The new H1N1 and HPV vaccines and old fears

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

BACKGROUND

Herpes zoster, commonly known as shingles, is a neurocutaneous disease caused by the reactivation of the virus that causes varicella (chickenpox). After resolution of the varicella episode, the virus can remain latent in the sensitive dorsal ganglia of the spine. Years later, with declining immunity, the varicella zoster virus (VZV) can reactivate and cause herpes zoster, an extremely painful condition that can last many weeks or months and significantly compromise the quality of life of the affected person. The natural process of ageing is associated with a reduction in cellular immunity, and this predisposes older adults to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of the VZV activates specific T-cell production avoiding viral reactivation. Two types of herpes zoster vaccines are currently available. One of them is the single-dose live attenuated zoster vaccine (LZV), which contains the same live attenuated virus used in the chickenpox vaccine, but it has over 14-fold more plaque-forming units of the attenuated virus per dose. The other is the recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) which does not contain the live attenuated virus, but rather a small fraction of the virus that cannot replicate but can boost immunogenicity. The recommended schedule for the RZV is two doses two months apart. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2010, and updated in 2012, 2016, and 2019.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this 2022 update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2022, Issue 10), MEDLINE (1948 to October 2022), Embase (2010 to October 2022), CINAHL (1981 to October 2022), LILACS (1982 to October 2022), and three trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies involving healthy older adults (mean age 60 years or older). We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine (any dose and potency) versus any other type of intervention (e.g. varicella vaccine, antiviral medication), placebo, or no intervention (no vaccine). Outcomes were cumulative incidence of herpes zoster, adverse events (death, serious adverse events, systemic reactions, or local reaction occurring at any time after vaccination), and dropouts.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two new studies involving 1736 participants in this update. The review now includes a total of 26 studies involving 90,259 healthy older adults with a mean age of 63.7 years. Only three studies assessed the cumulative incidence of herpes zoster in groups that received vaccines versus placebo. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries in Europe and North America and included healthy Caucasians (understood to be white participants) aged 60 years or over with no immunosuppressive comorbidities. Two studies were conducted in Japan and one study was conducted in the Republic of Korea. Sixteen studies used LZV. Ten studies tested an RZV. The overall certainty of the evidence was moderate, which indicates that the intervention probably works. Most data for the primary outcome (cumulative incidence of herpes zoster) and secondary outcomes (adverse events and dropouts) came from studies that had a low risk of bias and included a large number of participants. The cumulative incidence of herpes zoster at up to three years of follow-up was lower in participants who received the LZV (one dose subcutaneously) than in those who received placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56; risk difference (RD) 2%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 50; moderate-certainty evidence) in the largest study, which included 38,546 participants. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21) or deaths (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; moderate-certainty evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher cumulative incidence of one or more adverse events (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.11; RD 23%; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.3) and injection site adverse events (RR 3.73, 95% CI 1.93 to 7.21; RD 28%; NNTH 3.6; moderate-certainty evidence) of mild to moderate intensity. These data came from four studies with 6980 participants aged 60 years or older. Two studies (29,311 participants for safety evaluation and 22,022 participants for efficacy evaluation) compared RZV (two doses intramuscularly, two months apart) versus placebo. Participants who received the new vaccine had a lower cumulative incidence of herpes zoster at 3.2 years follow-up (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.23; RD 3%; NNTB 33; moderate-certainty evidence), probably indicating a favourable profile of the intervention. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups in cumulative incidence of serious adverse events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) or deaths (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; moderate-certainty evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher cumulative incidence of adverse events, any systemic symptom (RR 2.23, 95% CI 2.12 to 2.34; RD 33%; NNTH 3.0), and any local symptom (RR 6.89, 95% CI 6.37 to 7.45; RD 67%; NNTH 1.5). Although most participants reported that their symptoms were of mild to moderate intensity, the risk of dropouts (participants not returning for the second dose, two months after the first dose) was higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39; RD 1%; NNTH 100, moderate-certainty evidence). Only one study reported funding from a non-commercial source (a university research foundation). All other included studies received funding from pharmaceutical companies. We did not conduct subgroup and sensitivity analyses AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LZV (single dose) and RZV (two doses) are probably effective in preventing shingles disease for at least three years. To date, there are no data to recommend revaccination after receiving the basic schedule for each type of vaccine. Both vaccines produce systemic and injection site adverse events of mild to moderate intensity. The conclusions did not change in relation to the previous version of the systematic review.

