Effects of biological and non-biological immunomodulatory therapies on the immunogenicity of vaccines in patients with rheumatic diseases

Immunogenicity, Effectiveness, and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines among Patients with Immune-Mediated Dermatological Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Immunocompromised individuals, primarily attributable to using immunosuppressants, face heightened COVID-19 risks. Despite the proven efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, their impact on patients with immune-mediated dermatological diseases remains unclear. This study aims to thoroughly examine vaccine immunogenicity, effectiveness, and safety in immune-mediated dermatological disease patients. Clinical studies in adults that compared vaccinated immune-mediated dermatological disease patients with vaccinated healthy controls or unvaccinated immune-mediated dermatological disease patients in terms of vaccine immunogenicity, COVID-19 infection, adverse events, or exacerbation of immune-mediated dermatological diseases were searched via electronic databases. Seventeen studies (1,348,690 participants) were included. Seroconversion rates between immune-mediated dermatological disease patients and healthy controls were not different. However, among individuals aged ≤55 years, immune-mediated dermatological disease patients had lower mean anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels. Immunosuppressed immune-mediated dermatological disease patients also had lower titres and were less likely to achieve T-cell response. In terms of safety, the risk of adverse events was higher in atopic dermatitis patients, but those with psoriasis had a reduced risk. Additionally, immunosuppressed patients had fewer adverse events. Vaccinated immune-mediated dermatological disease patients had a lower risk of COVID-19 infection than unvaccinated patients but a higher risk than healthy controls; however, disease exacerbation may be induced. In conclusion, immune-mediated dermatological diseases showed a reduced vaccine response in our meta-analysis, yet vaccination remained effective against COVID-19 infection and well tolerated.

Influenza Vaccine Type-Dependent Antibody Response in Patients with Autoimmune Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to explore influenza antibody response in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatoid diseases (AIIRDs) stratified by the different vaccine types applied in Denmark during the 2018-2019 influenza season.

METHODS

Included patients were diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, or spondyloarthritis receiving biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) with or without conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Influenza vaccination status in the 2018-2019 season and vaccine type received were reviewed in the Denmark. Blood samples were drawn ≥ 14 days post vaccination, and antibody titers were determined by the hemagglutinin inhibition (HAI) assay for the serotypes A/Michigan/H1N1, A/Singapore/H3N2, and B/Colorado included in the influenza vaccines in the 2018-2019 season. An overall serotype HAI geometric mean titer (GMT) was calculated from the 3 serotype-specific HAI titers. An overall serotype HAI GMT ≥ 40 was considered protective.

RESULTS

Of the 205 included patients, 105 (51%) had received influenza vaccination. One-quarter of vaccinated patients achieved post-vaccination overall serotype HAI GMT ≥40. For patients vaccinated with Influvac, a significantly higher proportion had HAI titers ≥ 40 for 2 serotypes, namely, A/Michigan/H1N1 and A/Singapore/H3N2, than patients vaccinated with Vaxigrip or VaxigripTetra. The same applied to all serotypes HAI GMT, where significantly more patients who received Influvac achieved postvaccination HAI GMT≥40 versus patients who received Vaxigrip (p=0.02) or VaxigripTetra (p=0.002). The latter outcome was explored in a multivariable logistic regression analysis and remained significant when including the following variables: age, sex, treatment with methotrexate and/or prednisolone, type of influenza vaccine, time interval from vaccination to antibody measurement, and previous vaccination status.

CONCLUSION

Influenza antibody levels following vaccination with Influvac in bDMARD-treated patients with AIIRDs were superior to Vaxigrip and VaxigripTetra. Treatment with methotrexate (MTX) did not reduce the antibody response.

Maternal and neonatal antibody levels on pertussis vaccination in pregnant women on immune-modulating therapy for rheumatic disease

OBJECTIVES

While protection against pertussis following maternal tetanus-diphtheria-and-acellular-pertussis (Tdap) vaccination was demonstrated in healthy term-born infants, no evidence is available on Tdap vaccination in combination with immune-modulating therapy during pregnancy. In this pilot study, we explored whether treatment with tumour necrosis factor alpha inhibitors (TNFis) in pregnant patients with rheumatic disease interferes with Tdap vaccine responses and affects maternal anti-pertussis IgG antibody levels in newborns.

