COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance among Liver Transplant Recipients

A Practical Update on COVID-19 and Inflammatory Bowel Disease: COVID-19 Disease Risk and Vaccine Safety and Efficacy

The COVID-19 pandemic introduced significant uncertainty regarding the care of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Substantial research efforts have made progress in answering many of the questions that arose, but the constantly shifting paradigm of COVID-19-related research and recommendations has made it challenging for IBD clinicians to remain up-to-date. The goal of this article is to provide a concise and practical summary of the literature evaluating COVID-19 disease risk in addition to COVID-19 vaccine safety, immunogenicity, real-world effectiveness, and uptake among patients with IBD.

COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among Italian parents: A systematic review and meta-analysis

In May 2021, the Italian government extended the COVID-19 vaccination campaign to 12- to 18-year-old subjects and, starting December 2021, vaccines were also offered to children between 5 and 11 years-old. Despite these efforts, suboptimal vaccination coverages are reported. The purpose of this review is to estimate the proportion of parents/caregivers of children and adolescents expressing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Italy. The vaccine hesitation rate among parents of minors was 55.1% (95%CI: 43.8-66.1%). A higher value was evidenced in studies focusing on children (59.9%; 95%CI = 43.7-75.1%) compared to the ones focusing on adolescents (51.3%; 95%CI = 34.5-68.0%). The main reasons for unwillingness were the belief that the vaccine was unsafe or ineffective, fear of adverse events, and considering COVID-19 a non-threatening disease. The implementation of effective communication campaigns and health educational programs on safe pediatric vaccinations is essential to support strategies to bolster vaccination confidence.

Attitudes towards Vaccinations in a National Italian Cohort of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

The vaccination status of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) should be investigated before starting any treatment, and patients should eventually be vaccinated against vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). Patients with IBD may have suboptimal vaccination rates. The aim of this study was to evaluate the vaccination coverage, attitude towards vaccinations, and determinants among an Italian cohort of patients with IBD.

METHODS

AMICI, the Italian IBD patients' association, sent an anonymous web-based questionnaire in February 2021. Previous vaccination status and patients' attitudes towards vaccinations were recorded. We examined the factors influencing their attitudes using crude and adjusted odds ratios (adjORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Among the 4039 patients invited, 1252 patients (including 729 women, median age 47.7 [37-58]) completed the questionnaire, with a response rate of 25.3%. Respondents declared being vaccinated against tetanus (74.1%), flu (67.7%; last season), MMR (43.3%), HBV (37.1%), pneumococcus (29.1%), meningitis (20%), HAV (16%), VZV (15.3%), and HPV (7.6%). Complete vaccination history was not remembered by 20.7% of the patients. One thousand one hundred and twelve (88.8%) expressed a positive attitude towards vaccination, 91 (7.3%) were indifferent, and 49 (3.9%) reported being opposed to vaccinations. The belief of a possible return of VPDs with a decline in vaccination coverage rates was the factor most strongly related to a positive attitude towards vaccinations (adjOR 5.67, 95% CI 3.45-9.30, p-value < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A low vaccination rate against some VPDs was found among a national cohort of patients with IBD, despite a generally positive attitude towards vaccinations.

Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients Who Have Undergone Liver Transplantation Because of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Many clinical studies have shown that the COVID-19 case fatality rate is higher in older patients, those with comorbidities, those with immunosuppressive conditions, and those who stay in the intensive care unit. This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of 66 liver transplant (LT) patients with primary liver cancer who were exposed to COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

Demographic and clinical data of 66 patients with primary liver cancer (hepatocellular carcinoma = 64, hepatoblastoma = 1, cholangiocarcinoma = 1) who underwent LT in our institute and were exposed to COVID-19 infection between March 2020 and November 2021 were analyzed in this cross-sectional study. The following data of the patients were recorded: age, sex, body mass index (kg/m2), blood group, underlying primary liver disease, smoking, tumor characteristics, post-transplant immunosuppressive agents, COVID-19 symptoms, hospitalization, intensive care unit stay, intubation, and other clinical features.

