Immune response to hepatitis B vaccine among patients on hemodialysis

Prevalence of Hepatitis B Virus, Hepatitis C Virus, and HIV Infections in Hemodialysis Patients at Kano Kidney Center

Background Hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections are more prevalent in hemodialysis patients compared to the general population. The objective of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of HBV, HCV, and HIV infections in hemodialysis patients dialyzing regularly at Kano Kidney Center (KKC) in the Eastern Health Cluster of Saudi Arabia in 2022. Methods This retrospective study included all hemodialysis patients who were dialyzed regularly at KKC during 2022. Their electronic medical records were reviewed for the results of HBV, HCV, and HIV along with the patient's demographics, comorbid conditions, and dialysis history. The study was approved and monitored by the Institutional Review Board of Dammam Medical Complex. Results A total of 239 regular hemodialysis patients were included, consisting of 142 males and 97 females (59.41% and 40.59%, respectively), with a mean age of 52.71±15.83 years. Most of the patients were Saudis (156 patients, 65.27%) with the non-Saudi patients being composed mostly of Arabian patients. Nine patients (3.77%) tested positive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), the serologic hallmark of HBV infection. Two patients (0.84%) had resolved HBV infections as evidenced by positive hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) and hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs). However, the majority (226 patients, 94.56%) were never tested for anti-HBc. Anti-HBs, which can imply long-term immunity against HBV from prior immunizations or infections, were positive in 165 patients (69.04%). A protective anti-HBs level of ≥ 10 IU/L was detected in 158 patients (66.11%) including 104 patients (43.51%) having ≥ 100 IU/L. Eighteen patients (7.53%) had reactive HCV antibodies. Four patients (1.67%) had chronic HCV infection as they had detectable HCV RNA. The remaining 14 patients (5.86%) cleared HCV either spontaneously (seven patients, 2.93%) or by medications (seven patients, 2.93%). HIV screening tests were negative in all 239 patients (100%). HBsAg-positive patients did not have any statistically significant differences from HBsAg-negative patients. On the other hand, the patients who were positive for HCV antibodies were older than the patients who were negative for HCV antibodies (60.66 vs 52.05 years on average, p-value <0.05). They also contained a statistically larger proportion of non-Saudi patients than the patients with no evidence of prior infections (61.11% vs 32.13%, p-value <0.05). Conclusions The study found that the prevalence of HBV and HCV infections among hemodialysis patients in KKC at 3.77% and 1.67%, respectively, is higher than that reported in the general population in Saudi Arabia, with non-Saudis having a higher prevalence rate of HCV infection than Saudis. However, the current prevalence rate is lower compared to the previous studies that were conducted in Saudi Arabia in the first decade of the 21st century, and there were no cases of HIV infections. Nevertheless, a significant proportion of patients had unprotective or negative anti-HBs antibody titers, indicating the need for strict vaccination protocols and monitoring of antibody titers to ensure optimal protection.

Humoral and cellular immune response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine in pediatric kidney transplant recipients compared with dialysis patients and healthy children

BACKGROUND

Compared with the general population, the immune response to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines is lower in adult kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). However, data is limited for pediatric KTRs. In this study, we aimed to assess humoral and cellular immune responses to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in pediatric KTRs.

METHODS

This multicenter, prospective, case-control study included 63 KTRs (37 male, aged 12-21 years), 19 dialysis patients, and 19 controls. Humoral (anti-SARS-CoV2 IgG, neutralizing Ab (nAb)) and cellular (interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA)) immune responses were assessed at least one month after two doses of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine.

RESULTS

Among COVID-19 naïve KTRs (n = 46), 76.1% tested positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG, 54.3% for nAb, and 63% for IGRA. Serum levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and nAb activity were significantly lower in KTRs compared to dialysis and control groups (p < 0.05 for all). Seropositivity in KTRs was independently associated with shorter transplant duration (p = 0.005), and higher eGFR (p = 0.007). IGRA titer was significantly lower than dialysis patients (p = 0.009). Twenty (43.4%) KTRs were positive for all immune parameters. Only four of 11 seronegative KTRs were IGRA-positive. COVID-19 recovered KTRs had significantly higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and nAb activity levels than COVID-19 naïve KTRs (p = 0.018 and p = 0.007, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The humoral and cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine are lower in pediatric KTRs compared to dialysis patients. Further prospective studies are required to demonstrate the clinical efficacy of the mRNA vaccine in KTRs. This prospective study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05465863, registered retrospectively at 20.07.2022). A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

Immunogenicity Rates After SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in People With End-stage Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Adults receiving dialysis treatment have a higher likelihood of death when infected with SARS-CoV-2 than adults not receiving dialysis treatment. To date, the immune response of people receiving dialysis after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination has not been systematically discussed.

