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

Clinical Manifestations and Management of Fibrotic Pulmonary Sarcoidosis

Fibrotic pulmonary sarcoidosis represents a distinct and relatively uncommon manifestation within the spectrum of sarcoidosis and has substantial morbidity and mortality. Due to the scarcity of research focused on this specific disease subtype, our current understanding of pathogenesis and optimal management remains constrained. This knowledge gap underscores the need for further investigation into areas such as targeted therapies, lung transplantation, and quality of life of patients with fibrotic pulmonary sarcoidosis. The primary aim of this review is to discuss recent developments within the realm of fibrotic pulmonary sarcoidosis to foster a more comprehensive understanding of the underlying mechanisms, prognosis, and potential treatment modalities.

Hypogammaglobulinemia, late-onset neutropenia, and infections following rituximab

Rituximab is a chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that targets CD20-expressing B lymphocytes, has a well-defined efficacy and safety profile, and is broadly used to treat a wide array of diseases. In this review, we cover the mechanism of action of rituximab and focus on hypogammaglobulinemia and late-onset neutropenia-2 immune effects secondary to rituximab-and subsequent infection. We review risk factors and highlight key considerations for immunologic monitoring and clinical management of rituximab-induced secondary immune deficiencies. In patients treated with rituximab, monitoring for hypogammaglobulinemia and infections may help to identify the subset of patients at high risk for developing poor B cell reconstitution, subsequent infections, and adverse complications. These patients may benefit from early interventions such as vaccination, antibacterial prophylaxis, and immunoglobulin replacement therapy. Systematic evaluation of immunoglobulin levels and peripheral B cell counts by flow cytometry, both at baseline and periodically after therapy, is recommended for monitoring. In addition, in those patients with prolonged hypogammaglobulinemia and increased infections after rituximab use, immunologic evaluation for inborn errors of immunity may be warranted to further risk stratification, increase monitoring, and assist in therapeutic decision-making. As the immunologic effects of rituximab are further elucidated, personalized approaches to minimize the risk of adverse reactions while maximizing benefit will allow for improved care of patients with decreased morbidity and mortality.

Preventative Care in Scleroderma: What Is the Best Approach to Vaccination?

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare multisystem autoimmune disease characterized by fibrosis, vasculopathy, and autoimmunity. There are multiple complications inherent to SSc and its management. One of these complications is increased infection risk, which can lead to decreased quality of life and increased morbidity and mortality. Patients with SSc have lower vaccination rates and decreased vaccine seroconversion secondary to immunosuppressive medications compared with the general population. The purpose of this review is to provide clinicians with an approach to vaccinations in SSc.

2022 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for Vaccinations in Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of vaccinations in children and adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

METHODS

This guideline follows American College of Rheumatology (ACR) policy guiding management of conflicts of interest and disclosures and the ACR guideline development process, which includes the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. It also adheres to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. A core leadership team consisting of adult and pediatric rheumatologists and a guideline methodologist drafted clinical population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. A review team performed a systematic literature review for the PICO questions, graded the quality of evidence, and produced an evidence report. An expert Voting Panel reviewed the evidence and formulated recommendations. The panel included adult and pediatric rheumatology providers, infectious diseases specialists, and patient representatives. Consensus required ≥70% agreement on both the direction and strength of each recommendation.

RESULTS

This guideline includes expanded indications for some vaccines in patients with RMDs, as well as guidance on whether to hold immunosuppressive medications or delay vaccination to maximize vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. Safe approaches to the use of live attenuated vaccines in patients taking immunosuppressive medications are also addressed. Most recommendations are conditional and had low quality of supporting evidence.

CONCLUSION

Application of these recommendations should consider patients' individual risk for vaccine-preventable illness and for disease flares, particularly if immunosuppressive medications are held for vaccination. Shared decision-making with patients is encouraged in clinical settings.

2022 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for Vaccinations in Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of vaccinations in children and adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

METHODS

This guideline follows American College of Rheumatology (ACR) policy guiding management of conflicts of interest and disclosures and the ACR guideline development process, which includes the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. It also adheres to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. A core leadership team consisting of adult and pediatric rheumatologists and a guideline methodologist drafted clinical population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. A review team performed a systematic literature review for the PICO questions, graded the quality of evidence, and produced an evidence report. An expert Voting Panel reviewed the evidence and formulated recommendations. The panel included adult and pediatric rheumatology providers, infectious diseases specialists, and patient representatives. Consensus required ≥70% agreement on both the direction and strength of each recommendation.

RESULTS

This guideline includes expanded indications for some vaccines in patients with RMDs, as well as guidance on whether to hold immunosuppressive medications or delay vaccination to maximize vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. Safe approaches to the use of live attenuated vaccines in patients taking immunosuppressive medications are also addressed. Most recommendations are conditional and had low quality of supporting evidence.

CONCLUSION

Application of these recommendations should consider patients' individual risk for vaccine-preventable illness and for disease flares, particularly if immunosuppressive medications are held for vaccination. Shared decision-making with patients is encouraged in clinical settings.

Immunogenicity of the hepatitis B vaccine adjuvanted with AS04C in patients with biological therapies

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B vaccination is necessary for patients with biologic therapies because of the immunomodulatory effect of these drugs. Due to the elevated use of these therapies in the latest years, the research for new vaccination regimens and the improvement of the current ones is essential. New adjuvants like AS04C might be a potential strategy to improve immune response. Hepatitis B vaccine adjuvanted with AS04C has not been studied in this population before. We analyzed the immunogenicity of an adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine in patients with biologic therapies. Variables that might affect vaccine response were also evaluated.