RESULTS

There were 55 (83.3%) male and 11 (16.7%) female patients, with a median age of 58 years. Sixty-four patients were exposed to COVID-19 only once, whereas the remaining 2 patients were exposed 2 and 4 times, respectively. After exposure to COVID-19, it was determined that 37 patients used antiviral drugs, 25 were hospitalized, 9 were followed in the intensive care unit, and 3 were intubated. One intubated patient was under hospital follow-up because of biliary complications before exposure to COVID-19, and this patient died from sepsis.

CONCLUSION

The low mortality rate of LT patients with primary liver cancer exposed to COVID-19 infection can be attributed to background immunosuppression that prevents cytokine storm. However, it is appropriate to support this study with multicenter studies to make strong comments on this issue.

Learning from the Past to Improve the Future—Vaccine Hesitancy Determinants in the Italian Population: A Systematic Review

WHO identifies vaccine hesitancy (VH) as one of the ten threats to global health. The authors bring to the international scientific community an Italian episode that offers the opportunity to renew the discussion on the extent of the VH matter. The purpose of this systematic review is to analyze the factors determining vaccine hesitancy in the Italian population, to understand its roots, and suggest potential strategies to mitigate it. A systematic review of the literature according to the PRISMA guidelines was carried out using the SCOPUS and Medline (via PubMed) databases, using the following strategy: (COVID-19 vaccines) AND (vaccination hesitancy) AND (Italy). After the selection process, 36 articles were included in this systematic review. The most frequently detected factors associated with VH in the Italian population can be grouped as vaccine-related factors, socio-cultural factors, and demographic factors. Currently, we are facing a gap between the population and science, governments, and institutions. To heal this breach, it is necessary to strengthen the trust of the population through the implementation of health communication and public education strategies, while scientific literacy must continue to support families and individuals in discerning evidence from opinions to recognize the real risks and balance them with the benefits.

Investigation on the hesitancy of COVID-19 vaccination among liver transplant recipients: A cross-sectional study in China

Objectives

The hospitalization and mortality rate from COVID-19 appears to be higher in liver transplant recipients when compared with general populations. Vaccination is an effective strategy to reduce the risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in liver transplant recipients.

Methods

In April 2022, we conducted an online-based survey through WeChat platform to investigate the vaccination hesitancy among liver transplant recipients followed at Shanghai Renji Hospital and further explore possible influencing factors. Survey items included multiple choice, Likert-type rating scale and open-ended answers. Participants were classified as no hesitancy group and hesitancy group. Using univariate analysis, ROC curve analysis and multiple logistic regression to evaluate associations between baseline characteristics and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Results

449 liver transplant recipients participated in the survey with 299 (66.6%) of them being categorized as vaccine hesitancy. In no hesitancy group, 73 (48.7%) recipients had completed vaccination, while 77 (51.3%) were not yet but intended to be vaccinated. In contrast, 195 (65.2%) recipients in hesitancy group were hesitant to get vaccinated, while the remaining 104 (34.8%) refused. The most common side effect was injection arm pain (n = 9, 12.3%). The common reasons for vaccine willingness was trusted in the effectiveness of the vaccine and fear of contracting COVID-19. The most common reason for vaccination hesitancy is fear of side effects, and the most effective improvement was the support from the attending physician. Factors associated with vaccine hesitancy include female sex, influenza vaccination status, awareness of the importance and safety of vaccine, attitudes of doctors and others toward vaccine, medical worker source information of vaccine, relative/friend with medical background, total score of VHS (Vaccine Hesitancy Scale), accessibility of vaccine.

Conclusion

For liver transplant recipients, COVID-19 vaccine is an important preventive measure. Identifying the factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is therefore critical to developing a promotion plan. Our study shows that more comprehensive vaccine knowledge popularization and relevant medical workers' training can effectively improve the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine in this population.

A systematic literature review to clarify the concept of vaccine hesitancy

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is considered a top-10 global health threat. The concept of VH has been described and applied inconsistently. This systematic review aims to clarify VH by analysing how it is operationalized. We searched PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO databases on 14 January 2022. We selected 422 studies containing operationalizations of VH for inclusion. One limitation is that studies of lower quality were not excluded. Our qualitative analysis reveals that VH is conceptualized as involving (1) cognitions or affect, (2) behaviour and (3) decision making. A wide variety of methods have been used to measure VH. Our findings indicate the varied and confusing use of the term VH, leading to an impracticable concept. We propose that VH should be defined as a state of indecisiveness regarding a vaccination decision.

