Invasive pneumococcal infections in pediatric liver-small bowel-pancreas transplant recipients

Efficacy and safety of recombinant human growth hormone therapy in pediatric intestinal transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) is widely used to treat growth retardation in children. We aimed to examine the effect of rhGH therapy on growth and its impact on allograft function in children with growth retardation after intestinal transplant (IT).

METHODS

We retrospectively included children younger than 19 years who had received an IT with or without the liver, were diagnosed with growth retardation, and have received rhGH between January 2010 and January 2021. Changes in the patient's anthropometric parameters between baseline and various time points were compared using the paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test, as appropriate.

RESULTS

Seven patients (all males and prepubertal) received rhGH for the median duration of 2.3 years. The median age at rhGH start was 9.5 years. The median growth velocity z-score improved from -0.95 before treatment to 2.3 (p = .04) and 1.9 (p = .06) after 1 and 2 years of treatment, respectively. The median height-for-age z-score significantly improved from -3.4 at rhGH start to -1.3 (p = .005) at rhGH stop and remained above baseline at the last visit (-2.4, p = .002). The change in the first-year growth velocity was negatively correlated with the change in the second-year growth velocity (r = -.90, p = .04). No serious adverse effects or worsening allograft function were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Severely growth retarded children after IT could benefit from rhGH treatment. A larger, longitudinal study would be warranted to monitor the long-term effect and safety of rhGH and examine predictors of growth response to rhGH therapy in these pediatric IT recipients.

Post-transplant hepatic fibrosis in pediatric liver-small bowel transplant recipients: A single-center, retrospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the prevalence of hepatic graft fibrosis in combined LSBT children. We aimed to determine the prevalence of and identify potential predictors for hepatic graft fibrosis in LSBT children and to compare them with those in LT children.

METHODS

We retrospectively included children younger than 19 years who had received a primary LT/LSBT between 2000 and 2018 and had a liver biopsy performed at least 6 months post-transplant. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to determine predictors associated with significant hepatic graft fibrosis (≥F2) in LSBT vs LT children.

RESULTS

Ninety-six children (47 LSBT, 54 females) were included. The median post-transplant follow-up (years) was 12.8 in LT vs 10.5 in LSBT patients (P = .06). Hepatic graft fibrosis was found in 81.6% of LT vs 70.2% of LSBT children (P = .19), after a median time of 2.5 years and 2.6 years, respectively. On multivariate analyses, having post-transplant biliary complications was found to be associated with significant graft fibrosis in LT children, whereas AST/ALT ratio was found to predict significant hepatic graft fibrosis in LSBT children. The use of parenteral nutrition after transplant was not associated with significant hepatic graft fibrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of hepatic graft fibrosis in LSBT children did not significantly differ from that in LT children, but the predictors may differ. Future studies should investigate the role of post-transplant autoimmune antibodies and donor-specific antibodies in the development and progression of hepatic graft fibrosis in LSBT children.

Gaps in knowledge about the vaccine coverage of immunocompromised children: a scoping review

Immunocompromised children are at increased risk of severe illness from vaccine-preventable infections. However, inadequate vaccine coverage remains a concern. This scoping review sought to determine the current state of knowledge regarding vaccine coverage of immunocompromised children. Bibliographic databases were searched for primary research from any year. Data were analyzed quantitatively and narratively. Ninety-seven studies met inclusion criteria. The most commonly studied vaccines were pneumococcal (n = 46), influenza (n = 44), diphtheria/tetanus/pertussis/poliomyelitis/Haemophilus influenzae type B/hepatitis B-containing (n = 36), and measles- and/or mumps- and/or rubella-containing (n = 29). Immunocompromising conditions studied included cancer/stem cell transplants (n = 24), solid organ transplants (n = 23), sickle cell disease (n = 21), immunosuppressive therapy (n = 14), human immunodeficiency virus (n = 12), splenectomy (n = 4), and primary immunodeficiency (n = 2). As more children are treated with immunosuppressive therapies, it is critical to identify whether they are being appropriately vaccinated for age and condition. We identified gaps in the current state of knowledge for specific vaccine types in specific immunocompromised populations.

A randomized, controlled trial comparing the immunogenicity and safety of a 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination to a repeated dose 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccination in adult liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Solid organ transplant (SOT) patients are at significant risk for invasive pneumococcal disease. The optimal pneumococcal vaccination strategy for SOT patients is not known.

METHODS

The potential adult liver transplant recipients were randomised into two arms: to receive a 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) before the transplantation or to receive a 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) before the transplantation and a second dose of PCV13 six months after the transplantation. Serotype-specific antibody concentrations and opsonophagocytic activity (OPA) were measured before and after the first vaccination (visits V1,V2) and six and seven months after the transplantation, e.g. before and after the second PCV13 (visits V3,V4).

RESULTS

Out of 47 patients, 19 (PCV13 arm) and 17 (PPV23 arm) received a liver transplant and all these patients completed the study (36/47, 76,6%). Each vaccine schedule elicited a good immune response. At V2, the geometric mean concentrations (GMĆs) of antibodies for serotypes 6A, 7F and 23F, and the geometric mean titers (GMT́s) of OPA for serotypes 4, 6A, 6B and 23F were significantly higher for PCV13, but the proportions of patients reaching OPA cut-off ≥ 8 or ELISA cut-off ≥ 1.0 µg/ml did not differ between the arms. At V3 the antibody concentrations and the OPA had declined to baseline in both arms. The second PCV13 vaccination elicited an immune response. There was no difference in adverse events. No vaccine-related allograft rejection was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

The immunogenicity of PPV23 and PCV13 was comparable in this patient material, but the seroresponses waned after transplantation. The second dose of PCV13 restored the immune responses and was well tolerated.