METHODS

Analytic observational retrospective cohort study performed between January 2016 and September 2018. 301 patients under biological treatment aged from 18 years were included. Patients received 4 doses of hepatitis B adjuvanted vaccine (Fendrix®) in a 0-1-2-6 month immunization schedule. Several sociodemographic, clinical and pharmacological variables were evaluated. The outcome variable was measured as the antibody titers (anti-HBs). The geometric mean of titers (GMT) as a measure for the central tendency was calculated from these values.

RESULTS

The immunization schedule of the hepatitis B vaccine adjuvanted with AS04C demonstrated high levels of seroconversion with 82.1 % (95 % CI, 77.6-86.6) of vaccinated patients seroconverting after primary vaccination and achieving 89.0 % (95 % IC, 85.3-92.7) after the booster doses for non-responders. The use of corticosteroid therapy and high doses of them, age over 60 years and the main diagnosis were associated with lower seroconversion rates and lower anti-HBs titers.

CONCLUSIONS

The hepatitis B vaccine adjuvanted with AS04C (Fendrix®) produces an adequate immune response in patients with autoimmune diseases and immunosuppressive and/or immunomodulating therapies. This immunization schedule is proposed as a very suitable and adapted option for the protection of patients with autoimmune diseases under active biological therapies.

Management of Infections in Psoriatic Patients Treated with Systemic Therapies: A Lesson from the Immunopathogenesis of Psoriasis

Modern treatments continue to be developed based on identifying targets within the innate and adaptive immune pathways associated with psoriasis. Whilst there is a sound biologic rationale for increased risk of infection following treatment with immunomodulators, the clinical evidence is confounded by these agents being used in patients affected with several comorbidities. In an era characterized by an ever greater and growing risk of infections, it is necessary to always be updated on this risk. In this mini-review, we will discuss recent updates in psoriasis immunopathogenesis as a rationale for systemic therapy, outline the risk of infections linked to the disease itself and systemic therapy as well, and provide an overview of the prevention and management of infections.

Safety and Efficacy of Covid-19 Vaccination in Patients Undergoing Biological Treatments for Psoriasis

The introduction of biologic drugs revolutionized the treatment of psoriasis, shifting treatment goals to higher treatment outcomes and less frequent safety issues. The outbreak of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) represented a worldwide challenge, strongly affecting lifestyle, global economy, and overall health. Among the strategies adopted to contain the spreading of the infection, vaccination is the main one. In this context, the introduction of COVID-19 vaccines raised several doubts about their effectiveness and safety in patients undergoing therapy with biological for psoriasis. Even if molecular and cellular mechanisms by which COVID-19 vaccines lead to psoriasis development have not yet been fully elucidated, vaccination itself can trigger the release of interleukin (IL)-6, interferon (IFN) and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) α by T-helper (Th)1/Th17 cells. All these cytokines are involved in psoriasis pathogenesis. Thus, the aim of this manuscript is to review current literature on the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in psoriasis patients undergoing treatment with biologics, in order to clarify any concerns.

Immunogenicity and safety of the mRNA-based BNT162b2 vaccine in systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases patients

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 outbreak has led to the rapid development and administration of the COVID-19 vaccines worldwide. Data about the immunogenicity and adverse effects of the vaccine on patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs) is emerging.

AIM

To evaluate Pfizer/BioNTech (BNT162b2) mRNA-based vaccine second-dose immunogenicity and safety, and the relation between them, in patients with SARDs.

METHODS

A total of one hundred forty tow adults who received two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine were included in the study. The SARDs group included Ninety-nine patients and the control group (forty-three participants) comprised a mixture of healthy participants and patients who were seen at the rheumatology clinic for non-SARDs. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies against the Spike protein were evaluated using a SARS-CoV-2 IgG immunoassay. A level of > 150 AU/mL was considered positive. An adverse effects questionnaire was given to the participants upon their first visit to the clinic after their BNT162b2 vaccination.

RESULTS

Of the 142 participants, 116 were seropositive (81.7%) and 26 (18.3%) were seronegative. Of the seronegative participants, 96.2% were SARDs patients. The proportion of seropositivity in the SARDs patients treated with any immunosuppressant was significantly lower (69.9%) compared to the control group and SARDs patients not receiving immunosuppressants (96.8%). A significant negative correlation between seronegativity and treatment with rituximab, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and prednisone was found in the SARDs group (p = 0.004, 0.044, 0.007 respectively). No fever was observed following the BNT162b2 vaccine in seronegative patients, and the frequency of musculoskeletal adverse effects upon the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine was significantly higher in seropositive compared to seronegative patients and in the control group compared to the SARDs patients (p = 0.045, p = 0.02 respectively).

CONCLUSION

A decline in the immunogenicity to the second dose of BNT162b2 mRNA is seen in patients with SARDs, especially in patients treated with rituximab, MMF, and prednisone. Adverse effects of the vaccine including fever and musculoskeletal symptoms might be a signal for the acquisition of immunity in those patients.

KEY POINTS

• BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine is less immunogenic in SARDs patients compared to the control group. • Rituximab, prednisone, and mycophenolate mofetil significantly reduced immunogenicity to the vaccine. • There is a correlation between immunogenicity and adverse effects of the vaccine.