Hesitancy toward the Full COVID-19 Vaccination among Kidney, Liver and Lung Transplant Recipients in Italy

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination hesitancy is a threat as COVID-19 vaccines have reduced both viral transmission and virus-associated mortality rates, particularly in high-risk subgroups. Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are particularly vulnerable, as the underlying causes of their organ failure and the chronic immunosuppression are associated with a lower immune response to COVID-19 vaccines, and with an excessive risk of death due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to evaluate COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy and its reasons in a population of SOTRs.

METHODS

All the SOTRs attending our post-transplant clinics were asked to fill in a vaccination status form with specific validated questions related to their willingness to receive a third vaccine dose. In the case of negative answers, the patients were encouraged to explain the reasons for their refusal. Among the SOTRs (1899), 1019 were investigated (53.7%).

RESULTS

Overall, 5.01% (51/1019) of the SOTRs raised concerns regarding the future third dose vaccination. In more detail, hesitancy rates were 3.3% (15/453), 4.2% (7/166), and 7.3% (29/400) among the investigated liver, lung, and kidney transplant recipients, respectively (p = 0.0018). The main reasons for hesitancy were fear of adverse events (30/51, 58.8%) and perceived lack of efficacy (21/51, 41.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Full adherence to ongoing or future vaccination campaigns is crucial to prevent, or at least reduce, COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality in fragile patients. The identification of the reasons influencing COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in these patients is very important to establish appropriate and targeted patient-doctor communication strategies, and to further implement specific vaccination campaigns.

New-onset and relapsed liver diseases following COVID-19 vaccination: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Liver diseases post-COVID-19 vaccination is extremely rare but can occur. A growing body of evidence has indicated that portal vein thrombosis, autoimmune hepatitis, raised liver enzymes and liver injuries, etc., may be potential consequence of COVID-19 vaccines.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the results of a systematic review for new-onset and relapsed liver disease following COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

For this systematic review, we searched Proquest, Medline, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, Scopus and Nature through the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses PRISMA guideline for studies on the incidence of new onset or relapsed liver diseases post-COVID-19 vaccination, published from December 1, 2020 to July 31, 2022, with English language restriction.

RESULTS

Two hundred seventy-five cases from one hundred and eighteen articles were included in the qualitative synthesis of this systematic review. Autoimmune hepatitis (138 cases) was the most frequent pathology observed post-COVID-19 vaccination, followed by portal vein thrombosis (52 cases), raised liver enzymes (26 cases) and liver injury (21 cases). Other cases include splanchnic vein thrombosis, acute cellular rejection of the liver, jaundice, hepatomegaly, acute hepatic failure and hepatic porphyria. Mortality was reported in any of the included cases for acute hepatic failure (n = 4, 50%), portal vein thrombosis (n = 25, 48.1%), splanchnic vein thrombosis (n = 6, 42.8%), jaundice (n = 1, 12.5%), raised liver enzymes (n = 2, 7.7%), and autoimmune hepatitis (n = 3, 2.2%). Most patients were easily treated without any serious complications, recovered and did not require long-term hepatic therapy.

CONCLUSION

Reported evidence of liver diseases post-COIVD-19 vaccination should not discourage vaccination against this worldwide pandemic. The number of reported cases is relatively very small in relation to the hundreds of millions of vaccinations that have occurred and the protective benefits offered by COVID-19 vaccination far outweigh the risks.

