Treatment with infliximab or azathioprine negatively impact the efficacy of hepatitis B vaccine in inflammatory bowel disease patients

Immunogenicity of Hepatitis B Vaccination in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis on Infliximab Is Attenuated Compared to Those on 5-Aminosalicylic Acid Therapies: A Prospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection has been associated with chronic hepatitis and cirrhosis. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may be at a higher risk of HBV infection reactivation, especially those on biologic therapies. This study intends to compare the effectiveness of the HBV vaccine in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) on infliximab (IFX) compared to those on 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA).

METHODS

Patients with UC aged >18 years old were prospectively enrolled in the study. The patients were divided into two groups: patients treated with 5-ASA (control group) and patients treated with IFX (study group). HBV vaccination was administered (20 mcg) following the standard regimen, and Hepatitis B serum antibody (HbsAb) titers were assessed three months after the final dose. The response to HBV vaccines was categorized as an 'adequate' immune response (≥10 IU/L) and 'effective' immune response (≥100 IU/L).

RESULTS

In our final analysis of 118 patients with UC, 54.2% were male and 52.5% had extensive colitis. HBsAb titer levels were significantly higher in the 5-ASA group (126.7 ± 37.5) compared to the IFX group (55.5 ± 29.4). Stratifying HBsAb levels into two categories (≥10-99 IU/L and ≥100 IU/L) revealed a significantly greater proportion of subjects in the 5-ASA group with levels ≥100 IU/L compared to the IFX group (76.7% vs. 12.1%, p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that patients with UC receiving 5-ASA were 23.94 times more likely to exhibit HBsAb levels ≥ 100 compared to those treated with IFX (OR = 23.94, 95% CI 8.89-64.49).

CONCLUSION

The immune response to hepatitis B vaccination in patients with ulcerative colitis treated with IFX is attenuated compared to those treated with 5-ASA. Therefore, emphasizing the importance of HBV vaccination for patients with IBD before starting anti-TNF therapy, especially IFX, and advocating for screening is imperative in high-risk countries. Determining what levels of HBsAb provide protection and what happens to the levels over time after a booster dose are important clinical questions to be answered by follow-up studies.

Serum Anti-Spike Antibodies Are Not Affected by Immunosuppressants in SARS-CoV-2 Vaccinations Given to Brazilian Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

This study aimed to evaluate humoral responses after vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Patients with IBD enrolled in a tertiary outpatient unit were followed up between September 2021 and September 2022 via serial blood collection. Immunoglobulin G antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 were measured before administration and 1 and 6 months after the administration of two doses of different vaccination regimens. The results were compared with those of a healthy control group obtained during the same period. The mean pre-vaccination antibody titers were 452.0 and 93.3 AU/mL in the IBD (n = 42) and control (n = 89) groups, respectively. After two doses of the vaccine, the titers significantly increased in both groups (IBD, 8568.0 AU/mL; control, 7471.0 AU/mL; p < 0.001). One month after the second dose, no significant differences were observed between the two groups (p = 0.955). Significant differences between vaccination schemes in the IBD group were observed, with higher titers in those who received Pfizer, younger patients (p < 0.005), and those with a previous coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection (p < 0.012). The use of immunosuppressants and immunobiologicals did not affect the overall humoral response to COVID-19 vaccine in patients with IBD, but specific vaccine regimens, age, and previous coronavirus infection significantly did. This study reinforces the positive impact of booster doses and the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

Immunotherapy-induced cytotoxic T follicular helper cells reduce numbers of retrovirus-infected reservoir cells in B cell follicles

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) transformed HIV from a life-threatening disease to a chronic condition. However, eliminating the virus remains an elusive therapy goal. For several decades, Friend virus (FV) infection serves as a murine model to study retrovirus immunity. Similar to HIV, FV persists at low levels in lymph nodes B cell follicles avoiding elimination by immune cells. Such immune-privileged reservoirs exclude cytotoxic T cells from entry. However, CXCR5+ T cells are permitted to traffic through germinal centers. This marker is predominantly expressed by CD4+ follicular helper T cells (Tfh). Therefore, we explored immunotherapy to induce cytotoxic Tfh, which are rarely found under physiological conditions. The TNF receptor family member CD137 was first identified as a promising target for cancer immunotherapy. We demonstrated that FV-infected mice treatment with αCD137 antibody resulted in an induction of the cytotoxic program in Tfh. The therapy significantly increased numbers of cytotoxic Tfh within B cell follicles and contributed to viral load reduction. Moreover, αCD137 antibody combined with ART delayed virus rebound upon treatment termination without disturbing the lymph node architecture or antibody responses. Thus, αCD137 antibody therapy might be a novel strategy to target the retroviral reservoir and an interesting approach for HIV cure research.

Effectiveness of Hepatitis B Vaccination for Patients With Inflammatory Bowel and Celiac Disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Guidelines recommend measuring antibody (Ab) titers to hepatitis B virus (HBV) after vaccination for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or celiac disease (CD) ("patients with IBD/CD") and revaccinating when titers are low. Few data, however, support this recommendation. We aimed to compare effectiveness of HBV vaccination (immunity and infection rates) for patients with IBD/CD vs matched referents.

METHODS

Using the Rochester Epidemiology Project, we performed a retrospective cohort study of patients first diagnosed with IBD/CD (index date) while residing in Olmsted County, Minnesota, from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2019. HBV screening results were obtained from health records.

RESULTS

In 1264 incident cases of IBD/CD, only 6 HBV infections were diagnosed before the index date. A total of 351 IBD/CD cases had documented receipt of 2 or more HBV vaccines before their index date and had hepatitis B surface antigen Ab (anti-HBs) titers measured after their index date. The proportion of patients with HBV-protective titers (≥10 mIU/mL) decreased with time before plateauing, with protective titer rates of 45% at 5 up to 10 years and 41% at 15 up to 20 years after the last HBV vaccination. The proportion of referents with protective titers also decreased with time and was consistently higher than the levels of patients with IBD/CD within 15 years after the last HBV vaccination. However, no new HBV infection developed in any of 1258 patients with IBD/CD during a median follow-up of 9.4 years (interquartile range, 5.0-14.1 years).

CONCLUSIONS

Routine testing of anti-HBs titers may not be indicated for fully vaccinated patients with IBD/CD. Additional studies are needed to confirm these findings in other settings and populations.

International Delphi Consensus on the Management of AQP4-IgG+ NMOSD: Recommendations for Eculizumab, Inebilizumab, and Satralizumab

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) is a rare debilitating autoimmune disease of the CNS. Three monoclonal antibodies were recently approved as maintenance therapies for aquaporin-4 immunoglobulin G (AQP4-IgG)-seropositive NMOSD (eculizumab, inebilizumab, and satralizumab), prompting the need to consider best practice therapeutic decision-making for this indication. Our objective was to develop validated statements for the management of AQP4-IgG-seropositive NMOSD, through an evidence-based Delphi consensus process, with a focus on recommendations for eculizumab, inebilizumab, and satralizumab.

METHODS

We recruited an international panel of clinical experts in NMOSD and asked them to complete a questionnaire on NMOSD management. Panel members received a summary of evidence identified through a targeted literature review and provided free-text responses to the questionnaire based on both the data provided and their clinical experience. Responses were used to generate draft statements on NMOSD-related themes. Statements were voted on over a maximum of 3 rounds; participation in at least 1 of the first 2 rounds was mandatory. Panel members anonymously provided their level of agreement (6-point Likert scale) on each statement. Statements that failed to reach a predefined consensus threshold (≥67%) were revised based on feedback and then voted on in the next round. Final statements were those that met the consensus threshold (≥67%).