Guidance for Administering Biologics for Severe Asthma and Allergic Conditions

Asthma is a common respiratory disorder in Canada for which biologics may be prescribed for poorly controlled illness. Treatment with biologics, however, is sometimes inappropriately discontinued due to misconceptions regarding their potential immunologic effects, and concerns surrounding their continued use in severe asthma during the COVID-19 pandemic continue to propagate. Biologics can still be administered in a majority of health and treatment conditions. With regard to cardiac-related issues such as hypertension or cardiovascular disease (CVD), there is no solid evidence that suggests biologics should be withheld, as the benefits of treatment outweigh the risks. Asthmatic patients on biologic treatment should also continue treatment if they have, or are currently being treated for, a respiratory infection, including COVID-19. Evidence also indicates the importance of maintaining asthma control to reduce the risk of severe COVID-19 infection. Biologic treatment can be administered in severe asthmatic patients with bronchiectasis, though further evidence is needed to better understand the benefits. Biologic treatment should be continued postsurgery to reduce postoperative respiratory complications, as well as throughout the course of pregnancy. Regarding concerns over vaccine administration, nearly all vaccines can be given without interruption of biologic treatment in patients with severe asthma or allergic conditions. Appropriate screening for respiratory illnesses, such as COVID-19, continues to be warranted in clinical practices to reduce the risk of transmission. As recommendations from public health and regulatory agencies have been lacking, this guidance document addresses the administration of biologics in different health circumstances and respiratory illness screening during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Safety of mRNA COVID ‐19 vaccines in patients with well controlled myasthenia gravis

Introduction/Aims

Data on safety and tolerability of the vaccines against severe acute respiratory virus coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2, or coronavirus disease‐2019 [COVID‐19]) in patients with myasthenia gravis (MG) are currently limited. In this study we investigated the safety of mRNA‐based two‐dose vaccination in a cohort of patients with MG.

Methods

This investigation was a prospective observational study of messenger RNA (mRNA)‐based vaccines administered to patients with MG with stable disease. Local and systemic reactogenicity after injection was monitored for each dose administered. The patients were categorized and clinically assessed following the recommendations of the Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America.

Results

Thirty‐six males and 55 females (mean age at first vaccine dose, 58.8 years; standard deviation, = 17.1 years) received vaccines. Seventy‐two patients (79.1%) were taking one or more immunosuppressant(s). The most frequent adverse effects were injection‐site pain, fatigue, myalgia, chills, fever, and headache. Local and systemic reactions were transient; 58.2% of the patients developed one or more reaction(s). There were no anaphylactic reactions. None of the patients had a myasthenic crisis, and two developed a mild deterioration compared with their Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis baseline score. The clinical outcome scores showed no exacerbation of MG symptoms. Patients over 65 years of age developed fewer adverse effects. COVID‐19 vaccination did not induce clinical exacerbation in stable patients with MG, regardless of their age, sex, history of myasthenic crisis, or whether they were taking immunosuppressants.

Discussion

Our data are consistent with the mRNA COVID‐19 vaccine being well tolerated in patients with well‐controlled MG. The findings may contribute to decisions in vaccination campaigns in the future.

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.

The COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences for chronic pain: a narrative review

The COVID-19 pandemic transformed everyday life, but the implications were most impactful for vulnerable populations, including patients with chronic pain. Moreover, persistent pain is increasingly recognised as a key manifestation of long COVID. This narrative review explores the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic for chronic pain. Publications were identified related to the COVID-19 pandemic influence on the burden of chronic pain, development of new-onset pain because of long COVID with proposed mechanisms and COVID-19 vaccines and pain interventions. Broadly, mechanisms underlying pain due to SARS-CoV-2 infection could be caused by 'systemic inflammatory-immune mechanisms', 'direct neuropathic mechanisms' or 'secondary mechanisms due to the viral infection or treatment'. Existing chronic pain populations were variably impacted and social determinants of health appeared to influence the degree of effect. SARS-CoV-2 infection increased the absolute numbers of patients with pain and headache. In the acute phase, headache as a presenting symptom predicted a milder course. New-onset chronic pain was reportedly common and likely involves multiple mechanisms; however, its prevalence decreases over time and symptoms appear to fluctuate. Patients requiring intensive support were particularly susceptible to long COVID symptoms. Some evidence suggests steroid exposure (often used for pain interventions) may affect vaccine efficacy, but there is no evidence of clinical repercussions to date. Although existing chronic pain management could help with symptomatic relief, there is a need to advance research focusing on mechanism-based treatments within the domain of multidisciplinary care.

Watch out for neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder onset or clinical relapse after COVID-19 vaccination: What neurologists need to know?

Introduction

The ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically impacted our lives. We conducted this systematic review to investigate the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines in NMOSD patients.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase from the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination to March 1, 2022. Except for the letters, posters, and reviews, we included all related articles to answer two main questions. Our first question examined the occurrence of NMOSD onset as an adverse effect of the COVID-19 vaccine. Our second question investigated the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines in NMOSD patients.

Results

Out of 262 records, nine studies, including five studies for the first question and four studies for the second question, met the inclusion criteria. Out of the six patients with NMOSD onset after COVID-19 vaccination, five (83.3%) were female. The median time to NMOSD onset was 6.5 days, and the frequency of the COVID-19 vaccine type was identical in all patients. The most common presentation was longitudinally extensive transverse myelitis, significantly improved by pulse methylprednisolone with or without plasma exchange. The maintenance therapy was described only in three patients: rituximab (n=2) and azathioprine (n=1). Regarding the second question, out of 67 patients, 77.61% were female, with a mean age of 54.75 years old, a mean EDSS of 2.83, and a mean disease duration of 9.5 years. 77% reported at least one preexisting comorbidity. 88.05% were under treatment, most of which were rituximab and azathioprine. 98.50% received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. mRNA vaccines were the most commonly used vaccine(86.56%), which were well tolerated. No significant adverse event was reported, and local pain was the most frequently reported. 4.67% of the patients experienced a clinical relapse after a mean interval of 49.75 days, which was mainly mild to moderate in severity. Unfortunately, the data on the COVID-19 vaccines were missing.