METHODS

Patients were included by a rheumatologist during pregnancy in case they received maternal Tdap vaccination in the late-second or early-third trimester of pregnancy. Blood samples were obtained from mothers during the first pregnancy trimester, 3 months after delivery and from the umbilical cord. IgG antibody levels against Tdap-included antigens were measured using a bead-based multiplex immunoassay. Findings on patients exposed to TNFis were compared with those from TNFi-unexposed patients and with data from a historical comparator study among healthy Tdap vaccinated mother-infant pairs (n=53).

RESULTS

66 patients (46 exposed and 20 unexposed to TNFIs) were enrolled. No major differences in IgG antibody levels were observed between TNFi-exposed and unexposed mothers before maternal Tdap vaccination and 3 months after delivery. In cord sera, however, antibody levels against pertussis toxin were significantly lower after TNFi-treatment (35.94 IU/mL, 95% CI 20.68 to 62.45) compared with no TNFi-treatment of mothers with rheumatic disease (94.61 IU/mL, 95% CI 48.89 to 183.07) and lower compared with a cohort of healthy mothers (125.12 IU/mL, 95% CI 90.75 to 172.50). We observed similar differences for filamentous haemagglutinin, pertactin, tetanus toxoid and diphtheria toxoid.

CONCLUSION

These preliminary data indicate no major differences in IgG antibody levels on maternal Tdap vaccination in pregnant women with or without immune-modulating treatment, although our findings suggest that TNFis during pregnancy induce lower maternal anti-pertussis-specific protective antibody levels in newborns.

Clinical update on risks and efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with autoimmune hepatitis and summary of reports on post-vaccination liver injury

Patients with liver diseases, especially those with cirrhosis, have an increased mortality risk when infected by SARS-CoV-2 and therefore anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has been recommended by leading Scientific Associations for all patients with chronic liver diseases. However, previous reports have shown a reduced antibody response following the full course of vaccination in immunosuppressed patients, including liver transplant recipients and several rheumatic diseases. This document, drafted by an expert panel of hepatologists appointed by the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (AISF), aims to present the updated scientific data on the safety and efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). Furthermore, given the recent reports of sporadic cases of AIH-like cases following anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines, we summarize available data. Finally, we provide experts recommendations based on the limited data available.

Dose-Dependent Impairment of the Immune Response to the Moderna-1273 mRNA Vaccine by Mycophenolate Mofetil in Patients with Rheumatic and Autoimmune Liver Diseases

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Moderna-1273 mRNA vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 in patients with immune-mediated diseases under different treatments. Anti-trimeric spike protein antibodies were tested in 287 patients with rheumatic or autoimmune diseases (10% receiving mycophenolate mofetil, 15% low-dose glucocorticoids, 21% methotrexate, and 58% biologic/targeted synthetic drugs) at baseline and in 219 (76%) 4 weeks after the second Moderna-1273 mRNA vaccine dose. Family members or caretakers were enrolled as the controls. The neutralizing serum activity against SARS-CoV-2-G614, alpha, and beta variants in vitro and the cytotoxic T cell response to SARS-CoV-2 peptides were determined in a subgroup of patients and controls. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody development, i.e., seroconversion, was observed in 69% of the mycophenolate-treated patients compared to 100% of both the patients taking other treatments and the controls (p < 0.0001). A dose-dependent impairment of the humoral response was observed in the mycophenolate-treated patients. A daily dose of >1 g at vaccination was a significant risk factor for non-seroconversion (ROC AUC 0.89, 95% CI 0.80−98, p < 0.0001). Moreover, in the seroconverted patients, a daily dose of >1 g of mycophenolate was associated with significantly lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers, showing slightly reduced neutralizing serum activity but a comparable cytotoxic response compared to other immunosuppressants. In non-seroconverted patients treated with mycophenolate at a daily dose of >1 g, the cytotoxic activity elicited by viral peptides was also impaired. Mycophenolate treatment affects the Moderna-1273 mRNA vaccine immunogenicity in a dose-dependent manner, independent of rheumatological disease.

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.