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

BACKGROUND

Herpes zoster, commonly known as shingles, is a neurocutaneous disease caused by the reactivation of the virus that causes varicella (chickenpox). After resolution of the varicella episode, the virus can remain latent in the sensitive dorsal ganglia of the spine. Years later, with declining immunity, the varicella zoster virus (VZV) can reactivate and cause herpes zoster, an extremely painful condition that can last many weeks or months and significantly compromise the quality of life of the affected person. The natural process of aging is associated with a reduction in cellular immunity, and this predisposes older people to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of the VZV activates specific T-cell production avoiding viral reactivation. The USA Food and Drug Administration has approved a herpes zoster vaccine with an attenuated active virus, live zoster vaccine (LZV), for clinical use amongst older adults, which has been tested in large populations. A new adjuvanted recombinant VZV subunit zoster vaccine, recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV), has also been approved. It consists of recombinant VZV glycoprotein E and a liposome-based AS01B adjuvant system. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last updated in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this 2019 update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 1, January 2019), MEDLINE (1948 to January 2019), Embase (2010 to January 2019), CINAHL (1981 to January 2019), LILACS (1982 to January 2019), WHO ICTRP (on 31 January 2019) and ClinicalTrials.gov (on 31 January 2019).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine (any dose and potency) versus any other type of intervention (e.g. varicella vaccine, antiviral medication), placebo, or no intervention (no vaccine). Outcomes were incidence of herpes zoster, adverse events (death, serious adverse events, systemic reactions, or local reaction occurring at any time after vaccination), and dropouts.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 new studies involving 18,615 participants in this update. The review now includes a total of 24 studies involving 88,531 participants. Only three studies assessed the incidence of herpes zoster in groups that received vaccines versus placebo. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries in Europe and North America and included healthy Caucasians (understood to be white participants) aged 60 years or over with no immunosuppressive comorbidities. Two studies were conducted in Japan. Fifteen studies used LZV. Nine studies tested an RZV. The overall quality of the evidence was moderate. Most data for the primary outcome (incidence of herpes zoster) and secondary outcomes (adverse events and dropouts) came from studies that had a low risk of bias and included a large number of participants. The incidence of herpes zoster at up to three years follow-up was lower in participants who received the LZV (one dose subcutaneously) than in those who received placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56; risk difference (RD) 2%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 50; moderate-quality evidence) in the largest study, which included 38,546 participants. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21) or deaths (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; moderate-quality evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher incidence of one or more adverse events (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.11; RD 23%; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.3) and injection site adverse events (RR 3.73, 95% CI 1.93 to 7.21; RD 28%; NNTH 3.6) of mild to moderate intensity (moderate-quality evidence). These data came from four studies with 6980 participants aged 60 years or over. Two studies (29,311 participants for safety evaluation and 22,022 participants for efficacy evaluation) compared RZV (two doses intramuscularly, two months apart) versus placebo. Participants who received the new vaccine had a lower incidence of herpes zoster at 3.2 years follow-up (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.23; RD 3%; NNTB 33; moderate-quality evidence). There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups in incidence of serious adverse events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) or deaths (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; moderate-quality evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher incidence of adverse events, any systemic symptom (RR 2.23, 95% CI 2.12 to 2.34; RD 33%; NNTH 3.0), and any local symptom (RR 6.89, 95% CI 6.37 to 7.45; RD 67%; NNTH 1.5). Although most participants reported that there symptoms were of mild to moderate intensity, the risk of dropouts (participants not returning for the second dose, two months after the first dose) was higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39; RD 1%; NNTH 100, moderate-quality evidence). Only one study reported funding from a non-commercial source (a university research foundation). All of the other included studies received funding from pharmaceutical companies. We did not conduct subgroup and sensitivity analyses AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LZV and RZV are effective in preventing herpes zoster disease for up to three years (the main studies did not follow participants for more than three years). To date, there are no data to recommend revaccination after receiving the basic schedule for each type of vaccine. Both vaccines produce systemic and injection site adverse events of mild to moderate intensity.

A sudden onset of a pseudo-neurological syndrome after HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvated vaccine: might it be an autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA) presenting as a somatoform disorder?

In last centuries, vaccines reduced the incidence of several infectious diseases. In last decades, some vaccines aimed at preventing also some cancers, where viruses play a causative role. However, several adverse events have been described after vaccines, but a causal relationship has been established only in a minority of cases. Here, we describe a pseudo-neurological syndrome occurred shortly after the administration of the bivalent HPV vaccine. Some autoimmune disorders, including neurological demyelinating diseases, have been reported after HPV vaccines, but the patient showed no organic lesions. The patient was diagnosed as having a functional somatoform syndrome, which was supposed to be autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA), seen the temporal link with vaccination and the presence of anti-phospholipid autoantibodies. Immunological mechanisms of vaccines-and of adjuvants-have not been completely elucidated yet, and although there is no evidence of statistical association with many post-vaccination events, a causal link with vaccine cannot be excluded in some individuals.

Human papillomavirus vaccine and systemic lupus erythematosus

To investigate the association between human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and autoimmune manifestations compatible with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) or SLE-like disease, the medical history of six women who presented with SLE or SLE-like disease following HPV immunization was collected. Data regarding type of vaccine, number of immunization, family and personal, clinical and serological features, as well as response to treatments were analyzed. In the reported cases, several common features were observed, such as personal or familial susceptibility to autoimmunity or adverse response to a prior dose of the vaccine, both of which may be associated with a higher risk of post-vaccination autoimmunity. Favorable response to immunosuppressant was observed in all patients. In the current study, a temporal association between immunization with HPV vaccine and the appearance of a spectrum of SLE-like conditions is reported. Additionally, among the patients described, several common features were observed that may enable better identification of subjects at risk. Further studies are required to assess the safety of immunization with the HPV vaccine in patients with autoimmune-rheumatic diseases or in subject at risk of autoimmunity as well as the potential beneficial effect of preventive immunosuppressants.