Conclusion

The analysis suggests the safety profile of the COVID-19 vaccines. All NMOSD patients are strongly recommended to vaccinate for COVID-19. To maximize the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines, further studies are needed to draw the best practice for vaccination.

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.

Vaccines and myasthenia gravis: a comprehensive review and retrospective study of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in a large cohort of myasthenic patients

Introduction

Myasthenia gravis (MG) is an autoimmune disease, for which the risk of exacerbation after vaccines is debated. The aim of this study is to review the available literature concerning safety and efficacy of vaccines in MG. In addition, we also conducted a retrospective research of MG exacerbations and new onset MG after anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in a large cohort of patients.

Methods

A study of the available literature regarding vaccines and MG was carried out through research in the online database “Pubmed”. We also retrospectively collected data from 80 MG patients, who were followed at the Treviso Hospital and completed an anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination cycle. For each patient, we recorded MG exacerbations between first and second doses and within a window period of 1 day – 6 weeks after the second dose.

Results

We found 26 relevant articles about influenza, SARS-CoV-2 and other vaccines. No clear associations between most vaccines and MG exacerbations were found. Moreover, cases of new onset post-vaccine MG are mostly anecdotal, except for Japanese encephalitis virus vaccine. Concerning our cohort, 4/80 (5%) MG patients experienced an exacerbation within the post-vaccine window period. In addition, we report a case of new onset post-vaccine MG.

Discussion

Inactivated and subunit vaccines are safe and effective in MG. Although some of them, such as anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, might uncommonly cause MG exacerbations, data from our review suggest that benefits still outweigh by far the potential risks, thus they should be recommended to these patients. Nevertheless, large prospective studies are needed for further investigations.

Practical guidance for the diagnosis and management of secondary hypogammaglobulinemia: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Primary Immunodeficiency and Altered Immune Response Committees

Secondary hypogammaglobulinemia (SHG) is characterized by reduced immunoglobulin levels due to acquired causes of decreased antibody production or increased antibody loss. Clarification regarding whether the hypogammaglobulinemia is secondary or primary is important because this has implications for evaluation and management. Prior receipt of immunosuppressive medications and/or presence of conditions associated with SHG development, including protein loss syndromes, are histories that raise suspicion for SHG. In patients with these histories, a thorough investigation of potential etiologies of SHG reviewed in this report is needed to devise an effective treatment plan focused on removal of iatrogenic causes (eg, discontinuation of an offending drug) or treatment of the underlying condition (eg, management of nephrotic syndrome). When iatrogenic causes cannot be removed or underlying conditions cannot be reversed, therapeutic options are not clearly delineated but include heightened monitoring for clinical infections, supportive antimicrobials, and in some cases, immunoglobulin replacement therapy. This report serves to summarize the existing literature regarding immunosuppressive medications and populations (autoimmune, neurologic, hematologic/oncologic, pulmonary, posttransplant, protein-losing) associated with SHG and highlights key areas for future investigation.

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.

2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Recommendations for Nonpharmacologic Therapies, Medication Monitoring, Immunizations, and Imaging

OBJECTIVE

To provide recommendations for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with a focus on nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging, irrespective of JIA phenotype.

METHODS

We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations in this guideline include the use of physical therapy and occupational therapy interventions; a healthy, well-balanced, age-appropriate diet; specific laboratory monitoring for medications; widespread use of immunizations; and shared decision-making with patients/caregivers. Disease management for all patients with JIA is addressed with respect to nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional.

CONCLUSION

This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis, and a concurrent 2021 guideline on oligoarthritis, temporomandibular arthritis, and systemic JIA. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.

2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Recommendations for Nonpharmacologic Therapies, Medication Monitoring, Immunizations, and Imaging

OBJECTIVE

To provide recommendations for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with a focus on nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging, irrespective of JIA phenotype.

METHODS

We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations in this guideline include the use of physical therapy and occupational therapy interventions; a healthy, well-balanced, age-appropriate diet; specific laboratory monitoring for medications; widespread use of immunizations; and shared decision-making with patients/caregivers. Disease management for all patients with JIA is addressed with respect to nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional.

CONCLUSION

This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis, and a concurrent 2021 guideline on oligoarthritis, temporomandibular arthritis, and systemic JIA. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.

Efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of available vaccines in children on biologics: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Vaccinations are essential for preventing infectious diseases in children with chronic diseases as they have increased risk of infection from frequent use of biologics. Response to immunizations in this group is not well known.

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review was performed to evaluate three primary outcomes: efficacy; immunogenicity; and safety of vaccines in children with chronic conditions treated with biologics.

METHODS

The protocol for our systematic review and meta-analysis was registered and published with PROSPERO. We searched electronic bibliographic databases for studies published from 2009 to 2019, focusing on vaccinations in children with chronic conditions treated with biologics.

RESULTS

We retrieved 532 records. Thirty-one full-text articles were selected, and 14 were included in the meta-analysis. No significant publication bias was found.

EFFICACY

limited data are available regarding the efficacy of vaccination, as most studies have focused on immunogenicity as surrogate outcome for efficacy. Immunogenicity: patients receiving anti-TNF-alpha therapy had a statistically significant risk of poor seroconversion (p = 0.028) and seroprotection by the serotype B influenza vaccine [inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) p = 0.013; juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) p = 0.004]. We found adequate responses with H1N1 and H3N2 serotypes. Few studies existed for pneumococcal, hepatitis A virus, hepatitis B virus, varicella-zoster virus, Measles Mumps Rubella virus, and multiple vaccine administration.