Vaccinations in Patients with Rheumatic Disease: Consider Disease and Therapy

Patients with rheumatic diseases are susceptible to infections due to their underlying disease states as well as from immunosuppressive medications, highlighting the importance of vaccination, these same factors also pose challenges to vaccine efficacy, safety, and uptake. This article reviews the impact of immunosuppressive therapies and rheumatic disease on vaccine efficacy in this vulnerable patient population as well as discusses best practices.

Vaccination and immunotherapies in neuroimmunological diseases

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Antibody response to inactivated COVID-19 vaccine (CoronaVac) in immune-mediated diseases: a controlled study among hospital workers and elderly

OBJECTIVE

To assess antibody response to inactivated COVID-19 vaccine in patients with immune-mediated diseases (IMD) among hospital workers and people aged 65 and older.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we studied 82 hospital workers with IMD (mean age: 42.2 ± 10.0 years) and 300 (mean age: 41.7 ± 9.9 years) controls. Among + 65 aged population, we studied 22 (mean age: 71.4 ± 4.5 years) patients and 47 controls (mean age: 70.9 ± 4.8 years). All study subjects had a negative history for COVID-19. Sera were obtained after at least 21 days following the second vaccination. Anti-spike IgG antibody titers were measured quantitatively using a commercially available immunoassay method.

RESULTS

Patients with IMD were significantly less likely to have detectable antibodies than healthy controls both among the hospital workers (92.7% vs 99.7%, p < 0.001) and elderly population (77.3% vs 97.9%, p = 0.011). Among patients with IMD, those using immunosuppressive or immune-modulating drugs (64/75, 85.3%) were significantly less likely to have detectable antibodies compared to those off treatment (29/29, 100%) (p = 0.029). Additionally, a negative association between age and the antibody titer categories among patients (r = - 0.352; p < 0.001) and controls (r = - 0.258; p < 0.001) were demonstrated.

CONCLUSIONS

Among hospital workers, the vast majority of patients with IMD and immunocompetent controls developed a significant humoral response following the administration of the second dose of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine. This was also true for the elderly population, albeit with lower antibody titers. Immunosuppressive use, particularly rituximab significantly reduced antibody titers. Antibody titers were significantly lower among those aged ≥ 60 years both in patient and control populations. Whether these individuals should get a booster dose warrants further studies.

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

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

Vaccinations in Patients with Rheumatic Disease: Consider Disease and Therapy

Patients with rheumatic diseases are susceptible to infections due to their underlying disease states as well as from immunosuppressive medications, highlighting the importance of vaccination, these same factors also pose challenges to vaccine efficacy, safety, and uptake. This article reviews the impact of immunosuppressive therapies and rheumatic disease on vaccine efficacy in this vulnerable patient population as well as discusses best practices.

Immune Response to Vaccination in Patients with Psoriasis Treated with Systemic Therapies

Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease usually treated with immunomodulatory/immunosuppressive agents. The use of these agents has been associated with an increased susceptibility to infections. Vaccination might represent a critical aspect in the management of patients with psoriasis treated with immunomodulatory/immunosuppressive therapies. This narrative review aimed to provide an overview on the immune response to vaccines in subjects treated with systemic agents used to treat patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. Publications appearing in PubMed, Scopus, and ISI–Web of Knowledge database were selected using Medical Subject Headings key terms. Overall, published data confirmed that vaccination with attenuated live vaccines during therapy with immunomodulatory/immunosuppressive therapies should be avoided. For nonlive vaccines, a more favorable safety profile of biologic agents compared to conventional systemic agents is described as the humoral response to vaccines is in general well-preserved. Treatment with cyclosporine and methotrexate is associated with lower antibody titers to vaccines, and thus these agents are better discontinued during vaccination. In contrast, treatment with biological agents is not associated with lower antibody response and can thus be continued safely.

Recommendations for vaccination in patients with multiple sclerosis who are eligible for immunosuppressive therapies: Spanish consensus statement

BACKGROUND

The recent development of highly effective treatments for multiple sclerosis (MS) and the potential risk of infectious complications require the development of prevention and risk minimisation strategies. Vaccination is an essential element of the management of these patients. This consensus statement includes a series of recommendations and practical scenarios for the vaccination of adult patients with MS who are eligible for highly effective immunosuppressive treatments.

