Infectious disease consultation is effective in boosting vaccine coverage in patients awaiting kidney transplantation: A French prospective study

The pre-transplant evaluation: Considerations for trainees and early career transplant infectious diseases clinician

Transplant infectious disease (TID) clinicians are integral to the pre-transplantation evaluation. Pre-transplant evaluations allow clinicians to assess risk factors for latent infections and relevant exposures to potential pathogens, address immunizations, and optimize patients' health and understanding of life after transplant. However, there is not a standardized approach to the pre-transplant evaluation. This article reviews the details of performing successful pre-transplant evaluations, including updated recommendations on available vaccines and contemporary opinions on marijuana use. This resource can be used for teaching with trainees or for early career TID clinicians.

Infection prevention for immunocompromised patients: A cross-translational multicentric survey of current organization in France

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate current organization of infection prevention for immunocompromised patients (ICP) at a countrywide level.

METHODS

Nationwide cross-sectional multicenter study based on an online survey disseminated in 2022 to physicians invested with preventive healthcare missions.

RESULTS

A total of 341 physicians (96% graduates, 32% infectious disease specialists), participated in the survey, with a median age of 40 [35-51] years. On-site access to infection prevention consultations for ICP was reported by 30%, dedicated pre-travel consultations for ICPs by 29%, consultations for infection prevention in solid organ transplant candidates by 16% and return-to-work consultations for ICPs by 6%. Most participants (73%) were aware of nationwide vaccination guidelines for ICP, while 50% felt comfortable using them. Tools for infection prevention advice and ICP vaccination had been developed by 10%, while 89% would have appreciated access to tools developed by others.

CONCLUSIONS

Infection prevention for ICPs remains neglected. Guidelines covering all fields of prevention for ICPs would be more than welcome.

Recent changes to adult national immunization programs for pneumococcal vaccination in Europe and how they impact coverage: A systematic review of published and grey literature

Despite widespread use of pneumococcal vaccines throughout Europe, the burden of pneumococcal disease (PD) in adults is considerable. To mitigate this burden, National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies assess the value of different vaccine schedules for protecting against PD. The aim of this review was to assess the evidence and rationales used by NITAGs/HTA agencies, when considering recent changes to National Immunization Programs (NIPs) for adults, and how identified changes affected vaccine coverage rates (VCRs). A systematic review was conducted of published literature from PubMed® and Embase®, and gray literature from HTA/NITAG websites from the last 5 y, covering 31 European countries. Evidence related to NIP recommendations, epidemiology (invasive PD, pneumonia), health economic assessments and VCRs were collected and synthesized. Eighty-four records providing data for 26 countries were identified. Of these, eight described explicit changes to NIPs for adults in seven countries. Despite data gaps, some trends were observed; first, there appears to be a convergence of NIP recommendations in many countries toward sequential vaccination, with a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV), followed by pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine 23. Second, reducing economic or healthcare burden were common rationales for implementing changes. Third, most health economic analyses assessing higher-valency PCVs for adults found its inclusion in NIPs cost-effective. Finally, higher coverage rates were seen in most cases where countries had expanded their NIPs to cover at-risk populations. The findings can encourage agencies to improve surveillance systems and work to reach the NIP's target populations more effectively.

Implementation of a vaccination clinic for adult solid organ transplant candidates: A single-center experience

Vaccination is an evidence-based strategy to prevent or reduce the severity of infectious diseases (ID). Here, we aimed to describe the experience of implementing a vaccination clinic specifically targeting liver, heart, lung, and combined dual organ transplantation at a single transplantation center in Denmark. In this cohort of 242 solid organ transplant (SOT) candidates, we investigated seroprotection and the proportion of recommended vaccinations documented before transplantation. Furthermore, we registered completed vaccinations after ID consultations. The median age in our cohort was 53 years (IQR, 42-60), 60% were males (n = 135), and liver transplants (n = 138; 57%) were the most frequently planned organ transplants. Before the consultation to the vaccination clinic, influenza and pneumococcal vaccines had the highest proportion of documented vaccination (58% and 37%, respectively). Serological protection was more frequently observed for measles, mumps, or rubella (MMR, approximately 90% for each), while only 30% (n = 72) of SOT candidates showed seroprotection against pneumococcal disease. All SOT candidates required at least one of the recommended vaccines, and over 90% required three or more. At least 10% of patients in our cohort needed a live attenuated vaccine for either MMR or yellow fever. The most frequently administered vaccine was the tetanus-diphtheria-acelullar pertussis (Tdap) booster (n = 217; 90%), influenza vaccination was either administered (n = 16; 7%) or recommended (n = 226; 93%), PCV13 was administered (n = 155; 64%) or recommended (n = 27; 11%), and PPSV23 was either administered (n = 18; 7.4%) or recommended (n = 140; 58%). All SOT candidates adhered completely to their vaccination schedules. Based on our findings, we recommend prioritizing vaccination before transplantation by providing ID consultations for SOT candidates.