SAFETY

vaccine administration was not associated with serious side effects, but JIA patients on anti-TNF alpha therapy had a statistically significant risk of presenting with myalgia or arthralgia postinfluenza vaccine (p = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

More evidence concerning efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of vaccinations is needed to guide physicians in the vaccine decision process for this pediatric population.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and practical points in psoriasis patients: a narrative review

SARS‐CoV2 vaccines were approved without long‐term monitoring due to emergent situations. This has raised some issues about timing and protocol of receiving vaccines in specific situations including patients with chronic inflammatory disorders such as psoriasis. Here, we present different aspects of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and vaccination in psoriasis patients and aim to provide solutions to overcome the potential challenges. In brief, the benefits of vaccination outweigh the potential risk; vaccine‐triggered de novo or flares of psoriasis is uncommon. As such, all psoriasis patients, especially those receiving systemic treatments including anti tumor necrosis factor agents, are strongly recommended to get SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccines. It is recommended that new immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapies be initiated at least 1 week after the second SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine dose, if possible. In addition, in severe and active forms of psoriasis, it is better to delay vaccination until stabilization of the disease.

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.

Asthma management updates

ABSTRACT

This article discusses recent updates on the clinical management of asthma and outlines ways for nurses to engage patients in the management of their disease.

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.

Antibody Response to BNT162b2 Vaccine in Immune Modifiers-Treated Psoriatic Patients

Background

Data regarding anti-COVID-19 vaccination efficacy in psoriasis patients treated with immune-modulatory medications are scarce.

Objective

This study aims to examine the rate of positive antibody response following BNT162b2 vaccine in those patients.

Methods

BNT162b2-vaccinated and immune modifier-treated psoriatic patients were assigned to serological testing of IgG antibodies to protein S of SARS-CoV-2 after the second vaccination dose by Abbott Architect or Beckman Coulter. Levels ≥ 1 S1 units/mL (S/ml) and > 150 arbitrary units/ml (AU/ml) are considered a positive antibody response, respectively. The antibody levels further analyzed according to the patient's characteristics and compared to health workers' controls.

Results

Forty-nine of the 51 patients had a positive antibody response. Overall, patients treated with immune-modulatory medications had antibody levels similar to the control group.

Conclusions

Immune modifier-treated psoriasis patients seem to develop a positive antibody response to the full BNT162b2 vaccination in the vast majority of cases.

Immunogenicity and safety of routine vaccines in children and adolescents with rheumatic diseases on immunosuppressive treatment - a systematic review

The immunogenicity of vaccines in children with juvenile autoimmune rheumatic diseases (JARDs) can be reduced, there are additional safety concerns around vaccination, and there is a potential for worsening in disease activity. In this systematic review, we summarise studies that investigated the immunogenicity and safety of routine vaccines in children and adolescents with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment. We identified 37 studies investigating 2571 children and adolescents with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment and 4895 control children. Of the 56 geometric mean antibody titres measured, 19 (34%) were lower, six (11%) higher, and 31 (55%) similar; of the 39 seroprotection rates measured, 10 (26%) were lower, two (5%) higher, and 27 (69%) similar; and of the 27 seroconversion rates measured, nine (33%) were lower, two (8%) higher, and 16 (59%) similar in children with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment compared with control children. However, many of the studies were underpowered, and not designed to show non-inferiority between children with JARD and controls. Subgroup analysis for different types of immunosuppressive treatments was not feasible, as most studies did not report results by treatment. Severe adverse events were reported in 38 children (33 with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, four with systemic lupus erythematosus, and one in a healthy child); most of them were likely not related to the vaccination (e.g. elective hospitalisation or surgery). A worsening in disease activity was reported in 44 (2%) children with JARD; again, many of them were likely not related to the vaccination. There were no safety concerns with live attenuated vaccines; however, only few studies reported results for this.

CONCLUSION

Vaccination in children with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment is safe and should be promoted, especially since these children are at increased risk for infection. The importance for the completion of vaccination schedules should be stressed. Strategies to compensate for the lower vaccine responses, which are found in approximately one-third of these children, include measuring antibody levels to determine the optimal timing for the administration of additional booster doses.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Children with juvenile autoimmune rheumatic diseases (JARDs) are at higher risk for infections, due to their underlying disease and their immunosuppressive treatment. • In children with JARD, the immunogenicity of vaccines might be reduced, and concerns about safety or the potential for worsening in disease activity after vaccination exist.

WHAT IS NEW

• Our systematic review shows that vaccines in children with JARDs on immunosuppressive treatment are safe and immunogenic. • There are several limitations of the currently published studies, including random timing of measuring vaccine responses and age differences between children with JARD and control groups. Many of the studies were underpowered, and not designed to show non-inferiority between children with JARD and controls.

Current Take on Systemic Sclerosis Patients' Vaccination Recommendations

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease. The prevalence of SSc ranges from 7 to 700 cases per million worldwide. Due to multiple organ involvement and constant inflammatory state, this group of patients presents an increased risk of infectious diseases. This paper aimed to gather the up-to-date evidence on vaccination strategies for patients with SSc and to be a useful tool for the prevention and management of infectious diseases. The authors conducted a scoping review in which each paragraph presents data on a specific vaccine’s safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy. The work deals with the following topics: SARS-CoV-2, seasonal influenza, S. pneumoniae, HAV, HBV, HZV, N. meningitidis, H. influenzae, HPV, and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.