Solid Organ Rejection following SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination or COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Solid organ rejection post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COVID-19 infection is extremely rare but can occur. T-cell recognition of antigen is the primary and central event that leads to the cascade of events that result in rejection of a transplanted organ. Objectives: To describe the results of a systematic review for solid organ rejections following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COVID-19 infection. Methods: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Proquest, Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, Scopus and Nature through the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for studies on the incidence of solid organ rejection post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COVID-19 infection, published from 1 December 2019 to 31 May 2022, with English language restriction. Results: One hundred thirty-six cases from fifty-two articles were included in the qualitative synthesis of this systematic review (56 solid organs rejected post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and 40 solid organs rejected following COVID-19 infection). Cornea rejection (44 cases) was the most frequent organ observed post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and following COVID-19 infection, followed by kidney rejection (36 cases), liver rejection (12 cases), lung rejection (2 cases), heart rejection (1 case) and pancreas rejection (1 case). The median or mean patient age ranged from 23 to 94 years across the studies. The majority of the patients were male (n = 51, 53.1%) and were of White (Caucasian) (n = 51, 53.7%) and Hispanic (n = 15, 15.8%) ethnicity. A total of fifty-six solid organ rejections were reported post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination [Pfizer-BioNTech (n = 31), Moderna (n = 14), Oxford Uni-AstraZeneca (n = 10) and Sinovac-CoronaVac (n = 1)]. The median time from SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to organ rejection was 13.5 h (IQR, 3.2–17.2), while the median time from COVID-19 infection to organ rejection was 14 h (IQR, 5–21). Most patients were easily treated without any serious complications, recovered and did not require long-term allograft rejection therapy [graft success (n = 70, 85.4%), graft failure (n = 12, 14.6%), survived (n = 90, 95.7%) and died (n = 4, 4.3%)]. Conclusion: The reported evidence of solid organ rejections post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COIVD-19 infection should not discourage vaccination against this worldwide pandemic. The number of reported cases is relatively small in relation to the hundreds of millions of vaccinations that have occurred, and the protective benefits offered by SARS-CoV-2 vaccination far outweigh the risks.

Mycophenolate mofetil decreases humoral responses to three doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

After 2 doses, the efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination seems to be lower in solid organ transplant recipients than in the immunocompetent population. The objective of this study was to determine the humoral response rate after vaccination, including with a booster dose, and to identify risk factors for non-responsiveness in liver transplant recipients.

METHODS

We included all patients seen in consultation in two French liver transplant centres between January 1, 2021, and March 15, 2021.

RESULTS

598 liver transplant recipients were enrolled and 327 were included for analysis. Sixteen patients received one dose, 63 patients two doses and 248 patients three doses. Anti-SARS-Cov-2 antibodies were detected in 242 out of 327 (74.0%) liver transplant patients after vaccination. Considering an optimal serologic response defined as an antibody titre >260 BAU/ml, 172 patients (52.6%) were responders. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) treatment was an independent risk factor for a failure to develop anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after vaccination (OR 0.458; 95%CI 0.258-0.813; p = .008). Conversely, male gender (OR 2.247, 95%CI 1.194-4.227; p = .012) and receiving an mRNA vaccine (vs a non-mRNA vaccine) (OR 4.107, 95%CI 1.145-14.731; p = .030) were independent predictive factors for developing an optimal humoral response after vaccination. None of the patients who received the vaccine experienced any serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Even after a third booster dose, response rate to vaccination is decreased in liver transplant recipients. MMF appears to be a major determinant of seroconversion and optimal response to vaccination in these patients.

Approaches to pretransplant vaccination

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

Vaccination Status and Attitudes towards Vaccines in a Cohort of Patients with Celiac Disease

(1) Background: The identification of vaccination status and attitudes towards vaccines among celiac disease (CD) patients is of great importance, but it has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to investigate coverage against vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs), attitudes towards vaccinations, and its determinants among CD patients. (2) Methods: An anonymous web-based validated questionnaire was sent to a mailing list of CD adult patients. Patients were asked to self-report their previous vaccinations and attitudes towards vaccinations, which were defined as positive, negative, and partially positive/negative. The influencing factors towards vaccinations were investigated, and crude and adjusted odds ratios (AdjORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. (3) Results: The questionnaire was sent to 412 patients, with a response rate of 31.6% (130 patients, 105 women, median age 40 years, interquartile range 36–51). Patients self-reported vaccination against the following diseases: 73.8% tetanus, 42.3% flu, 20% measles, mumps and rubella, 19.2% meningitis, and 16.2% pneumococcus. Thirty-two people (24.6%) did not remember all of their previous vaccinations. In total, 104 (80%) respondents had a positive attitude towards vaccines, 25 (19.2%) a partially positive/negative one, and 1 a negative one. The determinants significantly influencing the positive attitude were being a graduate (AdjORs 7.49) and a belief in the possible return of VPDs with declining vaccination coverage rates (AdjORs 7.42), while the use of complementary and alternative medicines (AdjORs 0.11) and past negative experience (AdjORs 0.16) were associated with a negative attitude. (4) Conclusions: Despite four out of five CD patients showing a strong positive attitude towards vaccinations, one out of five had a partially negative one. Only a minority (16–20%) reported being vaccinated against some VPDs potentially harmful to their CD because of hyposplenism, such as meningitis and pneumococcus. The low vaccination rate against some VPDs, in spite of the 80% of CD patients stating a positive attitude towards vaccination, may be explained in part by patients’ vaccine hesitancy and in part by a possible role of physicians in under-prescribing vaccinations to these patients. These results may be a starting point for developing specific vaccination campaigns to increase vaccination rates against VPDs in CD patients.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccinations in Patients With Chronic Liver Disease and Liver Transplant Recipients: An Update