RESULTS

The Delphi panel comprised 24 experts, who completed the Delphi process in November 2021 after 2 voting rounds. In round 1, 23/25 statements reached consensus and were accepted as final. The 2 statements that failed to reach consensus were revised. In round 2, both revised statements reached consensus. Twenty-five statements were agreed in total: 11 on initiation of or switching between eculizumab, inebilizumab, and satralizumab; 3 on monotherapy/combination therapy; 7 on safety and patient population considerations; 3 on biomarkers/patient-reported outcomes; and 1 on research gaps.

DISCUSSION

An established consensus method was used to develop statements relevant to the management of AQP4-IgG-seropositive NMOSD. These international statements will be valuable for informing individualized therapeutic decision-making and could form the basis for standardized practice guidelines.

COVID-19 vaccination in psoriasis patients receiving systemic treatment: A prospective single-center study

Background

The rate of seroconversion after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis requiring systemic treatment is poorly understood.

Objectives

The aim of this prospective single-center cohort study performed between May 2020 and October 2021 was to determine the rate of seroconversion after COVID-19 vaccination in patients under active systemic treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis.

Methods

Inclusion criteria were systemic treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis, known COVID-19 vaccination status, and repetitive anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG serum quantification. The primary outcome was the rate of anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG seroconversion after complete COVID-19 vaccination.

Results

77 patients with a median age of 55.9 years undergoing systemic treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis were included. The majority of patients received interleukin- (n=50, 64.9%) or tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors (n=16, 20.8%) as systemic treatment for psoriasis; nine patients (11.7%) were treated with methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy, and one patient each received dimethyl fumarate (1.3%), respectively apremilast (1.3%). All included patients completed COVID-19 vaccination with two doses over the course of the study. Serum testing revealed that 74 patients (96.1%) showed an anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG seroconversion. While all patients on IL-17A, -12 or -12/23 inhibitors (n=50) achieved seroconversion, three of 16 patients (18.8%) receiving MTX and/or a TNF-α inhibitor as main anti-psoriatic treatment did not. At follow-up, none of the patients had developed symptomatic COVID-19 or died from COVID-19.

Conclusions

Anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG seroconversion rates following COVID-19 vaccination in psoriasis patients under systemic treatment were high. An impaired serological response, however, was observed in patients receiving MTX and/or TNF-α inhibitors, in particular infliximab.

Effects of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (Vero cells) on disease activity in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in China: a multicenter study

AIMS

To evaluate the impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on IBD activity.

METHODS

Adult IBD patients from five large IBD centers in China were enrolled and followed up for 6 months. Patients were divided into vaccinated and unvaccinated groups according to vaccination status. Demographic and clinical data were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 280 individuals (213 UC and 67 CD patients) were enrolled in the study. The unvaccinated and vaccinated groups of UC patients were comparable for basic characteristics, including age (t = - 0.8, p = 0.425), sex (χ2 = 0.980, p = 0.322), course of disease (z = - 0.513, p = 0.608), surgical conditions (χ2 = 1.042, p = 0.838), disease extent (χ2 = 4.853, p = 0.088), or baseline drug therapy (χ2 = 7.784, p = 0.064). In the subgroup of UC patients, there was no association between vaccination and disease activities, according to the medium disease activity scores for two groups: unvaccinated patients having scores (IQR) 1(2.75), 1(2), 1(2), and 1(2) at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively, whereas vaccinated patients having scores (IQR) 1(2), 1(2), 1(2), and 1(2). Similar conclusions were also derived in the subgroup of CD patients. There were also no statistically significant differences in age (t = - 1.48, p = 0.144), sex (χ2 = 0.003, p = 0.957), course of disease (z = - 0.074, p = 0.941), surgical conditions (χ2 = 0.613, p = 0.594), localization (χ2 = 6.261, p = 0.199), or baseline drug therapy (χ2 = 5.881, p = 0.114) between 2 groups of CD patients. The medium disease activity scores (IQR) of the unvaccinated group at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months were 1(4), 1(3), 1(3), and 1(3), respectively, whereas those of vaccinated group were 2.5(3.75), 2.5(3.75), 3(2), and 2(2), respectively. Overall, very few participants in this study described worsening IBD disease activity requiring a change or addition of medication.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has no adverse effect on disease activity in IBD population. IBD patients should be recommended to receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in time.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Neutralizing Antibody Response, Safety, and Efficacy of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines in Pediatric Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Prospective Multicenter Case-Control Study

The vaccination of immunocompromised children against coronavirus disease 2019 is an important public health issue. We evaluated the serological response, safety, and efficacy of the BNT162b2 vaccine in children with and without inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). A prospective, multicenter, case–control study was conducted in a pediatric population, including patients with IBD, aged 12–18 years. Clinical characteristics, safety profile, and serum samples for surrogate virus-neutralizing antibody testing pre- and post-BNT162b2 vaccination were assessed. The breakthrough infection rate during the Omicron outbreak was calculated to evaluate efficacy. Fifteen controls and twenty-three patients with IBD were enrolled. After two vaccine doses, the median level of percentage inhibition was highly increased, without significant differences between the groups (control 96.9 and IBD 96.3). However, it was significantly reduced in IBD patients receiving combination therapy (anti-tumor necrosis factor-α + immunomodulators) relative to those in other therapies and controls. Serious adverse events were not observed. The breakthrough infection rate was 42.1%, without statistical differences between the groups. Immunization with BNT162b2 in patients with IBD was comparable with that in healthy adolescents in terms of immunogenicity and safety. Nevertheless, the efficacy of BNT162b2 in preventing infection caused by the Omicron variant in the pediatric population was insufficient.

COVID-19 Vaccine Is Effective in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients and Is Not Associated With Disease Exacerbation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Studies have shown decreased response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations in some populations. In addition, it is possible that vaccine-triggered immune activation could trigger immune dysregulation and thus exacerbate inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). In this population-based study we used the epi-Israeli IBD Research Nucleus validated cohort to explore the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in IBD and to assess its effect on disease outcomes.

METHODS

We included all IBD patients insured in 2 of the 4 Israeli health maintenance organizations, covering 35% of the population. Patients receiving 2 Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine doses between December 2020 and June 2021 were individually matched to non-IBD controls. To assess IBD outcomes, we matched vaccinated to unvaccinated IBD patients, and response was analyzed per medical treatment.

RESULTS

In total, 12,109 IBD patients received 2 vaccine doses, of whom 4946 were matched to non-IBD controls (mean age, 51 ± 16 years; median follow-up, 22 weeks; interquartile range, 4-24). Fifteen patients in each group (0.3%) developed COVID-19 after vaccination (odds ratio, 1; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-2.05; P = 1.0). Patients on tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and/or corticosteroids did not have a higher incidence of infection. To explore IBD outcomes, 707 vaccinated IBD patients were compared with unvaccinated IBD patients by stringent matching (median follow-up, 14 weeks; interquartile range, 2.3-20.4). The risk of exacerbation was 29% in the vaccinated patients compared with 26% in unvaccinated patients (P = .3).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in IBD patients is comparable with that in non-IBD controls and is not influenced by treatment with TNF inhibitors or corticosteroids. The IBD exacerbation rate did not differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients.