Attention all anti-vaccinators: The cutaneous adverse events from the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are not an excuse to avoid them!

Despite the growing availability of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in the general population, a significant proportion of individuals demonstrate vaccine hesitancy. We sought to consolidate and update current evidence on cutaneous adverse events from COVID-19 vaccines to aid in the education and counseling of patients concerned about potential cutaneous side effects. We conducted a literature review of PubMed in May 2021 to identify reports of cutaneous events after vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines (postauthorization clinical reports pertaining to the Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca vaccines were limited). Event reports in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System were reviewed. Localized cutaneous reactions were common after the mRNA vaccines, consistent with clinical trial findings. Reported urticarial and morbilliform eruptions may reflect immediate hypersensitivity but have rarely been associated with anaphylaxis. There are infrequent reports of herpes zoster, dermatologic filler reactions, and immune thrombocytopenia, mainly occurring in high-risk patient groups. Ultimately, the identified cutaneous reactions are largely self-limited and should not discourage vaccination. Existing reports should reassure patients of the overall compelling safety profiles of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and benignity of skin reactions after vaccination.

Recommendations of the Italian society for infectious and tropical diseases (SIMIT) for adult vaccinations

Vaccination prevents 2-3 million deaths worldwide every year. Nevertheless, vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) still cause a considerable number of deaths especially in subjects belonging to "risk groups." These are represented by older adults, immunocompromised individuals and all subjects with underlying chronic medical conditions (cardiovascular, pulmonary, renal and liver chronic diseases, diabetes, immunodeficiency disorders). They have a weaker immune system and, if infected, are more likely to develop severe complications of their condition or of the preventable-infectious disease. This document summarizes the recommendations for vaccination of the main Global Institutional Organizations and analyses the risks of comorbidities associated with infectious disease and the benefits of vaccination for each specific group. The document provides a clear, practical and authoritative guide to adult vaccination.

Recommendations for dermatologists treating patients with atopic dermatitis during the Covid-19 pandemic: a look into the past for a conscious vaccination management

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that affects approximately 20% of children and 10% of adults. The implication of vaccines as a trigger for the de novo onset of AD in children or as a cause of exacerbation in individuals with a history of AD has long been debated. We present a brief review of the literature on AD and traditional vaccinations, proposing in addition the main recommendations for the management of patients with AD undergoing the vaccine against the SARS-COV-2 virus. Live attenuated vaccines seem to be associated with a relapse of AD and/or complications, such as eczema vaccinatum. For non-live vaccines, no adverse events are noted in atopic subjects. Since the Covid-19 vaccine is mRNA or viral vectored vaccine and there are no other currently used vaccines of this type, the same recommendations are applied as for all other non-live vaccines.

Vaccines Against SARS-CoV-2 in Psoriasis Patients on Immunosuppressive Therapy: Implications of Vaccination Nationwide Campaign on Clinical Practice in Italy

More than 12 months have passed since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19), caused by the SARS-CoV2 virus, to be a pandemic on 11 March 2020. The entire world scientific community agrees that at this time vaccine is the most promising weapon to combat the infection and the severity of the disease. According to the document “Draft landscape of COVID-19 candidate vaccines” by WHO, 272 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 virus are in development, although only four of these, produced by Pfizer-BioNTech (Pfizer, Inc. and BioNTech), Moderna, AstraZeneca, and Janssen companies, respectively, have been approved by European Medicines Agency and Italian Medicines Agency and subsequently distributed nationwide for use. These vaccines are the result of highly innovative procedures and are quite different from each other in terms of composition. Even clinicians in various medical fields may be unfamiliar with the effects of these vaccines. There is the strong emerging need for dermatologists to understand the crucial role of vaccines, with a focus on the need to vaccinate patients suffering from immune-mediated skin diseases, such as psoriasis, while taking the ongoing treatment into consideration regarding the timing of vaccination. Similarly, psoriasis patients aware of having an immune-mediated and inflammatory disease are increasingly asking the dermatologist information about the efficacy and safety of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 virus. In this narrative review of the literature and critical analysis of the recommendations of the Italian Ministry of Health, we analyze the implications of the vaccination campaign on dermatological patients with psoriasis undergoing immunosuppressive treatment.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for Immunizations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)-Part 1: Live Vaccines

Background & Aims

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may be at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable diseases. The effectiveness and safety of vaccinations may be altered by immunosuppressive therapies or IBD itself. These recommendations, developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and endorsed by the American Gastroenterological Association, aim to provide guidance on immunizations in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. This publication focused on live vaccines.

Methods

Systematic reviews evaluating the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of vaccines in patients with IBD, other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, and the general population were performed. Critical outcomes included mortality, vaccine-preventable diseases, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was considered a surrogate outcome for vaccine efficacy. Certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Key questions were developed through an iterative process and voted on by a multidisciplinary panel. Recommendations were formulated using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. Strong recommendation means that most patients should receive the recommended course of action, whereas a conditional recommendation means that different choices will be appropriate for different patients.

Results

Three good practice statements included reviewing a patient’s vaccination status at diagnosis and at regular intervals, giving appropriate vaccinations as soon as possible, and not delaying urgently needed immunosuppressive therapy to provide vaccinations. There are 4 recommendations on the use of live vaccines. Measles, mumps, rubella vaccine is recommended for both adult and pediatric patients with IBD not on immunosuppressive therapy, but not for those using immunosuppressive medications (conditional). Varicella vaccine is recommended for pediatric patients with IBD not on immunosuppressive therapy, but not for those using immunosuppressive medications (conditional). For adults, recommendations are conditionally in favor of varicella vaccine for those not on immunosuppressive therapy, and against for those on therapy. No recommendation was made regarding the use of live vaccines in infants born to mothers using biologics because the desirable and undesirable effects were closely balanced and the evidence was insufficient.

