Immunogenicity and safety of primary fractional-dose yellow fever vaccine in autoimmune rheumatic diseases

Hydroxychloroquine is associated with lower seroconversion upon 17DD-Yellow fever primovaccination in patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome

The present study aimed at investigating whether the hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) treatment would impact the neutralizing antibody production, viremia levels and the kinetics of serum soluble mediators upon planned 17DD-Yellow Fever (YF) primovaccination (Bio-Manguinhos-FIOCRUZ) of primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS). A total of 34 pSS patients and 23 healthy controls (HC) were enrolled. The pSS group was further categorized according to the use of HCQ (HCQ and Non-HCQ). The YF-plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT ≥1:50), YF viremia (RNAnemia) and serum biomarkers analyses were performed at baseline and subsequent time-points (Day0/Day3-4/Day5-6/Day7/Day14-D28). The pSS group showed PRNT titers and seropositivity rates similar to those observed for HC (GeoMean = 238 vs 440, p = .11; 82% vs 96%, p = .13). However, the HCQ subgroup exhibited lower seroconversion rates as compared to HC (GeoMean = 161 vs 440, p = .04; 69% vs 96%, p = .02) and Non-HQC (GeoMean = 161 vs 337, p = .582; 69% vs 94%, p = .049). No differences in YF viremia were observed amongst subgroups. Serum biomarkers analyses demonstrated that HCQ subgroup exhibited increased levels of CCL2, CXL10, IL-6, IFN-γ, IL1-Ra, IL-9, IL-10, and IL-2 at baseline and displayed a consistent increase of several biomarkers along the kinetics timeline up to D14-28. These results indicated that HCQ subgroup exhibited a deficiency in assembling YF-specific immune response elicited by 17DD-YF primovaccination as compared to Non-HCQ subgroup. Our findings suggested that hydroxychloroquine is associated with a decrease in the humoral immune response after 17DD-YF primovaccination.

II Brazilian Society of Rheumatology consensus for lupus nephritis diagnosis and treatment

OBJECTIVE

To develop the second evidence-based Brazilian Society of Rheumatology consensus for diagnosis and treatment of lupus nephritis (LN).

METHODS

Two methodologists and 20 rheumatologists from Lupus Comittee of Brazilian Society of Rheumatology participate in the development of this guideline. Fourteen PICO questions were defined and a systematic review was performed. Eligible randomized controlled trials were analyzed regarding complete renal remission, partial renal remission, serum creatinine, proteinuria, serum creatinine doubling, progression to end-stage renal disease, renal relapse, and severe adverse events (infections and mortality). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to develop these recommendations. Recommendations required ≥82% of agreement among the voting members and were classified as strongly in favor, weakly in favor, conditional, weakly against or strongly against a particular intervention. Other aspects of LN management (diagnosis, general principles of treatment, treatment of comorbidities and refractory cases) were evaluated through literature review and expert opinion.

RESULTS

All SLE patients should undergo creatinine and urinalysis tests to assess renal involvement. Kidney biopsy is considered the gold standard for diagnosing LN but, if it is not available or there is a contraindication to the procedure, therapeutic decisions should be based on clinical and laboratory parameters. Fourteen recommendations were developed. Target Renal response (TRR) was defined as improvement or maintenance of renal function (±10% at baseline of treatment) combined with a decrease in 24-h proteinuria or 24-h UPCR of 25% at 3 months, a decrease of 50% at 6 months, and proteinuria < 0.8 g/24 h at 12 months. Hydroxychloroquine should be prescribed to all SLE patients, except in cases of contraindication. Glucocorticoids should be used at the lowest dose and for the minimal necessary period. In class III or IV (±V), mycophenolate (MMF), cyclophosphamide, MMF plus tacrolimus (TAC), MMF plus belimumab or TAC can be used as induction therapy. For maintenance therapy, MMF or azathioprine (AZA) are the first choice and TAC or cyclosporin or leflunomide can be used in patients who cannot use MMF or AZA. Rituximab can be prescribed in cases of refractory disease. In cases of failure in achieving TRR, it is important to assess adherence, immunosuppressant dosage, adjuvant therapy, comorbidities, and consider biopsy/rebiopsy.

CONCLUSION

This consensus provides evidence-based data to guide LN diagnosis and treatment, supporting the development of public and supplementary health policies in Brazil.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of yellow fever vaccine in people with HIV

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate immunogenicity and reactogenicity of yellow fever (YF) vaccine in people with HIV (PWH) compared to HIV-uninfected controls.

DESIGN

In this longitudinal interventional trial (NCT03132311), PWH with CD4 + cell count ≥200 cells/μl and controls, aged 18-59, without a previous history of YF vaccination received a single standard dose of YF vaccine (17DD) and were followed at Days 5, 30 and Year 1.

METHODS

YF-neutralization titers were measured at Days 0, 30 and Year 1 and geometric mean titers (GMT) were calculated. Adverse events (AE) and YF virus detection were measured at Days 5 and 30. Linear regression evaluated factors associated with YF-neutralization titers.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eighteen PWH and 82 controls were included. At baseline, all PWH were using antiretroviral therapy; 92.6% had undetectable HIV viral load (VL) and median CD4 + cell count was 630 cells/μl [interquartile range (IQR) 463-888]. YF vaccine was safe and there were no serious AEs. At Day 30, seroconversion was observed in 98.6% of PWH [95% confidence interval (CI): 95.6-99.6] and in 100% of controls (95% CI: 93.9-100); at Year 1, 94.0% of PWH (95% CI: 89.6-96.7) and 98.4% of controls (95% CI 90.3-99.9) were seropositive. PWH had lower GMTs than controls at Day 30 and Year 1. Baseline VL >1000 copies/ml, low CD4 + cell count and low CD4 + /CD8 + ratio were associated with lower YF-neutralization titers.