Response to COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Biological Treatment

Background: The antibody response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on biological drugs is still unclear. Aim: To determine the anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike 1 (anti-S1-IgG) response rate and antibody levels following a complete COVID-19 vaccination cycle in patients with IBD on biological treatment. Methods: We assessed antibody response to COVID-19 in consecutive patients with IBD on biological drugs and without prior exposure to COVID-19. Sera were prospectively collected at baseline and at 21 days (T1), 42 days (T2), and 3 months (T3) after the first vaccine dose. Results: Among the 42 patients included in the study, the overall response rate at T3 was 97.6%, with no difference across the various biological drugs. After the first dose (T1), the response rate was higher in patients receiving anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) compared to patients treated with other biologics (p = 0.031). Among the responders, the anti-S1 levels were not significantly different among the various biological drugs at all study timepoints. Concomitant corticosteroids and disease activity had no impact on the response rate at all study timepoints. No unexpected side events were observed. Discussion: The antibody response to vaccination against COVID-19 in patients with IBD on biological drugs is optimal, independently of their mechanism of action. Patients treated with anti-TNF seem to have an earlier response to vaccination, while concomitant low-dose corticosteroids and disease activity does not seem to impact response. This information can be used to program vaccination and inform patients.

Impaired Humoral Immunity with Concomitant Preserved T Cell Reactivity in IBD Patients on Treatment with Infliximab 6 Month after Vaccination with the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2: A Pilot Study

Introduction: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). The most important approach to prevent severe disease progression and to contain the pandemic is the use of COVID-19 vaccines. The aim of this study was to investigate the humoral and cellular response in immunosuppressed patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on treatment with anti-TNF (infliximab, adalimumab) and anti-α4ß7-Integrin (vedolizumab) 6 months after mRNA vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 compared to healthy subjects. Methods: In this prospective study, 20 IBD patients and 9 healthy controls were included 6 months after the second BNT162b2 vaccination. In addition to quantitative determination of IgG antibody levels against the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein subunit S1, a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate neutralization test (sVNT) was used to assess potential neutralization capacity. SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses were measured using an interferon-γ (IFN-γ) release assay (IGRA; Euroimmun Medical Laboratory Diagnostics, Lübeck, Germany). Results: S-IgG could still be detected in the majority of IBD patients 6 months after second vaccination. Compared to healthy controls, IBD patients treated with anti-TNF agents showed both lower neutralizing activity in sVNT (percent inhibition of ACE2 receptor binding by RBD protein) and lower IgG-S (AU/mL) antibody levels (AB) (sVNT: 79% vs. 2%, p < 0. 001; AB: 1018 AU/mL vs. 141 AU/mL, p = 0.025). In contrast, patients on therapy with vedolizumab showed no impairment in humoral immune response (sVNT, S-IgG) compared with healthy controls. Specific T-cellular reactivity was detected in 73% of IBD patients and in 67% of healthy controls independent of immunosuppressive therapy (anti-TNF., vedolizumab) (p = 0.189). Conclusion: Six months after BNT162b2 vaccination, this study found significantly decreased antibody levels in patients under anti-TNF therapy. IBD patients under anti-TNF and vedolizumab therapy had no impairment of T-cellular reactivity compared to healthy controls at this time point. Further studies with larger collectives for confirmation should follow.

Vaccination and immunotherapies in neuroimmunological diseases

Neuroimmunological diseases and their treatment compromise the immune system, thereby increasing the risk of infections and serious illness. Consequently, vaccinations to protect against infections are an important part of the clinical management of these diseases. However, the wide variety of immunotherapies that are currently used to treat neuroimmunological disease — particularly multiple sclerosis and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders — can also impair immunological responses to vaccinations. In this Review, we discuss what is known about the effects of various immunotherapies on immunological responses to vaccines and what these effects mean for the safe and effective use of vaccines in patients with a neuroimmunological disease. The success of vaccination in patients receiving immunotherapy largely depends on the specific mode of action of the immunotherapy. To minimize the risk of infection when using immunotherapy, assessment of immune status and exclusion of underlying chronic infections before initiation of therapy are essential. Selection of the required vaccinations and leaving appropriate time intervals between vaccination and administration of immunotherapy can help to safeguard patients. We also discuss the rapidly evolving knowledge of how immunotherapies affect responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and how these effects should influence the management of patients on these therapies during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In this Review, the authors discuss how various immunotherapies for neuroimmunological diseases interact with vaccination responses, including responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, and the implications for the safe and effective use of vaccines in patients with these diseases.

Vaccination against infection is an essential part of the management of neuroimmunological diseases.

All indicated vaccinations should be administered before initiation of immunotherapy whenever possible; appropriate intervals between vaccination and treatment vary with treatment and vaccination.

Inactivated vaccines are considered safe in neuroimmunological diseases but live vaccines are generally contraindicated during immunotherapy.

Vaccination responses during immunotherapy can be diminished or abrogated, depending on the treatment and vaccination; antibody titre testing to monitor responses can be considered where appropriate.

Vaccinations must be avoided during relapses or exacerbations of neuroimmunological diseases.

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is recommended for patients with neuroimmunological disease but some immunotherapies limit the immune response; therefore, timing should be considered carefully.

Meta-analysis: hepatitis B vaccination in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

The response rate of hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is variable. Increasing dose or accelerated schedule is the suggested strategy to improve seroconversion.

AIM

We performed a meta-analysis to determine the pooled response rate of HBV vaccination and to identify the predictors of seroconversion.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library databases. Studies reporting the response of HBV vaccination in IBD patients were included. Response was recorded as adequate immune response (AIR, >10 IU/L) and Effective immune response (EIR, >100 IU/L). Pooled AIR and EIR rates were calculated for different doses (10-20 μg or 40 μg) and schedules (standard: 0, 1 and 6 months or accelerated: 0, 1 and 2 months). Meta-analysis was performed to identify the predictors of response.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies including 2602 patients were eligible. Pooled AIR and EIR rates after HBV vaccination were 62% (95% CI, 55-68) and 42% (95% CI, 37-48), respectively. Pooled AIR and EIR rates for standard and double dose were similar. Pooled AIR and EIR rates were also comparable for different schedules of HBV vaccination. Gender, IBD subtype and disease activity did not affect the response rate. Use of immunosuppression [immunomodulators (RR: 0.73, 95% CI, 0.62-0.87) and anti-TNFs (RR: 0.72, 95% CI, 0.60-0.87)] was a predictor of poor immune response compared to no immunosuppressive therapy.

CONCLUSION

Patients with IBD have a poor serological response after HBV vaccination. HBV screening and vaccination should preferably be done before starting the immunosuppressive drugs.

