Vaccination practices in pediatric transplantation: A survey among member centers of the European reference network TransplantChild

No Vaccine, No Organ? Ethics of Vaccine Mandates for Pediatric Transplant

Many transplant programs worldwide are likely to impose vaccine mandates for pediatric solid organ transplant candidates; some already do. Three potential benefits that advocates invoke to justify mandates are improved patient outcomes, efficient organ allocation, and contributions to community protection. We show that none of these benefits can justify mandates. The medical benefits of mandates are unlikely to outweigh the risks of denying life-saving care, mandates threaten trust and equity in organ allocation, and the impact on community protection is likely negligible, while the burden on unvaccinated children would be disproportionate. We also reject the claim that clinician burdens in dealing with vaccine refusers are good reasons for mandates, and point out, to the contrary, that the potential political backlash to mandates is a good reason for restraint. Rather, we argue that vaccine mandates for pediatric transplant candidates should be a last resort; they should only be considered after all evidence-based noncoercive measures have been exhausted, and after mandates for transplant professionals and staff are in place. Since there is little evidence that all such measures have been attempted, it is premature to consider vaccine mandates.

Vaccines and Vaccine Response in the Small Bowel Transplant Patient

Vaccines should be regularly administered and their efficiency controlled, before and after intestinal transplantation. The household and health care providers should also be immunized, to further prevent transmission. Universal vaccination providing " herd immunity" should be enforced. Recommendations are given about timing, indications, and contraindications of each individual vaccine, before and after transplantation.

Live Vaccine and Varicella Postexposure Prophylaxis in Pediatric Liver Transplant Recipients: A Survey of Practice in Australia and New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Administration of live vaccines following liver transplant (LT) has historically not been recommended due to concerns regarding risk of vaccine-attenuated disease. However, there is evidence suggesting that in select transplant recipients live vaccinations can be administered safely. Studies in other regions have indicated that despite this evidence many clinicians remain hesitant to administer live vaccinations.

METHOD

A REDCap survey was distributed to gastroenterologists, pediatricians, and infectious diseases physicians at pediatric centers across Australia and New Zealand via email between September and November 2023. The survey included a series of questions regarding live vaccine and varicella postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) practices in pediatric LT recipients and barriers to live vaccine administration in this cohort.

RESULTS

There was a total of 16 responses to the survey, from 10 different pediatric centers, including 10/11 pediatric gastroenterology centers and all four pediatric LT centers in the region. Only 31% (5/16) of respondents (from 3/10 different centers) offer live vaccines. The main barrier to live vaccine administration was clinician reluctance and the main reason for not offering live vaccines was insufficient safety data. Sixty-nine percent (11/16) of respondents take vaccination status and/or serology into account when deciding whether to offer varicella PEP to this cohort. Respondents universally offer varicella zoster immunoglobulin as PEP, though 31% (5/16) also offer antiviral medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Many clinicians in our region remain hesitant to provide live vaccines to pediatric LT recipients, with concerns regarding insufficient safety data. Updated local guidelines may help to address this.

Live-attenuated vaccination for measles, mumps, and rubella in pediatric liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Infections are a serious short- and long-term problem after pediatric organ transplantation. In immunocompromised patients, they can lead to transplant rejection or a severe course with a sometimes fatal outcome. Vaccination is an appropriate means of reducing morbidity and mortality caused by vaccine-preventable diseases. Unfortunately, due to the disease or its course, it is not always possible to establish adequate vaccine protection against live-attenuated viral vaccines (LAVVs) prior to transplantation. LAVVs such as measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) are still contraindicated in solid organ transplant recipients receiving immunosuppressive therapy (IST), thus creating a dilemma.

AIM

This review discusses whether, when, and how live-attenuated MMR vaccines can be administered effectively and safely to pediatric liver transplant recipients based on the available data.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We searched PubMed for literature on live-attenuated MMR vaccination in pediatric liver transplantation (LT).

RESULTS

Nine prospective observational studies and three retrospective case series were identified in which at least 833 doses of measles vaccine were administered to 716 liver transplant children receiving IST. In these selected patients, MMR vaccination was well tolerated and no serious adverse reactions to the vaccine were observed. In addition, an immune response to the vaccine was demonstrated in patients receiving IST.

CONCLUSION

Due to inadequate vaccine protection in this high-risk group, maximum efforts must be made to ensure full immunization. MMR vaccination could also be considered for unprotected patients after LT receiving IST following an individual risk assessment, as severe harm from live vaccines after liver transplantation has been reported only very rarely. To this end, it is important to establish standardized and simple criteria for the selection of suitable patients and the administration of the MMR vaccine to ensure safe use.

Adherence to recommended vaccination policies for pre- and post-solid organ transplantation patients: A national questionnaire survey in Japan

BACKGROUND

Pre-transplant vaccination is recommended for patients undergoing solid organ transplantation (SOT). While appropriate vaccination protocols are implemented at some facilities, transplantation is sometimes performed with inadequate preoperative vaccine management. Vaccination rates vary across facilities, but those of SOT centers in Japan have never been investigated. This study aimed to conduct a nationwide questionnaire survey to assess pre- and post-transplant vaccination policies among SOT facilities in Japan.

METHODS

The survey was conducted from September to November 2022. All registered (n = 221) solid organ (namely, the lungs, liver, kidneys, pancreas, heart, and small intestine) transplant facilities were asked to complete a web-based survey.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 70.2 %. Live and inactivated vaccines were recommended at 64.9 % and 68.9 % of the responding facilities, respectively. The following vaccines were incorporated into the vaccination protocols of facilities: pneumococcal vaccine, 31.7 % (13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine) and 65.4 % (23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine); hepatitis B virus vaccine, 67.3 %; severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine, 73.1 %; influenza vaccine, 73.1 %; and zoster vaccines, 23.1 %. The reasons for unresponsiveness to vaccinations included inadequate time before transplantation (60.3 %), cost burden (41.1 %), high number of vaccinations (21.9 %), no recognition of the need for vaccination (17.9 %), and the requirement to explain the need for vaccination (15.2 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed gaps in vaccination practices across nationwide facilities in Japan. The findings indicate the importance of promoting scheduled efficiency and encouraging the national health system to reduce vaccine costs with the support of public subsidies.