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a current global pandemic associated with an increased mortality, particularly in patients with comorbidities. Patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) and liver transplant (LT) recipients are at higher risk of morbidity and mortality after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Many liver societies have recommended that these patients should receive COVID-19 vaccinations, although there are limited studies assessing risks and benefits in this population. In addition, two doses of mRNA vaccines may not provide sufficient immune response, and booster dose(s) may be necessary, especially in LT recipients. Notably, variants of concern have recently emerged, and it remains unclear whether currently available vaccines provide adequate and durable protective immunity against these novel variants. This review focuses on the role of COVID-19 vaccinations in CLD and LT recipients.

[Immunosuppressed people's beliefs, expectations, and experiences with COVID-19 vaccinations : Results of a longitudinal study]

BACKGROUND

Immunocompromised people are less likely to be vaccinated, despite an increased benefit of many vaccinations in terms of benefit-risk assessment, including the vaccines against SARS CoV-2 (COVID-19). Attitudes, expectations, and experiences with previous vaccinations influence the decision to get vaccinated.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the attitudes of immunocompromised people towards vaccinations in general and COVID-19 vaccination in particular and their experiences with COVID-19 vaccinations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

As part of the CoCo Immune study, immunocompromised participants were surveyed in the spring and summer of 2021 (1 November 2021-7 September 2021) using questionnaires. Initially, they were asked about their expectations concerning a COVID-19 vaccination and followed up about their experience after COVID-19 vaccination. In addition, sociodemographic data, general attitudes toward vaccinations and experiences with previous vaccinations were collected. Analysis was performed using descriptive and bivariate statistics.

RESULTS

The 243 participants mostly approved vaccinations and expected the COVID-19 vaccination to be effective and well-tolerated. Women were more concerned about the safety of vaccinations and were more often worried about side effects. Older persons felt better informed than younger persons. Participants who reported subjective side effects of previous vaccinations were more skeptical about vaccinations as well as the government institutions that recommend vaccinations. They less often agreed with the statement "in retrospect, the COVID-19 vaccination has been harmless for me so far".

DISCUSSION

The participants mostly expressed a positive attitude and anticipation towards COVID-19 vaccinations; however, the age and sex differences found suggest that there are different information needs which should be addressed when educating individuals about vaccinations or designing vaccination campaigns.

Vaccine Hesitancy Under the Magnifying Glass: A Systematic Review of the Uses and Misuses of an Increasingly Popular Construct

Resistance to vaccines has hindered attempts to contain and prevent outbreaks of infectious diseases for centuries. More recently, however, the term "vaccine hesitancy" has been used to describe not necessarily outright resistance but also a delay in acceptance or uncertainty regarding vaccines. Given concerns about hesitancy and its impact on vaccine uptake rates, researchers increasingly shifted the focus from resistance to vaccines toward vaccine hesitancy. Acknowledging the urgency to accurately assess the phenomenon, it is critical to understand the state of the literature, focusing on issues of conceptualization and operationalization. To carry out this systematic review, we collected and analyzed all published empirical articles from 2000 to 2021 that explicitly included quantitative self-report measures of vaccine hesitancy (k = 86). Using a mixed-method approach, the review demonstrates and quantifies crucial inconsistencies in the measurement of the construct, lack of clarity in regard to the determination of who should or should not be defined as hesitant, and overreliance on unrepresentative samples. Crucially, our analysis points to a potential systematic bias toward exaggerating the level of hesitancy in the population. Modeling a vaccine hesitancy co-citation network, the analysis also points to the existence of insular academic silos that make it harder to achieve a unified measurement tool. Theoretical and practical implications for academics, practitioners, and policymakers are discussed.