Response to Vaccines in Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Narrative Review

Patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), such as rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, are at increased risk of infection. International guidelines recommend vaccination to limit this risk of infection, although live attenuated vaccines are contraindicated once immunosuppressive therapy has begun. Biologic therapies used to treat IMIDs target the immune system to stop chronic pathogenic process but may also attenuate the protective immune response to vaccines. Here, we review the current knowledge regarding vaccine responses in IMID patients receiving treatment with biologic therapies, with a focus on the interleukin (IL)-12/23 inhibitors. B cell-depleting therapies, such as rituximab, strongly impair vaccines immunogenicity, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) fusion protein abatacept are also associated with attenuated antibody responses, which are further diminished in patients taking concomitant immunosuppressants. On the other hand, integrin, IL-6, IL-12/23, IL-17, and B-cell activating factor (BAFF) inhibitors do not appear to affect the immune response to several vaccines evaluated. Importantly, treatment with biologic therapies in IMID patients is not associated with an increased risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or developing severe disease. However, the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines on IMID patients may be reduced compared with healthy individuals. The impact of biologic therapies on the response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines seems to replicate what has been described for other vaccines. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination appears to be safe and well tolerated in IMID patients. Attenuated but, in general, still protective responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the context of certain therapies warrant current recommendations for a third primary dose in IMID patients treated with immunosuppressive drugs.

Humoral Immune Response in IBD Patients Three and Six Months after Vaccination with the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccines mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronovirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Vaccination is considered the core approach to containing the pandemic. There is currently insufficient evidence on the efficacy of these vaccines in immunosuppressed inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the humoral response in immunosuppressed IBD patients after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. In this prospective study, IgG antibody levels (AB) against the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (spike-protein) were quantitatively determined. For assessing the potential neutralizing capacity, a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate neutralization test (sVNT) was employed in IBD patients (n = 95) and healthy controls (n = 38). Sera were examined prior to the first/second vaccination and 3/6 months after second vaccination. Patients showed lower sVNT (%) and IgG-S (AU/mL) AB both before the second vaccination (sVNT p < 0.001; AB p < 0.001) and 3 (sVNT p = 0.002; AB p = 0.001) and 6 months (sVNT p = 0.062; AB p = 0.061) after the second vaccination. Although seroconversion rates (sVNT, IgG-S) did not differ between the two groups 3 months after second vaccination, a significant difference was seen 6 months after second vaccination (sVNT p = 0.045). Before and three months after the second vaccination, patients treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents showed significantly lower AB than healthy subjects. In conclusion, an early booster shot vaccination should be discussed for IBD patients on anti-TNF therapy.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease: expert consensus statement by KASID

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel coronavirus, is threatening global health worldwide with unprecedented contagiousness and severity. The best strategy to overcome COVID-19 is a vaccine. Various vaccines are currently being developed, and mass vaccination is in progress. Despite the very encouraging clinical trial results of these vaccines, there is insufficient information on the safety and efficacy of vaccines for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients facing various issues. After reviewing current evidence and international guidelines, the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases developed an expert consensus statement on COVID-19 vaccination issues for Korean IBD patients. This expert consensus statement emphasizes that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination be strongly recommended for IBD patients, and it is safe for IBD patients receiving immunomodulatory therapy.

Recommendations by the Scientific Department of Neuroimmunology of the Brazilian Academy of Neurology (DCNI/ABN) and the Brazilian Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis and Neuroimmunological Diseases (BCTRIMS) on vaccination in general and specifically against SARS-CoV-2 for patients with demyelinating diseases of the central nervous system

The Scientific Department of Neuroimmunology of the Brazilian Academy of Neurology (DCNI/ABN) and Brazilian Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis and Neuroimmunological Diseases (BCTRIMS) provide recommendations in this document for vaccination of the population with demyelinating diseases of the central nervous system (CNS) against infections in general and against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes COVID-19. We emphasize the seriousness of the current situation in view of the spread of COVID-19 in our country. Therefore, reference guides on vaccination for clinicians, patients, and public health authorities are particularly important to prevent some infectious diseases. The DCNI/ABN and BCTRIMS recommend that patients with CNS demyelinating diseases (e.g., MS and NMOSD) be continually monitored for updates to their vaccination schedule, especially at the beginning or before a change in treatment with a disease modifying drug (DMD). It is also important to note that vaccines are safe, and physicians should encourage their use in all patients. Clearly, special care should be taken when live attenuated viruses are involved. Finally, it is important for physicians to verify which DMD the patient is receiving and when the last dose was taken, as each drug may affect the induction of immune response differently.

Review Article: vaccination for patients with inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Poor immune responses are frequently observed in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving established vaccines; risk factors include immunosuppressants and active disease.

AIMS

To summarise available information regarding immune responses achieved in patients with IBD receiving established vaccines. Using this information, to identify risk factors in the IBD population related to poor vaccine-induced immunity that may be applicable to vaccines against COVID-19.

METHODS

We undertook a literature review on immunity to currently recommended vaccines for patients with IBD and to COVID-19 vaccines and summarised the relevant literature.

RESULTS

Patients with IBD have reduced immune responses following vaccination compared to the general population. Factors including the use of immunomodulators and anti-TNF agents reduce response rates. Patients with IBD should be vaccinated against COVID-19 at the earliest opportunity as recommended by International Advisory Committees, and vaccination should not be deferred because a patient is receiving immune-modifying therapies. Antibody titres to COVID-19 vaccines appear to be reduced in patients receiving anti-TNF therapy, especially in combination with immunomodulators after one vaccination. Therefore, we should optimise any established risk factors that could impact response to vaccination in patients with IBD before vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Ideally, patients with IBD should be vaccinated at the earliest opportunity against COVID-19. Patients should be in remission and, if possible, have their corticosteroid dose minimised before vaccination. Further research is required to determine the impact of different biologics on vaccine response to COVID-19 and the potential for booster vaccines or heterologous prime-boost vaccinations in the IBD population.

Hepatitis-B Vaccine Response in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Data on efficacy of hepatitis-B vaccine (HBV) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is limited. Our aim was to review the literature and perform meta-analysis of available studies to quantify efficacy of HBV in patients with IBD.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (inception to July 2020) to identify studies evaluating efficacy of HBV in patients with IBD. Random effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates and I2 percentage values were used to assess the heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies (2375 patients) were included. Four data sets were available from 2 studies that compared HBV response in patients with IBD against healthy controls. The pooled odds ratio of HBV response in IBD patients was 0.13 (95% CI, 0.05-0.33, P = 0.001). The pooled proportion of adequate immune response (AIR) was 64% (95% CI, 55-72.1, P = 0.003) from 13 data sets, and effective immune response (EIR) was 39.7% (95% CI, 30.7-49.5, P = 0.04) from 10 data sets.

CONCLUSION

Patients with IBD on immunosuppression demonstrated significantly reduced HBV response as compared with general population.

Vaccinations in Patients Receiving Systemic Drugs for Skin Disorders: What Can We Learn for SARS-Cov-2 Vaccination Strategies?

Large-scale vaccination strategies are currently being deployed against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-Cov-2). Whether systemic medication for skin diseases affects the efficacy of vaccination and whether temporary interruption or extension of the dosing interval is necessary is under debate. Most immunomodulating/immunosuppressive drugs only affect vaccine-induced immune responses to a limited or moderate extent, preserving sufficient immunity in most patients. Mycophenolate mofetil, Janus kinase inhibitors, and rituximab require a more cautious approach, and judicious timing of vaccination might be appropriate in patients receiving these treatments. It should be noted that, for most drugs except methotrexate, data on the length of the interruption period to restore vaccine-induced immune responses to normal levels are either very limited or absent. In these cases, only the drug half-life can be used as a practical guideline. In most patients, systemic medication can be continued through the vaccination process, although case-by-case decisions can be considered.

[SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination for Adult Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Expert Consensus Statements by KASID]

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel coronavirus, is threatening global health worldwide with unprecedented contagiousness and severity. The best strategy to overcome COVID-19 is a vaccine. Various vaccines are currently being developed, and mass vaccination is in progress. Despite the very encouraging clinical trial results of these vaccines, there is insufficient information on the safety and efficacy of vaccines for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients facing various issues. After reviewing current evidence and international guidelines, the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases (KASID) developed an expert consensus statement on COVID-19 vaccination issues for Korean IBD patients. This expert consensus statement emphasizes that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination be strongly recommended for IBD patients, and it is safe for IBD patients receiving immunomodulatory therapy.

Evaluation of hepatitis B vaccine efficacy and factors affecting vaccine nonresponse in patients receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor agents

OBJECTIVES

The response rate of patients to hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents is quite low. We aimed to assess the efficiency of HBV vaccination in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases (CIDs) receiving anti-TNF agents as well as in healthy controls. We also evaluated the impact of different factors on the efficacy of HBV vaccination.

METHODS

Patients with CIDs receiving anti-TNF agents and healthy controls vaccinated for HBV were included in the study during 2018-2019. An adequate immune response and an effective immune response to HBV were defined as >10 IU/L and > 100 IU/L, respectively.

RESULTS

Among 274 participants, 187 were patients with CID and 87 were healthy controls. The mean age of the patients with CID (43.9 ± 11.7 years) was significantly higher than that of the healthy controls (31.4 ± 7 years) (P = 0.000). Adequate immune response was 60.8 and 94.3% in patients with CID and healthy controls (P = 0.000), respectively, whereas effective immune response was 37.9 and 75.9% (P = 0.000), respectively. In logistic regression analysis, male sex [odds ratio (OR), 0.408; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.201-0.830; P = 0.013), use of infliximab (OR, 2.694; 95% CI, 1.203-6.035; P = 0.016) and sertoluzimab (OR, 3.307; 95% CI, 1.287-8.498; P = 0.013), vaccination after anti-TNF treatment (OR, 0.224; 95% CI, 0.083-0.602; P = 0.003) were identified as risk factors of nonresponse to HBV vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Infliximab and sertoluzimab usage, male sex, and vaccination after anti-TNF treatment were risk factors of nonresponse. HBV vaccination should be given to patients with CID before initiation of anti-TNF treatment and awareness should be spread on this subject.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

The current COVID-19 pandemic, caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has drastically impacted societies worldwide. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is expected to play a key role in the management of this pandemic. Inflammatory conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) often require chronic immunosuppression, which can influence vaccination decisions.

AIM

This review article aims to describe the most commonly available SARS-CoV-2 vaccination vectors globally, assess the potential benefits and concerns of vaccination in the setting of immunosuppression and provide medical practitioners with guidance regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with IBD.

METHODS

All published Phase 1/2 and/or Phase 3 and 4 studies of SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations were reviewed. IBD international society position papers, safety registry data and media releases from pharmaceutical companies as well as administrative and medicines regulatory bodies were included. General vaccine evidence and recommendations in immunosuppressed patients were reviewed for context. Society position papers regarding special populations, including immunosuppressed, pregnant and breast-feeding individuals were also evaluated. Literature was critically analysed and summarised.

RESULTS

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is supported in all adult, non-pregnant individuals with IBD without contraindication. There is the potential that vaccine efficacy may be reduced in those who are immunosuppressed; however, medical therapies should not be withheld in order to undertake vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are safe, but data specific to immunosuppressed patients remain limited.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is essential from both an individual patient and community perspective and should be encouraged in patients with IBD. Recommendations must be continually updated as real-world and trial-based evidence emerges.

Lupus, vaccinations and COVID-19: What we know now

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus causing Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has had a huge impact on health services, with a high mortality associated with complications including pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are at increased risk of viral infections, and recent data suggests they may be at an increased risk of poor outcomes with COVID-19. This may be particularly true for those on rituximab or high dose steroids. A huge international effort from the scientific community has so far resulted in the temporary authorisation of three vaccines which offer protection against SARS-CoV-2, with over 30 other vaccines being evaluated in ongoing trials. Although there has historically been concern that vaccines may trigger disease flares of SLE, there is little convincing evidence to show this. In general lupus patients appear to gain good protection from vaccination, although there may be reduced efficacy in those with high disease activity or those on immunosuppressive therapies, such as rituximab or high dose steroids. Recent concerns have been raised regarding rare clotting events with the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine and it is currently unknown whether this risk is higher for those patients with secondary antiphospholipid syndrome. With the possibility of annual COVID vaccination programmes in the future, prospective data collection and registries looking at the effect of vaccination on SLE disease control, the incidence of COVID-19 in SLE patients and severity of COVID-19 disease course would all be useful. As mass vaccination programmes begin to roll out across the world, we assess the evidence of the use of vaccines in SLE patients and in particular vaccines targeting SARS-CoV-2.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in IBD: Past Lessons, Current Evidence, and Future Challenges

Since the beginning of the pandemic, patients with inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] have been considered at high risk for infection and complications of COVID-19. IBD patients and patients taking immunosuppressive therapy were excluded from clinical phase III vaccine trials, complicating the assessment of effectiveness of these new vaccines. From past experience we know that adapted vaccination strategies may be appropriate in some IBD patients to optimise immunogenicity. We review current evidence on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination relevant to IBD patients, including immune responses from humoral to cellular, emerging data on new variants, and off-label vaccination schemes. We also identify clinical and scientific knowledge gaps that can be translated into both large-scale population-based studies and targeted vaccine studies to describe the precise immune responses induced by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in IBD patients. We strongly endorse the recommendation of vaccinating IBD patients to ensure maximal protection from COVID-19 both for the individual and the community.

An evidence-based guide to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination of patients on immunotherapies in dermatology

Immune-mediated diseases and immunotherapeutics can negatively affect normal immune functioning and, consequently, vaccine safety and response. The COVID-19 pandemic has incited research aimed at developing a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine. As SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are developed and made available, the assessment of anticipated safety and efficacy in patients with immune-mediated dermatologic diseases and requiring immunosuppressive and/or immunomodulatory therapy is particularly important. A review of the literature was conducted by a multidisciplinary committee to provide guidance on the safety and efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for dermatologists and other clinicians when prescribing immunotherapeutics. The vaccine platforms being used to develop SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are expected to be safe and potentially effective for dermatology patients on immunotherapeutics. Current guidelines for the vaccination of an immunocompromised host remain appropriate when considering future administration of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

The Immunogenicity of the Influenza, Pneumococcal, and Hepatitis B Vaccines in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Treated With Vedolizumab

Background

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have an elevated risk for infection which is further increased by immunosuppressive medications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of influenza, PVC13, PPSV23, and hepatitis B vaccines in adults with IBD treated with vedolizumab as compared to those treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents or nonimmunosuppressive therapy.

Methods

In this prospective controlled trial, patients were vaccinated with the influenza, PVC13, PPSV23, and/or hepatitis B vaccines. Participants were grouped based on IBD medication regimen: (1) vedolizumab monotherapy, (2) vedolizumab plus immunomodulator, (3) anti-TNF plus immunomodulator, and (4) no immunosuppressive therapy (control). Vaccine responses were evaluated by comparing pre- and postvaccination titers. Disease activity and adverse events were monitored by the Harvey-Bradshaw Index or Simple Colitis Clinical Activity Index and by standardized phone interviews.