METHODOLOGY

A formal consensus procedure was followed. Having defined the scope of the statement, we conducted a literature search on recommendations for the vaccination of patients with MS and specific vaccination guidelines for immunosuppressed patients receiving biological therapy for other conditions. The modified nominal group technique methodology was used to formulate the recommendations.

DEVELOPMENT

Vaccination in patients who are candidates for immunosuppressive therapy should be considered before starting immunosuppressive treatment providing the patient's clinical situation allows. Vaccines included in the routine adult vaccination schedule, as well as some specific ones, are recommended depending on the pre-existing immunity status. If immunosuppressive treatment is already established, live attenuated vaccines are contraindicated. For vaccines with a correlate of protection, it is recommended to monitor the serological response in an optimal interval of 1-2 months from the last dose.

Mapping Host-Related Correlates of Influenza Vaccine-Induced Immune Response: An Umbrella Review of the Available Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Seasonal influenza is the leading infectious disease in terms of its health and socioeconomic impact. Annual immunization is the most efficient way to reduce this burden. Several correlates of influenza vaccine-induced protection are commonly used, owing to their ready availability and cheapness. Influenza vaccine-induced immunogenicity is a function of host-, virus- and vaccine-related factors. Host-related factors constitute the most heterogeneous group. The objective of this study was to analyze the available systematic evidence on the host factors able to modify influenza vaccine-induced immunogenicity. An umbrella review approach was undertaken. A total of 28 systematic reviews/meta-analyses were analyzed—these covered the following domains: intravenous drug use, psychological stress, acute and chronic physical exercise, genetic polymorphisms, use of pre-/pro-/symbiotics, previous Bacillus Calmette–Guérin vaccination, diabetes mellitus, vitamin D supplementation/deficiency, latent cytomegalovirus infection and various forms of immunosuppression. In order to present effect sizes on the same scale, all possible meta-analyses were re-performed and cumulative evidence synthesis ranking was carried out. The meta-analysis was conducted separately on each health condition category and virus (sub)type. A total of 97 pooled estimates were used in order to construct an evidence-based stakeholder-friendly map. The principal public health implications are discussed.

Impact of synthetic and biological immunomodulatory therapy on the duration of 17DD yellow fever vaccine-induced immunity in rheumatoid arthritis

Background

The 17DD-yellow fever (YF) vaccine induces a long-lasting protective immunity, resulting from humoral and cellular immunological memory. The treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD) may affect pre-existing 17DD-vaccine protective immunity and increase the risk of acquiring YF infection. Our goal was to determine whether DMARD would affect the duration of YF-specific protective immunity in RA patients.

Methods

A total of 122 RA patients, previously immunized with the 17DD-YF vaccine (1–5, 5–9, and ≥ 10 years) and currently under DMARD therapy, were enrolled in the present investigation. Immunomodulatory therapy encompasses the use of conventional synthetic DMARD alone (csDMARD) or combines with biological DMARD (cs+bDMARD). A total of 226 healthy subjects were recruited as a control group (CONT). Neutralizing antibody responses were measured by a plaque-reduction neutralization test (PRNT), and cellular immunity was evaluated by an in vitro 17DD-YF-specific peripheral blood lymphoproliferative assay.

Results

The data demonstrated that csDMARD therapy did not affect the duration of protective immunity induced by the 17DD-YF vaccine compared to that of CONT, as both presented a significant time-dependent decline at 10 years after vaccination. Conversely, cs+bDMARD therapy induced a premature depletion in the main determinants of the vaccine protective response, with diminished PRNT seropositivity levels between 5 and 9 years and impaired effector memory in CD8⁺ T cells as early as 1–5 years after 17DD-YF vaccination.

Conclusions

These findings could support changing the vaccination schedule of this population, with the possibility of a planned booster dose upon the suspension of bDMARD in cases where this is allowed, even before 10 years following 17DD-YF vaccination. The benefit of a planned booster dose should be evaluated in further studies.

