficient (small studies including only patients in remission). Vaccination with non-live vaccines can generally be regarded as safe and relatively effective, even in patients on immunosuppressive therapy. Since the immune response to vaccination may be markedly impaired depending on the medication used and the underlying autoimmune disease, monitoring of both serum titers and of patients' vaccination schedules should form an integral part of rheumatological care.

Antibody responses to natural influenza A/H1N1/09 disease or following immunization with adjuvanted vaccines, in immunocompetent and immunocompromised children

OBJECTIVES

To compare antibody responses elicited by influenza A/H1N1/09 disease and immunization with adjuvanted vaccines, in immunocompetent or immunocompromised children.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective parallel cohort field study enrolling children with confirmed influenza A/H1N1/09 disease or immunized with 1 (immunocompetent) or 2 (immunocompromised) doses of influenza A/H1N1/09 squalene-based AS03- or MF59-adjuvanted vaccines. Antibody geometric mean titers (GMT) were measured by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization (MN) assays 4-6 weeks after vaccination/disease. Vaccine adverse events were self-recorded in a 7-day diary.

RESULTS

Antibody titers were as high in 48 immunocompetent children after a single immunization (HAI and MN seroprotection rates: 98%; HAI-GMT: 395, MN-GMT: 370) as in 51 convalescent children (seroprotection rates: 98% (HAI) and 92% (MN); GMT: 350 (HAI) and 212 (MN). Twenty-seven immunocompromised children reached slightly lower seroprotection rates (HAI: 89%, MN: 85%) but similar antibody titers (HAI-GMT: 306, MN-GMT: 225) after 2 immunizations. Adverse events increased with age (P=0.01) and were more frequent with Pandemrix® than Focetria® (P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Similarly high seroresponses may be expected in immunocompetent children after a single dose of adjuvanted vaccines as responses of convalescent children. Two vaccine doses were sufficient for most immunocompromised children.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT0102293 and NCT01022905.

Vaccination in adult patients with auto-immune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a systematic literature review for the European League Against Rheumatism evidence-based recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with auto-immune inflammatory rheumatic diseases

OBJECTIVES

To present the systematic literature review (SLR), which formed the basis for the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) evidence-based recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with auto-immune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD).

METHODS

AIIRD, vaccines and immunomodulating drugs, as well as eight key questions were defined by the multidisciplinary expert committee commissioned by EULAR for developing the recommendations. A SLR was performed using MedLine through October 2009 and including data from meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized trials, and observational studies, excluding case series with ≤ 5 participants. Articles in English and regarding patients ≥ 16 years of age, were eligible.

RESULTS

Several vaccine-preventable infections (VPI) occur more often in AIIRD-patients and most vaccines are efficacious in AIIRD-patients, even when treated with immunomodulating agents, except rituximab. There does not appear to be an increase in vaccination-related harms in vaccinated patients with AIIRD in comparison with unvaccinated patients with AIIRD. However, these studies are underpowered and therefore not conclusive.

CONCLUSION

Based on the current evidence from the literature, recommendations for vaccination in patients with AIIRD were made. However, more research is needed in particular regarding incidence of VPI, harms of vaccination and the influence of (new and established) immunomodulating agents on vaccination efficacy.