Results

No serious adverse events or significant changes in disease activity were reported. For the influenza vaccine, baseline titers were high in all groups, and no follow-up titers met criteria for adequate response. For the pneumococcal vaccines, all groups showed response to vaccination; there was no statistically significant difference between the groups. For the hepatitis B vaccine, 62.5% of patients receiving vedolizumab and 33.3% receiving anti-TNF therapy achieved a level of response >10 mIU/mL.

Discussion

The inability to observe a response to the influenza vaccine was influenced by high baseline titers. For the hepatitis B vaccine, patients treated with vedolizumab experienced immunogenic response to vaccination that was noninferior to nonimmunosuppressed controls. All studied vaccines were well-tolerated. Vaccination should be encouraged in all adult patients with IBD.

Immunizations in immunocompromised patients: a guide for dermatologists

The increasingly frequent use of immunomodulatory agents in dermatology requires the observance of specific recommendations for immunization. These recommendations are developed and regularly updated by the German Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO), an independent advisory group at the Robert Koch Institute. Dermatological patients on immunosuppressive treatment should ideally receive all vaccinations included in the standard immunization schedule. Additionally, it is recommended that they also undergo vaccination against the seasonal flu, pneumococci, and herpes zoster (inactivated herpes zoster subunit vaccine for patients ≥ 50 years). Additional immunizations against Haemophilus influenzae type B, hepatitis B and meningococci may be indicated depending on individual comorbidities and exposure risk. Limitations of use, specific contraindications and intervals to be observed between vaccination and immunosuppression depend on the immunosuppressive agent used and its dosing. Only under certain conditions may live-attenuated vaccines be administered in patients on immunosuppressive therapy. Given its strong suppressive effect on the humoral immune response, no vaccines - except for flu shots - should be given within six months after rituximab therapy. This CME article presents current recommendations on immunization in immunocompromised individuals, with a special focus on dermatological patients. Its goal is to enable readers to provide competent counseling and to initiate necessary immunizations in this vulnerable patient group.

Maintaining Hepatitis B Protection in Immunocompromised Pediatric Rheumatology and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients

OBJECTIVE

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection remains a significant public health challenge, particularly for immunocompromised patients. Our aim was to evaluate the serologic immunity in immunocompromised rheumatology and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients, assess factors for serologic nonimmunity, and evaluate their response to 1 HBV booster dose.

METHODS

Immunocompromised rheumatology and IBD patients with completed HBV screening were identified. A chart review was performed to collect demographics, clinical information, baseline HBV serology results, and serologic response to booster vaccination. Serologic nonimmunity was defined as a negative/indeterminate hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs) level.

RESULTS

Among 580 patients, 71% were nonimmune. The highest portion of nonimmune patients were 11-18 years old (P = 0.004). There was no significant difference between immune and nonimmune patients with regards to diagnosis (P = 0.34), age at diagnosis (P = 0.64), duration of treatment (P = 0.07), or type of medications (P = 0.08). Sixty-two percent of those who received a booster vaccine were rescreened, and most (68%) seroconverted. In those 18 years or older, only half seroconverted.

CONCLUSION

Results of this study support the benefit of HBV screening in immunosuppressed patients. Beginning at age 11 years, most patients lacked serologic immunity to HBV. Seroconversion for most patients 11-18 years occurred after 1 booster vaccine. Thus, for immunocompromised patients without recent HBV serologic data, obtaining the HBV serology beginning at age 11 years might be considered. Those 18 years and older were least likely to seroconvert after 1 booster, indicating that they may benefit from receiving the 3-dose HBV vaccine series.

Immune response to hepatitis B vaccination in pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease

AIM OF THE STUDY

To evaluate the immune response rate in children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who received the full hepatitis B vaccination course in infancy. We also evaluated rates of response to booster doses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Participants were 1- to 18-year-old children with IBD, who received 3 doses of the hepatitis B vaccine in infancy. The study subjects were on no immunosuppressive therapy, on immunomodulators, on biological therapy, or received combo therapy. Anti-hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs) level ≥ 10 mIU/ml was considered to be seroprotective. Patients with anti-HBs level < 10 mIU/ml received 1 or 3 doses of hepatitis B vaccine, and their post-vaccination anti-HBs levels were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, we included 157 subjects, with a median age of 14.5 years. Anti-HBs levels ≥ 10 mIU/ml were found in 84/157 (53.5%) patients and were not associated with age (p = 0.3), sex (p = 0.7), or IBD type (p = 0.9). There was no significant difference in the rate of seroconversion between IBD patients treated with no immunosuppressive drugs, immunomodulators, biologicals, and combo therapy (30.4% vs. 39.3% vs. 2.7% vs. 7.1%, respectively, p = 0.3). After the first and third dose of booster vaccine, anti-HBs levels ≥ 10 mIU/ml were as follows: 92% and 100%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The immune response in children with IBD, who received the full series of hepatitis B vaccinations in infancy was inadequate and did not depend on the type of therapy. The booster dose(s) of vaccine could help to protect this group of patients from hepatitis B virus.

Efficacy and Safety of Hepatitis B Vaccination in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Receiving Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs and/or Biologics Therapy

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to assess efficacy and safety of the hepatitis B vaccination in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving conventional and/or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

METHODS

A longitudinal open-label study was conducted. Of 46 RA patients, 33 received only conventional synthetic DMARDs, and 13 received both conventional synthetic DMARDs and biological DMARDs, and 9 healthy age- and sex-matched control subjects were vaccinated with 20 μg recombinant hepatitis B vaccine (EuVax B) at weeks 0, 4, and 24. Hepatitis B surface antibody levels were measured 8 weeks after the last dose of vaccination. Seroprotection was defined as hepatitis B surface antibody level of 10 mIU/mL or greater. Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints scores were recorded at weeks 0, 4, and 32 in 46 RA patients who received hepatitis B vaccination and 47 treatment-matched RA patients who did not receive it. Adverse events were recorded at each visit.Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 16.0.

RESULTS

Seroprotection was lower in the RA patients than in the control subjects (64% vs. 100%, p = 0.045). Patients receiving biological DMARDs and conventional DMARDs had a lower proportion of seroprotection compared with the control group (50% vs. 100% [p = 0.02] and 69.7% vs. 100% [p = 0.09], respectively). Among RA patients, responders were younger than nonresponders with a mean age of 57.5 (SD, 9.0) years and 64.9 (SD, 10.9) years (p = 0.04) and less likely to be treated with rituximab (6.9% vs. 37.5%, p = 0.01). Overall, hepatitis B vaccination was well tolerated. The rate of RA flare was not increased after hepatitis B vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RA receiving DMARDs had less humoral response to hepatitis B vaccination as compared with control subjects. Aging and rituximab use were associated with impaired response to hepatitis B vaccination. Hepatitis B vaccination is safe and well tolerated in RA patients.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

Vaccination in the Elderly and IBD

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Significant gaps in knowledge and utilization of vaccinations exist among practitioners providing care for patients with IBD. This review is intended to update the reader on best practices for vaccination within the IBD population with a specific focus on the elderly.

RECENT FINDINGS

Advances in IBD therapeutics have recently increased the number of immunosuppressive therapies available to practitioners. Differences in mechanisms of action of these medications have led to differential implications pertaining to vaccination strategies. Additionally, new vaccines, including the recombinant zoster vaccine, have recently become available for the use in the IBD population. Given the prominent role the IBD provider plays in the management of patients with IBD, a clear understanding of best practices is essential. This review provides a framework for the integration of optimal vaccination strategies for practitioners caring for adult and elderly patients with IBD.