Trial registration

RBR-946bv5. Date of registration: March 05, 2018. Retrospectively registered

The immunogenicity of seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccination in autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic patients-a 6-month follow-up prospective study

INTRODUCTION

Influenza may cause severe complications in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease (AIRD), to whom vaccinations are especially recommended. However, AIRD patients require cautious scrutiny of immunogenicity as they might exhibit poor antibody response to vaccination, especially when taking immunomodulatory medications.

AIM

The aim was to determine immunogenicity of seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccine in AIRD patients, its timeline/persistence, and influence of medications on immune response.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-seven AIRD and 54 healthy controls were vaccinated with trivalent seasonal influenza. After 3-5 weeks, 15 healthy controls and 93 AIRD were vaccinated with pandemic influenza vaccine, and 63 of patients were vaccinated a second time after 3-5 weeks. Sera were collected before vaccination, 18-90 days after each vaccination, and more than 180 days after the last vaccination. The immune response was measured using hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay and IgG/IgA antibodies against influenza A/B with ELISA.

RESULTS

Our findings indicate that following vaccination with seasonal influenza vaccine, seroprotection, seroresponse, and change in geometric mean titers (GMT) in AIRD patients was not compromised compared to healthy. Similarly, we report for pandemic influenza vaccination little added benefit of the second dose. We confirm lowest increase in HI titer in rituximab-treated AIRD compared to other medications. Vaccination largely tilts the balance from negative ELISA A IgG and IgA titers to positive titers in seasonal H1N1 seroresponsive AIRD patients and controls. A significant decrease in HI GMT and seroprotection was observed only in AIRD at > 180 days after vaccination highlighting an absent persistence of immunogenic response in AIRD patients. Due to high initial HI titers for influenza vaccine, we foresee their benefit in personalized medicine in the future.

CONCLUSION

Influenza vaccination is immunologically active for AIRD, with little value of the second dose of the pandemic vaccine and further scrutiny on persistence of immune response to vaccine in AIRD is needed.

Benralizumab does not impair antibody response to seasonal influenza vaccination in adolescent and young adult patients with moderate to severe asthma: results from the Phase IIIb ALIZE trial

Background and objectives

Benralizumab is a humanized, afucosylated monoclonal antibody against the IL-5Rα. Initial monthly followed by every-other-month injections result in rapid and nearly complete eosinophil depletion. We evaluated whether three doses of benralizumab modifies antibody response to seasonal influenza vaccination for adolescent/young adult patients with moderate to severe asthma.

Methods

ALIZE (NCT02814643) was a Phase IIIb randomized controlled trial of patients aged 12–21 years receiving medium- to high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β₂-agonists. Patients received benralizumab 30 mg or placebo at Weeks 0, 4, and 8, plus tetravalent influenza vaccination at Week 8. At Week 12, strain-specific antibody responses following vaccination were assessed for four influenza antigens by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization (MN) assays.

Results

A total of 103 patients were randomized and received benralizumab (n=51) or placebo (n=52). There were no consistent differences in HAI or MN antibody responses at Week 12 between patients receiving benralizumab or placebo. HAI geometric mean fold rises (GMFRs) for all influenza strains tested were 3.3–4.2 for benralizumab vs 3.4–3.9 for placebo; MN GMFRs were 2.8–5.1 for benralizumab vs 3.2–4.4 for placebo. A ≥4-fold rise in HAI from Weeks 8 to 12 occurred in 44.0%–56.0% and 30.6%–49.0% of patients receiving benralizumab and placebo, respectively. At Week 12, 78.0%–100% vs 79.6%–100% of patients receiving benralizumab and placebo, respectively, achieved a ≥40 HAI antibody titer. There were no significant safety findings.

Conclusion

Benralizumab did not impair the antibody response to seasonal virus vaccination in adolescents and young adult patients with moderate to severe asthma.

Impact of temporary methotrexate discontinuation for 2 weeks on immunogenicity of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a 2-week methotrexate (MTX) discontinuation after vaccination improves the efficacy of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

In this prospective randomised parallel-group multicentre study, patients with RA on stable dose of MTX were randomly assigned at a ratio of 1:1 to continue MTX or to hold MTX for 2 weeks after 2016-2017 quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine containing H1N1, H3N2, B-Yamagata and B-Victoria. The primary outcome was frequency of satisfactory vaccine response, defined as greater than or equal to fourfold increase of haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titre at 4 weeks after vaccination against ≥2 of four vaccine strains. Secondary endpoints included seroprotection (ie, HI titre ≥1:40) rate, fold change in antibody titres.