CONCLUSIONS

YF vaccine is safe in PWH with CD4 + cell count ≥200 cells/μl. YF vaccine immunogenicity is impaired in PWH, particularly among those with high VL, low CD4 + cell count and low CD4 + /CD8 + ratio at vaccination and YF-neutralization titers decays over time.

Fractional Dosing of Yellow Fever Live Attenuated 17D Vaccine: A Perspective

Yellow fever virus (YFV) is a mosquito-borne flavivirus that causes over 109,000 severe infections and over 51,000 deaths annually in endemic areas of sub-Saharan Africa and tropical South America. The virus has a transmission cycle involving mosquitoes and humans or non-human primates (NHPs) as the vertebrate hosts. Although yellow fever (YF) is prevented by a live attenuated vaccine (strain 17D), recent epidemics in Angola, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and Brazil put great pressure on vaccine stockpiles. This resulted in the World Health Organization (WHO) and Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) implementing, on an emergency basis only, off-label dose-sparing techniques and policies during 2016-2018 to protect as many people in DRC and Brazil as possible from disease during unexpected large outbreaks of YF. Subsequently non-inferiority studies involving full doses compared to fractional doses indicated promising results, leading some policy-makers and scientists to consider utilizing YF vaccine fractional doses in non-emergency scenarios. Although the additional data on the immunogenicity and safety of fractional doses are promising, there are several questions and considerations that remain regarding the use of fractional doses, including differences in the initial antibody kinetics, differences in the immune response in certain populations, and durability of the immune response to fractional doses compared to full doses. Until the remaining knowledge gaps are addressed, full doses instead of fractional doses should continue to be used unless there are insufficient doses of the vaccine available to control outbreaks of YF.

Distinct impact of DMARD combination and monotherapy in immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the distinct impact of disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) combination and monotherapy in immune response to an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

This phase 4 prospective study analysed seroconversion (SC) of anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) and neutralising antibodies (NAb) induced by the inactivated vaccine (CoronaVac) in patients with RA in comparison to controls (CG). Disease activity and treatment were also assessed. Only participants with baseline negative IgG/NAb were included.

RESULTS

Patients with RA (N=260) and CG (N=104) had comparable median ages (59 years (50-65 years) vs 58 years (49.8-64 years), p=0.483). Patients with RA had moderate but lower SC (61.8% vs 94.2%, p<0.001) and NAb positivity (45% vs 78.6%, p<0.001) in comparison to CG after full vaccination. Baseline disease activity did not influence immunogenicity (p>0.05). After multivariate analyses, factors independently related to reduced SC were: older age (OR=0.79 (0.70-0.89) for each 5-year interval, p<0.001), methotrexate (OR=0.54 (0.29-0.98), p=0.044), abatacept (OR=0.37 (0.19-0.73), p=0.004) and number of DMARD (OR=0.55 (0.33-0.90), p=0.018). Regarding NAb, age (OR=0.87 (0.78-0.96) for each 5-year interval, p=0.007) and prednisone >7.5 mg/day (OR=0.38 (0.19-0.74), p=0.004) were negatively related to the presence of NAb. Further comparison of SC/NAb positivity among RA treatment subgroups and CG revealed that methotrexate/tofacitinib/abatacept/tocilizumab use, in monotherapy or in combination, resulted in lower responses (p<0.05), while tumour necrosis factor inhibitor and other conventional synthetic DMARD interfered solely when combined with other therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RA under DMARD have a moderate immunogenicity to CoronaVac. We identified that nearly all DMARD combinations have a deleterious effect in immunogenicity, whereas a more restricted number of drugs (methotrexate/tofacitinib/abatacept/tocilizumab) also hampered this response as monotherapy. These findings reinforce the need of a broader approach, not limited to specific drugs, to improve vaccine response for this population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS

NCT04754698.

Vaccinology in pediatric rheumatology: Past, present and future

With the introduction of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), the treatment of pediatric patients with autoimmune/inflammatory rheumatic diseases (pedAIIRD) has advanced from the "Stone Age" to modern times, resulting in much better clinical outcomes. However, everything comes with a price, and use of new bDMARDs has resulted in an increased risk of infections. Therefore, preventing infections in pedAIIRD patients is one of the top priorities. The most effective preventive measure against infection is vaccination. The first study on humoral immunity after vaccination in pediatric rheumatology was published in 1974 and on safety in 1993. For many years, data about safety and immunogenicity in pedAIIRD patients were available only for non-live vaccines and the first studies on live-attenuated vaccines in pedAIIRD patients treated with immunosuppressive therapy were available only after 2007. Even today the data are limited, especially for children treated with bDMARDs. Vaccinations with non-live vaccines are nowadays recommended, although their long-term immunogenicity and efficacy in pedAIIRD patients are still under investigation. Vaccinations with live-attenuated vaccines are not universally recommended in immunosuppressed patients. However, measles-mumps-rubella booster and varicella zoster virus vaccination can be considered under specific conditions. Additional research is needed to provide more evidence on safety and immunogenicity, especially regarding live-attenuated vaccines in immunosuppressed patients with pedAIIRD. Due to the limited number of these patients, well-designed, prospective, international studies are needed. Further challenges were presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. This mini review article reviews past and present data and discusses the future of vaccinology in pediatric rheumatology.