Improved Antibody Response to Three Additional Hepatitis B Vaccine Doses Following Primary Vaccination Failure in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown the efficacy of hepatitis B (HBV) vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is impaired, but few data exist regarding the effectiveness of revaccination strategies following primary vaccination failure. Our aim was to analyze the association between administration of additional vaccine doses and hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) seroconversion.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study. Inclusion criteria are as follows: age ≥ 18, diagnosis of Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC), inadequate HBsAb < 10 IU/L following initial HBV vaccination series, subsequent administration of 1-3 additional doses of HBV vaccine with follow-up serum HBsAb measurements. Patients were stratified into groups of ≤ 2 or 3 doses received. Primary outcome was achieving HBsAb > 10 IU/L. Outcomes were stratified by age ≥ or < 40 years. We performed logistic and linear multivariable regression analyses for categorical and continuous data.

RESULTS

The study cohort consists of (n = 149) 54.4% women; 77.9% white; 72.6% with CD, with mean age: 46.2. Patients of all ages and age ≥ 40 years, who received 3 additional doses of vaccine, were more likely to achieve seroprotective HBsAb levels than patients who received 1 or 2 doses (OR 1.77, P = 0.01; OR 1.9, P = 0.03, respectively, after adjusting for age, sex, race, immunosuppressive medication exposure, time between vaccine/titer).

CONCLUSIONS

Following initial HBV vaccination failure, patients with IBD of all ages are more likely to develop seroprotective levels of HBsAb following 3 additional vaccine doses, rather than 1 or 2 alone. In patients who fail primary HBV vaccination, providers should consider a more aggressive revaccination strategy with an additional 3-dose series.

Humoral response to Clostridium difficile in inflammatory bowel disease, including correlation with immunomodulatory treatment

Background and Aim

An abnormal immune response to intestinal bacteria has been observed in Crohn's disease (CD). Clostridium difficile infection incidence and severity are increased in CD, but reports on the humoral response have provided conflicting results. We aimed to shed light on the possible role of C. difficile in CD pathogenesis by paying attention to the influence of immunomodulatory treatment on the humoral response.

Methods

A total of 71 consecutive outpatients with CD, 67 with ulcerative colitis (UC), and 121 healthy controls were analyzed for serum IgA and IgG to C. difficile toxins A and B.

Results

IgA levels were similar in all study groups. IgG to toxin A was increased similarly in CD and UC (P = 0.02 for both). In contrast, IgG to toxin B was elevated only in CD patients not receiving disease-modifying anti-inflammatory bowel disease drugs (DMAID) (n = 16) (P = 0.0001), while the CD medication subgroup (n = 47) had a level similar to healthy controls. The UC results were not influenced by DMAID treatment.

Conclusion

Our findings add support to the idea of a disturbed interaction between intestinal cells and the microbiota being part of the CD disease mechanism. An abnormal immune response to C. difficile toxin B may be a critical component of this interaction.

Useful message in choosing optimal biological agents for patients with autoimmune arthritis

The introduction of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) treatments for various types of autoimmune arthritis, such as rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthropathy and ankylosing spondylitis, represents a new era of treatment for patients with a refractory response to conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs). Many new bDMARDs with different modalities or that target different pro-inflammatory molecules, likely cytokines, are rapidly emerging. Hence, physicians in the field may be confused about choosing appropriate bDMARDs for their patients. Considering the high cost of bDMARDs and the rapid destructive process of autoimmune arthritis in patients, the choice of optimal bDMARDs for patients who fail to respond or show an inadequate therapeutic response to csDMARDs designed to control the disease is very critical. Here, we summarize the strengths and weaknesses of bDMARDs and specifically focus on their uses in patients with comorbid conditions or with specific medical conditions, such as pregnancy. This commentary provides a solid up-to-date review on commercially available bDMARDs and very useful information for physicians to facilitate the choice of more appropriate bDMARDs to treat patients with autoimmune arthritis and for basic researchers to understand the current strategies of bDMARD usage and hopefully to develop more powerful bDMARDs with fewer safety concerns.

Vaccination Guidelines for Patients With Immune-Mediated Disorders on Immunosuppressive Therapies

BACKGROUND:

Patients with immune-mediated diseases on immunosuppressive therapies have more infectious episodes than healthy individuals, yet vaccination practices by physicians for this patient population remain suboptimal.

OBJECTIVES:

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of vaccines in individuals exposed to immunosuppressive therapies and provide evidence-based clinical practice recommendations.

METHODS:

A literature search for vaccination safety and efficacy in patients on immunosuppressive therapies (2009-2017) was conducted. Results were assessed using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.

RESULTS:

Several immunosuppressive therapies attenuate vaccine response. Thus, vaccines should be administered before treatment whenever feasible. Inactivated vaccines can be administered without treatment discontinuation. Similarly, evidence suggests that the live zoster vaccine is safe and effective while on select immunosuppressive therapy, although use of the subunit vaccine is preferred. Caution regarding other live vaccines is warranted. Drug pharmacokinetics, duration of vaccine-induced viremia, and immune response kinetics should be considered to determine appropriate timing of vaccination and treatment (re)initiation. Infants exposed to immunosuppressive therapies through breastmilk can usually be immunized according to local guidelines. Intrauterine exposure to immunosuppressive agents is not a contraindication for inactivated vaccines. Live attenuated vaccines scheduled for infants and children ⩾12 months of age, including measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella, can be safely administered as sufficient time has elapsed for drug clearance.

CONCLUSIONS:

Immunosuppressive agents may attenuate vaccine responses, but protective benefit is generally maintained. While these recommendations are evidence based, they do not replace clinical judgment, and decisions regarding vaccination must carefully assess the risks, benefits, and circumstances of individual patients.

Hepatitis B Vaccination Effective in Children Exposed to Anti-Tumour Necrosis Factor Alpha in Utero

INTRODUCTION

Neonates exposed to tumour necrosis factor [TNF] alpha inhibitors in utero are born with detectable drug levels which can still be detected throughout the first year of life. Since 2011, the hepatitis B virus [HBV] vaccine is routinely administered to all newborns in the Netherlands. Adults treated with anti-TNF have been reported to respond inadequately to the HBV vaccine. The aim of this study was to compare anti-HB levels in anti-TNF-exposed children with non-exposed children following routine Dutch HBV vaccination.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional, controlled cohort study from 2014 to 2017 in a single, tertiary referral centre. Pregnant women treated with anti-TNF for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] and their subsequent children were recruited from the IBD preconception outpatient clinic. Pregnant women not treated with anti-TNF for IBD and their subsequent children were eligible as controls. Adherence to the Dutch National Vaccination Programme was mandatory for participation in this study. A venous blood sample was obtained 1 month after final HBV vaccination. Anti-HB levels were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

Anti-HB levels at 12 months did not differ between the anti-TNF-exposed [n = 15] and the control group [n = 12] [> 1000 IU/l vs > 1000 IU/l, p = 0.59]. All children were successfully immunized against HBV, defined as anti-HB > 10 IU/l. Median anti-TNF levels determined in cord blood at birth were 9.0 µg/ml [interquartile range: 3.0-15.0 µg/ml] for infliximab and 0.4. µg/ml [interquartile range: 0.3-0.6 µg/ml] for adalimumab. There were no differences in general birth and health outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Children born with detectable anti-TNF levels can be effectively vaccinated against HBV.