RESULTS

The modified intention-to-treat population included 156 patients in the MTX-continue group and 160 patients in the MTX-hold group. More patients in MTX-hold group achieved satisfactory vaccine response than the MTX-continue group (75.5% vs 54.5%, p<0.001). Seroprotection rate was higher in the MTX-hold group than the MTX-continue group for all four antigens (H1N1: difference 10.7%, 95% CI 2.0% to 19.3%; H3N2: difference 15.9%, 95% CI 5.9% to 26.0%; B-Yamagata: difference13.7%, 95% CI 5.2% to 22.4%; B-Victoria: difference 14.7%, 95% CI 4.5% to 25.0%). The MTX-hold group showed higher fold increase in their antibody titres against all four influenza antigens (all p<0.05). Change in disease activity was similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A temporary MTX discontinuation for 2 weeks after vaccination improves the immunogenicity of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with RA without increasing RA disease activity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02897011.

Immunogenicity and persistence of a prime-boost re-vaccination strategy for pneumococcal vaccines in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at an increased risk of Pneumococcal infections. Immunogenicity and persistence of a prime-boost revaccination strategy using 13-valent/23-valent anti-pneumococcal vaccines was evaluated in patients with RA treated by Methotrexate (MTX) and anti-TNF.

METHOD

Twenty-four patients with RA received one dose of PCV13 (Prevenar13®; Pfizer) followed two months later by one dose of PPV23 (Pneumovax®, Merck). Concentrations of IgG specific for 7 serotypes common to both vaccines and 3 uncommon serotypes, included only in the PPV23 were measured by ELISA and Opsonophagocytic Assay (OPA) at baseline and after 4, 12 and 24 months post-vaccine.

RESULTS

Similar percentages of protection were found at 4 months (63% vs. 55%), 12 months (54% vs. 50%) and 24 months (52% vs. 55%) for the 7 common and 3 uncommon serotypes when antibody titers were assayed by ELISA. Based on functional antibody measurements by OPA, a decrease of protected patients was observed 24 months after vaccine with only 19% of patients protected compared to 29% at baseline.

CONCLUSION

Although the combined pneumococcal revaccination strategy induces good protection in the short term in RA patients, this protection does not persist beyond two years with levels of functional antibody decreasing below pre-vaccine levels. We did not observe a higher efficacy of the conjugate vaccine compared to the polysaccharide vaccine. Our results clearly question the advantage of the prime-boost strategy as it highlight the possible hyporesponse induced by PPV23 against the immune response elicited by the primo-injection of the PCV13 vaccine.

Report on WHO meeting on immunization in older adults: Geneva, Switzerland, 22-23 March 2017

Many industrialized countries have implemented routine immunization policies for older adults, but similar strategies have not been widely implemented in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In March 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) convened a meeting to identify policies and activities to promote access to vaccination of older adults, specifically in LMICs. Participants included academic and industry researchers, funders, civil society organizations, implementers of global health interventions, and stakeholders from developing countries with adult immunization needs. These experts reviewed vaccine performance in older adults, the anticipated impact of adult vaccination programs, and the challenges and opportunities of building or strengthening an adult and older adult immunization platforms. Key conclusions of the meeting were that there is a need for discussion of new opportunities for vaccination of all adults as well as for vaccination of older adults, as reflected in the recent shift by WHO to a life-course approach to immunization; that immunization in adults should be viewed in the context of a much broader model based on an individual's abilities rather than chronological age; and that immunization beyond infancy is a global priority that can be successfully integrated with other interventions to promote healthy ageing. As WHO is looking ahead to a global Decade of Healthy Ageing starting in 2020, it will seek to define a roadmap for interdisciplinary collaborations to integrate immunization with improving access to preventive and other healthcare interventions for adults worldwide.

[Vaccination in rheumatology: Evolution of views on the problem]

The problem of coinfections that are due to both a rheumatic disease (RD) itself and the need to use immunosuppressive drugs deserves apparent attention in modern rheumatology. Coinfections substantially affect morbidity and mortality rates, especially in diffuse connective tissue diseases. The data available in the literature on the above subject matter suggest that vaccination is a powerful method for prevention of infectious diseases that are the most important problem for patients with RD.