Vaccination in Kidney Transplant Candidates

Background

Kidney transplant (KT) candidates have historically low immunization rates against recommended vaccines. A retrospective single-center study of contemporary KT candidates was conducted to assess vaccination rates and vaccine uptake.

Methods

All KT candidates ≥18 y evaluated between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, were retrospectively reviewed for history of prior vaccination against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis; 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine; 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine; and recombinant zoster vaccine. Positive hepatitis A IgG total, hepatitis B surface antibody, measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella IgG were assessed as surrogate markers of immunity. Vaccine uptake among vaccine-eligible candidates was also assessed.

Results

Among 150 KT candidates, the rate of prior vaccination against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis; 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine; 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine; and recombinant zoster vaccine (latter among patients ≥50 y) was found to be as low as 11%. Hepatitis A IgG total, hepatitis B surface antibody, measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella IgG seropositivity rates were 30%, 66%, 88%, 78%, 90%, and 96%, respectively. Only 7 (5%) of 150 patients had complete immunization or seropositivity. Five (3%) of 143 vaccine-eligible patients declined vaccination. Hepatitis A vaccine declination was relatively common with 15 (16%) of 94 vaccine-eligible patients declining it.

Conclusions

KT candidates have low baseline rates of prior immunization/seropositivity against most recommended vaccines. Overall vaccine uptake among eligible candidates was high.

Disparities in vaccination rates in solid organ transplant patients

INTRODUCTION

Vaccinations against preventable respiratory infections such as Streptococcus pneumoniae and influenza are important in immunosuppressed solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Little is known about the role of age, race, ethnicity, sex, and sociodemographic factors including rurality, or socioeconomic status (SES) associated with vaccine uptake in this population.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based study using the Rochester Epidemiology Project, a medical records linkage system, to assess socioeconomic and demographic factors associated with influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates among adult recipients of solid organ transplantation (aged 19-64 years) living in four counties in southeastern Minnesota. Vaccination data were obtained from the Minnesota Immunization Information Connection from June 1, 2010 to June 30, 2020. Vaccination rate was assessed with Poisson and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 468 SOT recipients were identified with an overall vaccination rate of 57%-63% for influenza and 56% for pneumococcal vaccines. As expected, vaccination for pneumococcal vaccine positively correlated with influenza vaccination. Rural patients had decreased vaccination in both compared to urban patients, even after adjusting for age, sex, race, ethnicity, and SES. Although the population was mostly White and non-Hispanic, neither vaccination differed by race or ethnicity, but influenza vaccination did by SES. Among organ transplant groups, liver and lung recipients were least vaccinated for influenza, and heart recipients were least up-to-date on pneumococcal vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of vaccination were below national goals. Rurality was associated with undervaccination. Further investigation is needed to understand and address barriers to vaccination among transplant recipients.

Impact of a Dedicated Pretransplant Infectious Disease Consultation on Respiratory Tract Infections in Kidney Allograft Recipients: A Retrospective Study of 516 Recipients

BACKGROUND

Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are a leading cause of death after kidney transplant. Preventive strategies may be implemented during a dedicated infectious disease consultation (IDC) before transplantation. Impact of IDC on RTIs after transplant has not been determined.

METHODS

We conducted a monocentric retrospective cohort analysis including all kidney transplant recipients from January 2015 to December 2019. We evaluated the impact of IDC on RTIs and identified risk and protective factors associated with RTIs.

RESULTS

We included 516 kidney transplant recipients. Among these, 145 had an IDC before transplant. Ninety-five patients presented 123 RTIs, including 75 (61%) with pneumonia. Patient that benefited from IDC presented significantly less RTIs (p = 0.049). RTIs were an independent risk factor of mortality (HR = 3.64 (1.97-6.73)). Independent risk factors for RTIs included HIV (OR = 3.33 (1.43-7.74)) and HCV (OR = 3.76 (1.58-8.96)). IDC was identified as an independent protective factor (OR = 0.48 (0.26-0.88)). IDC prior to transplantation is associated with diminished RTIs and is an independent protective factor. RTIs after kidney transplant are an independent risk factor of death. Implementing systematic IDC may have an important impact on reducing RTIs and related morbidity and mortality.

Approaches to pretransplant vaccination

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study was to summarize new data and perspectives in pretransplant vaccination, with a particular focus on COVID-19 vaccination and vaccination requirements.

RECENT FINDINGS

Pretransplant vaccination produces superior markers of immunity and is expected to have greater clinical benefit, compared with posttransplant vaccination. As such, efforts are underway to identify and characterize barriers to pretransplant vaccination, with a particular focus on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Unfortunately, vaccine hesitancy is common in transplant patients, often motivated by individual side effect and safety concerns. COVID-19 vaccination requirements have been implemented in some centres, informed by ethical principles, including beneficence, utility and justice.

SUMMARY

Barriers to pretransplant vaccination can be understood in three categories: hard stops, including issues of vaccine availability, eligibility, safety and feasibility; soft stops, including issues of convenience, prioritization and care coordination; and volitional stops related to vaccine hesitancy and refusal. All of these barriers present opportunities for improvement based on recent data.