Antibody Response to Hepatitis B Virus Vaccine is Impaired in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Infliximab Therapy

BACKGROUND

Studies have demonstrated an association between anti-TNF/immunomodulator agents used in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and impaired hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccine immunogenicity, but little data exist on whether specific medication types affect protective HBsAb titers. Our aim was to analyze this association.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study. Inclusion criteria: age ≥18, diagnosis of Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC), previous HBV vaccination series and/or ≥1 positive HBsAb, and record of IBD therapy in 6 months before titer level. Patients were stratified based upon medication exposures: anti-TNF, immunomodulator, combination anti-TNF and immunomodulatory, and a reference arm. Titer levels following vaccination and specific medication types given in the 6 months before titer were recorded. Seroprotection was defined as HBsAb ≥10 IU/l and ≥100 IU/l.

RESULTS

The study cohort (N = 391) was 70.8% white, 51.4% female and 64.2% had CD and 35.8% had UC. The mean age was 45.8 years. A significantly lower percentage of patients exposed to anti-TNF, immunomodulator or dual therapy had titers ≥10 (P < 0.01). Regarding specific medications, only patients exposed to infliximab (P < 0.01) were less likely to have titer levels ≥10, after controlling for other medication exposures, age at titer level, and interval time between vaccination/titer level. This was not found for patients exposed to adalimumab, methotrexate, 6-mercaptopurine, or azathioprine.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients exposed to infliximab were significantly less likely to have protective HBsAb titer levels following vaccination, a trend not seen in patients on adalimumab. Efforts to vaccinate IBD patients against HBV before use of immunomodulators and anti-TNFs, infliximab specifically, and screen periodically thereafter must be reinforced.

Travel and biologic therapy: travel-related infection risk, vaccine response and recommendations

BACKGROUND

Biologic therapy has revolutionized the management of refractory chronic autoimmune and auto-inflammatory disease, as well as several malignancies, providing rapid symptomatic relief and/or disease remission. Patients receiving biologic therapies have an improved quality of life, facilitating travel to exotic destinations and potentially placing them at risk of a range of infections. For each biologic agent, we review associated travel-related infection risk and expected travel vaccine response and effectiveness.

METHODS

A PUBMED search [vaccination OR vaccine] AND/OR ['specific vaccine'] AND/OR [immunology OR immune response OR response] AND [biologic OR biological OR biologic agent] was performed. A review of the literature was performed in order to develop recommendations on vaccination for patients in receipt of biologic therapy travelling to high-risk travel destinations.

RESULTS

There is a paucity of literature in this area, however, it is apparent that travel-related infection risk is increased in patients on biologic therapy and when illness occurs they are at a higher risk of complication and hospitalization. Patients in receipt of biologic agents are deemed as having a high level of immunosuppression-live vaccines, including the yellow fever vaccine, are contraindicated. Inactivated vaccines are considered safe; however, vaccine response can be attenuated by the patient's biologic therapy, thereby resulting in reduced vaccine effectiveness and protection.

CONCLUSIONS

Best practice requires a collaborative approach between the patient's primary healthcare physician, relevant specialist and travel medicine expert, who should all be familiar with the immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory effects resulting from the biologic therapies. Timing of vaccines should be carefully planned, and if possible, vaccination provided well before established immunosuppression.

Vaccinations in immunosuppressive-dependent pediatric inflammatory bowel disease

AIM

To determine the vaccination rates in pediatric immunosuppression-dependent inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and review the safety and efficacy of vaccinations in this population.

METHODS

The electronic medical records from October 2009 to December 2015 of patients diagnosed with IBD at 10 years of age or younger and prescribed anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (anti-TNF-α) therapy were reviewed for clinical history, medication history, vaccination history, and hepatitis B and varicella titers. Literature discussing vaccination response in IBD patients were identified through search of the MEDLINE database and reviewed using the key words “inflammatory bowel disease”, “immunization”, “vaccination”, “pneumococcal”, “varicella”, and “hepatitis B”. Non-human and non-English language studies were excluded. Search results were reviewed by authors to select articles that addressed safety and efficacy of immunizations in inflammatory bowel disease.

RESULTS

A total of 51 patients diagnosed with IBD prior to the age of 10 and receiving anti-TNF-α therapy were identified. Thirty-three percent of patients (17/51) had incomplete or no documentation of vaccinations. Sixteen case reports, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, and randomized trials were determined through review of the literature to describe the safety and efficacy of hepatitis B, pneumococcal, and varicella immunizations in adult and pediatric patients with IBD. These studies showed that patients safely tolerated the vaccines without significant adverse effects. Importantly, IBD patients receiving immunosuppressive medications, particularly anti-TNF-α treatment, have decreased vaccine response compared to controls. However, the majority of patients are still able to achieve protective levels of specific antibodies.

CONCLUSION

Immunizations have been shown to be well-tolerated and protective immunity can be achieved in patients with IBD requiring immunosuppressive therapy.

Asymptomatic acute hepatitis E in a female patient with ulcerative colitis

We present a 60-year-old female patient with asymptomatic acute hepatitis E that was fortuitously detected during the course of ulcerative colitis (UC). She was admitted to hospital on October 30, 2015. Endoscopy and histological examination of the colon showed typical findings of UC. All parameters of liver function tests were normal on this date. Combination therapy with oral prednisolone and mesalazine was started and intravenous administration of infliximab once every 8 weeks was added later. Her symptoms gradually improved after these treatments, and she was discharged on February 7, 2016. In a periodic check-up on July 7, 2016, high levels of serum transaminases were detected in liver function tests. Although drug-induced liver injury was first suspected, anti-hepatitis E virus (HEV) immunoglobulin A was positive. The genotype and subgenotype of this HEV are 3 and 3a, respectively, although the infectious route of the HEV was unclear. Within 2 weeks after the onset of acute liver injury, the HEV viremia disappeared and her liver function tests improved. Examination of serum anti-HEV immunoglobulin A should be added at the time of abnormal liver function tests in patients with UC receiving immunosuppressive and biological drugs.

Immune response to hepatitis B vaccination among people with inflammatory bowel diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The response rate to hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is low and varies markedly. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the response rate to HBV vaccination and identified the factors predictive of an immune response.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases, and reviewed the titles and abstracts of studies on the efficacy of HBV vaccination in IBD patients performed through July 2016. Anti-HBs levels>10IU/L was considered to be an effective immune response. The primary outcome measure was the response rate to HBV vaccination after series completion, and the secondary outcome was identification of factors at baseline predictive of an immune response.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies including 1688 patients were eligible for inclusion. Based on a random-effects model, the pooled rate of a response to HBV vaccination among patients with IBD was 61% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 53-69). Young age (mean difference [MD]: -5.7; 95% CI: -8.46, -2.95) and vaccination during disease remission (relative risk [RR]: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.15-2.29) were associated with a positive response to HBV vaccination. In addition, no immunosuppressive therapy was predictive of an immune response compared to immunomodulatory (RR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.08-1.63) or anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) (RR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.19-2.08) therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this meta-analysis, only three of five IBD patients will show a serological response to HBV vaccination. Vaccination should be performed at the time of IBD diagnosis, during disease remission, or before starting immunosuppressive therapy.