Effective treatment of rat adjuvant-induced arthritis by celastrol

We have previously reported an increase in interleukin (IL)-1β and IL-17 levels, and a continuous activation of caspase-1 in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. These results suggest that drugs targeting IL-1β regulatory pathways, in addition to tumor necrosis factor (TNF), may constitute promising therapeutic agents in early RA. We have recently used a THP-1 macrophage-like cell line to screen 2320 compounds for those that down-regulate both IL-1β and TNF secretion. Celastrol was one of the most promising therapeutic candidates identified in that study. Our main goal in the present work was to investigate whether administration of celastrol is able to attenuate inflammation in a rat model of adjuvant-induced arthritis (AIA). Moreover, since IL-1β is known to play a role in the polarization of Th17 cells, we also investigate whether administration of digoxin, a specific inhibitor of Th17 cells polarization, is able to attenuate inflammation in the same rat model. We found that celastrol administration significantly suppressed joint inflammation. The histological and immunohistochemical evaluation revealed that celastrol-treated rats had a normal joint structure with complete abrogation of the inflammatory infiltrate and cellular proliferation. In contrast, we observed that digoxin administration significantly ameliorated inflammation but only if administrated in the early phase of disease course (after 4days of disease induction), and it was not efficient at inhibiting the infiltration of immune cells within the joint and in preventing damage. Thus, our results suggest that celastrol has significant anti-inflammatory and anti-proliferative properties and can constitute a potential anti-inflammatory drug with therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases such as RA. Furthermore, we find that early inhibition of Th17 cells polarization ameliorates arthritis but it is not as effective as celastrol.

Giant cell arteritis and polymyalgia rheumatica after influenza vaccination: report of 10 cases and review of the literature

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) and polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) are inflammatory rheumatic diseases common in people over the age of 50 years. Herein, we report 10 cases of previously healthy subjects who developed GCA/PMR within 3 months of influenza vaccination (Inf-V). A Medline search uncovered additional 11 isolated cases of GCA/PMR occurring after Inf-V. We discuss the role of individual susceptibility, the potential function of immune adjuvants as triggers of autoimmunity post-vaccination, and the correlation of our observation with the ‘ASIA’ syndrome, i.e. autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants and including post-vaccination phenomena.

Atraumatic osteonecrosis of the humeral head after influenza A-(H1N1) v-2009 vaccination

In the recent pandemic influenza A-(H1N1) v-2009 vaccination campaign, adjuvanted vaccines have been used because of their antigen-sparing effect. According to available reports, the rate of severe vaccination reactions has not increased, as compared with previous seasonal influenza vaccinations. Here we describe an adult female patient who was vaccinated with an AS03 adjuvanted split-virus vaccine injected into the left arm. She experienced a prolonged and painful local reaction for 4 weeks. During this time, persistent incapacitating pain shifted into the left shoulder. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the injection site detected atraumatic humeral head osteonecrosis in conjunction with bursitis of the rotator cuff region. Clinical and laboratory examination revealed no other underlying disease. Using analgetic medication and physical therapy, resting pain completely remitted within the following 14 weeks. Pain on exertion declined within the following 6 months. Atraumatic osteonecrosis, a relatively rare disorder which initially presents non-specific clinical symptoms, has never been associated with parenteral influenza vaccination. Although the available data cannot establish a causal relationship, our patient's clinical course - with a continuous transition from increased local post-vaccination reactions to symptoms of a severe shoulder lesion with osteonecrosis - raises the question of a pathogenetic link. Considering the vascular pathogenesis of osteonecrosis, we hypothesize that our patient's enhanced local immunologic reaction may have led to regional vasculitis as the cause of bone destruction. As mild forms of osteonecrosis may have escaped previous clinical attention, it is the purpose of our report to increase awareness of this exceptional event as a possible side effect of parenteral adjuvanted vaccination.

Autoimmune hepatitis type 2 following anti-papillomavirus vaccination in a 11-year-old girl

In the last years numerous reports describing a possible association between administration of vaccines and development of autoimmune phenomena and overt autoimmune disease were published. Possible mechanisms of induction of autoimmune phenomena by vaccines and their excipients are probably similar to those implicated in induction by infectious agents. Here we report the case of an 11-year-old girl who developed autoimmune hepatitis type II after four weeks from vaccination against human papillomavirus. The possible relationships between the use of adjuvated vaccine against papillomavirus and autoimmune hepatitis are discussed. Although we do not provide evidence for a causal link, we suggest that the occurrence of the autoimmune hepatitis may be related to the stimulation of immune system by adjuvated-vaccine, that could have triggered the disease in a genetically predisposed individual. Therefore a monitoring of liver function test following administration of vaccine against papillomavirus may be useful in adolescent girl with signs of hepatopathy, as jaundice, dark urine or hepatomegaly, to early identify and to promptly treat autoimmune liver disorders.