Conclusions

Maintaining appropriate vaccination status in patients with IBD is critical to optimize patient outcomes. In general, live vaccines are recommended in patients not on immunosuppressive therapy, but not for those using immunosuppressive medications. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of live vaccines in patients on immunosuppressive therapy.

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.

Special Considerations in the Management of Autoimmune Hepatitis in COVID-19 Hotspots: A Review

The ongoing coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has necessitated special considerations in the management of diseases. The way presence of pre-existing diseases or treatment for it predisposes to, alters course of, and changes the management of COVID-19, is of relevance and is being extensively studied. Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is unique in that it is an autoimmune disease mandating treatment with immunosuppressive drugs, as well as a liver disease with potential for varying degrees of underlying fibrosis. The use of immunosuppressive drugs could alter the risk of acquiring COVID-19, the clinical course and severity of COVID-19 and the degree of underlying liver fibrosis could alter the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19. In this review, we try to summarize key areas relevant in understanding and improving the clinical care of patients with AIH in the current pandemic. Special considerations required in the management of patients with AIH in COVID-19 hotspots have been outlined based on the current evidence.

Vaccination in Children With Autoimmune Disorders and Treated With Various Immunosuppressive Regimens: A Comprehensive Review and Practical Guide

Children with autoimmune disorders are especially at risk of vaccine-preventable diseases due to their underlying disease and the immunosuppressive treatment often required for a long period. In addition, vaccine coverage remains too low in this vulnerable population. This can be explained by a fear of possible adverse effects of vaccines under immunosuppression, but also a lack of data and clear recommendations, particularly with regard to vaccination with live vaccines. In this review, the latest literature and recommendations on vaccination in immunosuppressed children are discussed in detail, with the aim to provide a set of practical guidelines on vaccination for specialists caring for children suffering from different autoimmune disorders and treated with various immunosuppressive regimens.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for Immunizations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)-Part 1: Live Vaccines

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may be at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable diseases. The effectiveness and safety of vaccinations may be altered by immunosuppressive therapies or IBD itself. These recommendations developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and endorsed by the American Gastroenterological Association, aim to provide guidance on immunizations in adult and pediatric patients with IBD. This publication focused on live vaccines.

METHODS

Systematic reviews evaluating the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of vaccines in patients with IBD, other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, and the general population were performed. Critical outcomes included mortality, vaccine-preventable diseases, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was considered a surrogate outcome for vaccine efficacy. Certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Key questions were developed through an iterative process and voted on by a multidisciplinary panel. Recommendations were formulated using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. Strong recommendation means that most patients should receive the recommended course of action, whereas a conditional recommendation means that different choices will be appropriate for different patients.

RESULTS

Three good practice statements included reviewing a patient's vaccination status at diagnosis and at regular intervals, giving appropriate vaccinations as soon as possible, and not delaying urgently needed immunosuppressive therapy to provide vaccinations. There are 4 recommendations on the use of live vaccines. Measles, mumps, rubella vaccine is recommended for both adult and pediatric patients with IBD not on immunosuppressive therapy, but not for those using immunosuppressive medications (conditional). Varicella vaccine is recommended for pediatric patients with IBD not on immunosuppressive therapy, but not for those using immunosuppressive medications (conditional). For adults, recommendations are conditionally in favor of varicella vaccine for those not on immunosuppressive therapy, and against for those on therapy. No recommendation was made regarding the use of live vaccines in infants born to mothers using biologics because the desirable and undesirable effects were closely balanced and the evidence was insufficient.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintaining appropriate vaccination status in patients with IBD is critical to optimize patient outcomes. In general, live vaccines are recommended in patients not on immunosuppressive therapy, but not for those using immunosuppressive medications. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of live vaccines in patients on immunosuppressive therapy.

Oxford-AstraZeneca Coronavirus Disease-2019 Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombocytopenia on Day Two

Introduction

Vaccines have been one of the most impactful human discoveries that have significantly changed life expectancy. Immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) is an autoimmune disease characterized by platelet damage, life-threatening thrombocytopenia, and haemorrhage when the platelet count reaches below 20 × 10⁹/mcL. Its pathogenesis involves viral mimicry or T-cell-induced immune destruction in antibody-negative cases. The clinical manifestations of thrombocytopenia vary according to the severity (level of platelets) and range from being asymptomatic to severe haemorrhage. ITP is treated with immunosuppression. Case Presentation. A 26-year-old Iraqi male laboratory analyst with an unremarkable medical history presented with severe thrombocytopenia 2 days after receiving the Oxford-AstraZeneca coronavirus disease-2019 vaccine. The patient was asymptomatic with unremarkable examination findings. However, his low platelet count was discovered accidentally, and the patient did not exhibit the resistance pattern of ITP and recovered successfully with regular immunosuppressant treatment.

Conclusion

Patients with a history of thrombocytopenia can develop vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia earlier than the expected onset. Close monitoring, through regular complete blood counts, is highly recommended for patients with previous thrombocytopenia because the immune modulation process of the vaccine can worsen preexisting thrombocytopenia.

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.