Effect of methotrexate discontinuation on efficacy of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether temporary discontinuation of methotrexate (MTX) improves the efficacy of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

In this prospective randomised parallel-group trial, patients with RA taking stable dose of MTX were randomly assigned at a ratio of 1:1:1:1 to continue MTX (group 1), suspend MTX for 4 weeks before vaccination (group 2), suspend MTX for 2 weeks before and 2 weeks after vaccination (group 3) or suspend MTX for 4 weeks after vaccination (group 4). All participants were vaccinated with trivalent influenza vaccine containing H1N1, H3N2 and B-Yamagata. The primary outcome was frequency of satisfactory vaccine response (≥4-fold titre increase 4 weeks postvaccination). Secondary endpoints included fold change in antibody titres from baseline.

RESULTS

The per-protocol population consisted of 199 patients (n=54, 44, 49 and 52 in groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively). Group 3 achieved higher satisfactory vaccine response against all three antigens than group 1 (51.0% vs 31.5%, p=0.044). The anti-H3N2 antibody fold increase (95% CI) was significantly higher in groups 3 and 4 (12.2 (8.4 to 17.5), p <0.001 and 10.0 (6.8 to 14.8), p=0.043, respectively) than group 1 (5.9 (4.3 to 8.1)). The anti-B-Yamagata antibody responses of groups 3 and 4 were higher (4.7 (3.3 to 6.7), p=0.048; 6.1 (4.2 to 8.8), p <0.001, respectively) than group 1 (2.9 (2.2 to 3.8)). RA flare occurred in 24.1%, 21.2%, 34.1% and 38.8% in groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively (p=NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Temporary MTX discontinuation improves the immunogenicity of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration number is: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02748785.

Antibody response to pneumococcal and influenza vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving abatacept

BACKGROUND

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), including those treated with biologics, are at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable infections. We evaluated the antibody response to standard 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) and the 2011-2012 trivalent seasonal influenza vaccine in adults with RA receiving subcutaneous (SC) abatacept and background disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

METHODS

Two multicenter, open-label sub-studies enrolled patients from the ACQUIRE (pneumococcal and influenza) and ATTUNE (pneumococcal) studies at any point during their SC abatacept treatment cycle following completion of ≥3 months' SC abatacept. All patients received fixed-dose abatacept 125 mg/week with background DMARDs. A pre-vaccination blood sample was taken, and after 28 ± 3 days a final post-vaccination sample was collected. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an immunologic response to the vaccine at Day 28 among patients without a protective antibody level to the vaccine antigens at baseline (pneumococcal: defined as ≥2-fold increase in post-vaccination titers to ≥3 of 5 antigens and protective antibody level of ≥1.6 μg/mL to ≥3 of 5 antigens; influenza: defined as ≥4-fold increase in post-vaccination titers to ≥2 of 3 antigens and protective antibody level of ≥1:40 to ≥2 of 3 antigens). Safety and tolerability were evaluated throughout the sub-studies.

RESULTS

Pre- and post-vaccination titers were available for 113/125 and 186/191 enrolled patients receiving the PPSV23 and influenza vaccine, respectively. Among vaccinated patients, 47/113 pneumococcal and 121/186 influenza patients were without protective antibody levels at baseline. Among patients with available data, 73.9 % (34/46) and 61.3 % (73/119) met the primary endpoint and achieved an immunologic response to PPSV23 or influenza vaccine, respectively. In patients with pre- and post-vaccination data available, 83.9 % in the pneumococcal study demonstrated protective antibody levels with PPSV23 (titer ≥1.6 μg/mL to ≥3 of 5 antigens), and 81.2 % in the influenza study achieved protective antibody levels (titer ≥1:40 to ≥2 of 3 antigens) at Day 28 post-vaccination. Vaccines were well tolerated with SC abatacept with background DMARDs.

CONCLUSIONS

In these sub-studies, patients with RA receiving SC abatacept and background DMARDs were able to mount an appropriate immune response to pneumococcal and influenza vaccines.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00559585 (registered 15 November 2007) and NCT00663702 (registered 18 April 2008).