Recommendations for Vaccination in Children with Atopic Dermatitis Treated with Dupilumab: A Consensus Meeting, 2020

Dupilumab is the only biologic therapy currently approved in Europe and the United States for severe atopic dermatitis in patients 6 years of age or older. Off-label use is rationalized in younger children with severe atopic dermatitis. Decisions about vaccination for children on dupilumab are complex and depend on both the child's current treatment and the type of vaccination required. To achieve consensus on recommendations for vaccination of pediatric patients with atopic dermatitis treated with or planning to start dupilumab, a review of the literature and a modified-Delphi process was conducted by a working group of 5 panelists with expertise in dermatology, immunology, infectious diseases and vaccination. Here, we provide seven recommendations for vaccination of pediatric patients with atopic dermatitis treated with or planning to start dupilumab. These recommendations serve to guide physicians' decisions about vaccination in children with atopic dermatitis treated with dupilumab. Furthermore, we highlight an unmet need for research to determine how significantly dupilumab affects cellular and humoral immune responses to vaccination with live attenuated and inactivated vaccines.

Myelin Oligodendrocyte Glycoprotein Antibody-Associated Disease: Presentation, Diagnosis, and Management

Pediatric demyelinating syndromes are a spectrum of diseases affecting the central nervous system. In the past decade, major advances have been made in this field, including the discovery of antibody-based biomarkers and treatment guidelines for specific syndromes. When myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG) antibodies were first discovered, they were thought to be a biomarker for multiple sclerosis (MS). However, further research has shown that MOG positivity during the first episode of a pediatric demyelinating syndrome is a predictor of a course that is distinct to MS. This article discusses the clinical manifestations of MOG antibody associated disease and key distinguishing features in the investigation, treatment, and prognosis between MOG and other demyelinating diseases. [Pediatr Ann. 2021;50(6):e254-e258.].

Comparison of Guidelines for the Use of Interleukin-17 Inhibitors for Psoriasis in the United States, Britain, and Europe: A Critical Appraisal and Comprehensive Review

BACKGROUND

Interleukin (IL)-17 inhibitors are a newer class of biologic used to treat patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVE

We compared evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) from leading dermatological organizations for the use of IL-17 inhibitors in psoriasis.

METHODS

Guidelines from the Joint American Academy of Dermatology-National Psoriasis Foundation (AAD-NFP) Guidelines, British Association of Dermatologists guidelines (BAD), and European S3 group (ES3) were all reviewed and compared.

RESULTS

This analysis revealed significant overlap in the recommendations made by experts from each CPG. However, our review highlights differences in routine laboratory recommendations and the relative and absolute contraindications to use with IL-17 inhibitors.

CONCLUSION

IL-17 inhibitors are an effective treatment option for psoriasis. This analysis and review of guidelines for IL-17 inhibitor use highlights the consensus in treatment protocols and areas of disagreement between CPGs.

Immunogenicity and safety of a high-dose and prolonged-schedule hepatitis B vaccine among chronic kidney disease patients: a randomized, parallel-controlled trial

Background: The immunogenicity against hepatitis B vaccine is unsatisfactory in the chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, and studies evaluating augmented vaccine regimens to enhance immunogenicity have been inconclusive.Objectives: To evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of four-standard-dose and four-triple-dose regimens hepatitis B vaccine among CKD patients in China.Research design and methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, parallel-controlled trial including 273 patients with CKD who were randomly allocated to receive 3 or 4 doses of 20 or 60 µg of recombinant hepatitis B vaccine.Main outcome measures: Seroconversion rates, high-level response rates, and geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) of anti-HBs at months 3 and 7.Results: The seroconversion rates and high-level responses in the IM20 × 4 group and the IM60 × 4 group were higher than those in the IM20 × 3 group at months 3 and 7 (P < 0.05). The IM60 × 4 group had better immune responses than the IM20 × 4 group at month 3 (P < 0.05); however, no significant difference was noted at month 7 (P > 0.05).Conclusions: Both the four-standard-dose and four-triple-dose regimens improved immune response compared to the three-standard-dose regimen of hepatitis B vaccination in CKD patients, and the additional effect of higher dose was minimal.Trial registration: The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (CT.gov identifier: NCT03962881).

Canadian Rheumatology Association Recommendation for the Use of COVID-19 Vaccination for Patients With Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases

OBJECTIVE

To develop guidance on the use of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD).

METHODS

The Canadian Rheumatology Association (CRA) formed a multidisciplinary panel including rheumatologists, researchers, methodologists, vaccine experts, and patients. The panel used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Outcomes were prioritized according to their importance for patients and clinicians. Evidence from the COVID-19 clinical trials was summarized. Indirect evidence for non-COVID-19 vaccines in ARD was also considered. The GRADE evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework was used to develop a recommendation for the use of the 4 COVID-19 vaccines approved in Canada as of March 25, 2021 (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, ChAdOx1, and Ad26.COV2.S), over 4 virtual panel meetings.

RESULTS

The CRA guideline panel suggests using COVID-19 vaccination in persons with ARD. The panel unanimously agreed that for the majority of patients, the potential health benefits of vaccination outweigh the potential harms in people with ARDs. The recommendation was graded as conditional because of low or very low certainty of the evidence on the effects in the population of interest, primarily due to indirectness and imprecise effect estimates. The panel felt strongly that persons with autoimmune rheumatic diseases who meet local eligibility should not be required to take additional steps compared to people without ARDs to obtain their vaccination. Guidance on medications, implementation, monitoring of vaccine uptake, and research priorities are also provided.

CONCLUSION

This recommendation will be updated over time as new evidence emerges, with the latest recommendation, evidence summaries, and EtD available on the CRA website.