Immunogenicity and Safety of Influenza Vaccination in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Patients Compared with Healthy Controls: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the immunogenicity and safety of influenza vaccine in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

METHODS

Relevant articles were retrieved from electronic databases. Seroprotection rate, seroconversion rate and factors that increase antibody geometric mean titer (GMT) were used as indices to measure the immunogenicity. The safety of vaccine was assessed through monitoring adverse events, which included side effects and SLE exacerbations. We performed a meta-analysis of influenza vaccine seroprotection, seroconversion and adverse effects. SLE exacerbation after vaccination was comprehensively described. We used the Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP) guidelines to determine whether influenza can induce adequate immunogenicity in patients with SLE.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies with 1966 subjects met the inclusion criteria. At least 565 of the subjects were patients with low-to-moderate SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) score or stable SLE disease. Compared with the general population, seroprotection rate in SLE patients was significantly decreased in patients with H1N1 [odds ratio (OR) = 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27-0.50] and H3N2 vaccination (OR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.24-0.93), but not influenza B vaccination (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.24-1.25). Seroconversion rate also significantly decreased in patients with H1N1 (OR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.27-0.57) and influenza B (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.29-0.76) vaccination, but not H3N2 vaccination (OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.21-1.79). However, the immunogenicity of influenza vaccine in SLE patients almost reached that of the CPMP guidelines. The OR for side effects (patients versus healthy controls) was 3.24 (95% CI: 0.62-16.76). Among 1966 patients with SLE, 32 experienced mild exacerbation of SLE and five had serious side effects for other reasons.

CONCLUSION

Influenza vaccine has moderate effect on protecting patients with SLE. The side effects of influenza vaccine are not serious and are manageable. With consideration of a higher risk of SLE exacerbation and a more severe course of infection among SLE patients, influenza vaccination should be promoted among SLE patients with a low-to-moderate SLEDAI score or stable disease.

Vaccination recommendations for adult patients with rheumatic diseases

Infectious diseases in any age group can be successfully prevented through immunization. Protection provided through immunization in childhood decreases over the years. Immunization in adulthood is important because of the growing elderly population, chronic diseases, and globalization. Recommendations on this subject are being constantly updated through scientific guidelines. Immunization in adulthood is also important in rheumatology. There is an increased risk not only of infection in rheumatic diseases but also of infections being more severe. Most infections, and their frequently observed complications, are among those diseases that can be prevented through immunization. The type of immunization, immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapy received by the patient, disease activity, and presence of chronic diseases affect the immunization process in patients with rheumatic diseases. This review will consider the immunization process followed in rheumatic diseases and also refer to its application.

Vaccination in patients with primary immune deficiency, secondary immune deficiency and autoimmunity with immune regulatory abnormalities

Vaccination has been an important healthcare measure in preventing infectious diseases. The response to vaccination is reduced in immunocompromised patients, primary immune deficiency (PID) and secondary immune deficiency (SID), but vaccination studies still demonstrated a protective effect resulting in reducing complications, hospitalization, treatment costs and even mortality. The primary physician and the specialist directing patient care are responsible for vaccination. Live vaccines are contraindicated in patients with severe immune impairment, killed vaccines are highly recommended in PID and SID. Criteria have been defined to distinguish high- or low-level immune impairment in the different disease entities among PID and SID patients. For patients who do not respond to diagnostic vaccination as characterized by antibody failure immunoglobulin replacement is the mainstay of therapy.

Pediatric Rheumatology for the Primary Care Clinicians-Recognizing Patterns of Disease

This review presents a diagnostic approach to musculoskeletal and rheumatic diseases in children for primary care clinicians. The focus is on juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) as the major arthritis disease in children. It is necessary to know the personalities of these JIA categories. It is also crucial to be able to recognize the common infectious, orthopedic and mechanical, malignant, genetic, other rheumatic diseases, and other miscellaneous syndromes that can mimic JIA. To do so requires recognition of clinical patterns using a thorough musculoskeletal and rheumatic history and repeated complete physical exams with emphasis on the musculoskeletal exam. It also requires targeted and limited laboratory testing with careful follow-up over time.