Objective

To assess immunogenicity rates in people with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) receiving SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, explore postvaccination potential risk factors for nonresponse, and assess whether receiving dialysis is associated with different antibody response rates compared with the nondialysis population.

Data Sources

This systematic review and meta-analysis used articles from PubMed, Medline, and Embase published before July 30, 2021, as well as articles in the medRxiv preprint server.

Study Selection

Studies that evaluated the immunogenicity rate according to the postvaccine antibody response rate in patients with ESKD receiving dialysis were selected.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

The meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. A random-effects model was used. Two independent reviewers conducted the literature search and extracted the data.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the pooled antibody postvaccine response rates in individuals with ESKD. The secondary outcomes were pooled response rates in individuals receiving and not receiving dialysis. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were conducted to identify the sources of heterogeneity.

Results

A total of 32 studies were included. The overall immunogenicity rate of the dialysis group was 86% (95% CI, 81%-89%). Meta-regression showed a significant difference was detected in the postvaccine response rate on the basis of prevalence of diabetes (regression coefficient, -0.06; 95% CI, -0.10 to -0.02; P = .004). Compared with nondialysis controls, patients in the dialysis group had a lower response rate after the first (relative risk [RR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.79; I2 = 70.2%) and second (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.93; I2 = 72.2%) doses, with statistically significantly increased RR between first and second doses (P = .007).

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that the immunogenicity rate among patients receiving dialysis was 41% after the first dose and 89% after the second dose. Diabetes might be a risk factor for nonresponse in the dialysis population. Patients receiving dialysis had a poorer antibody response rate than did individuals not receiving dialysis, particularly after the first dose.

Long-term durability of immunogenicity induced by standard and triple-dose hepatitis B vaccine in patients receiving methadone maintenance treatment

OBJECTIVES

We explored the long-term immunogenicity induced by 60 μg and 20 μg hepatitis B vaccines among patients receiving methadone maintenance treatment (MMT).

METHODS

In initial study, a randomized controlled trial was conducted, in which patients receiving MMT were administered 20 µg (IM20 group) or 60 µg (IM60 group) hepatitis B vaccines at months 0, 1, and 6. In this study, the responders at month 7 were followed-up at months 18, 30, and 42 to estimate long-term immunogenicity.

RESULTS

The response rate decreased from 78.0% (39/50) to 31.1% (14/45) in the IM20 group, and from 86.0% (43/50) to 50.0% (20/40) in the IM60 group from month 7 to 42. Vaccine-induced responses in 75% of patients were observed for 14.2 months in the IM20 group and for 20.0 months in the IM60 group, and differences between these two groups were non-significant (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The three-dose 20 µg and 60 µg hepatitis B vaccines showed similar rapid hepatitis B surface antibody decreases. Abbreviations: HBV, hepatitis B virus; MMT, methadone maintenance treatment; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; HBsAg, hepatitis B surface antigen; anti-HBs, hepatitis B surface antibody; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; IQR, interquartile range; GEE, generalized estimated equation.

Evaluation of a hepatitis B virus protection intervention among interns at Zagazig University Hospitals, Egypt

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is the most common serious liver infection. The study aimed to evaluate the effect of a HBV protection intervention on interns, as regards their knowledge, attitude and immune response to HB vaccine and to identify the factors affecting their compliance and immune response to HB vaccination at Zagazig University Hospitals.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study was conducted in 3 phases over 10 months. Phase 1: assessment of knowledge, attitude and HCV/HBV immune status. Phase 2: the implementation of HBV protection campaign; vaccine administration and health education sessions. Phase 3: the assessment of the immune response to the vaccine and the change in knowledge and attitude.

RESULTS

Out of 120 participants, 60% were compliant to the vaccination schedule. Needle-stick injury, the seriousness of HBV infection and attendance of infection control courses are the motivating factors to vaccination (p < 0.05). After the 3rd dose, 9.7% were non-responders. BMI and diabetes were the statistically significant predictors of the immune response. The HCWs compliant with vaccination schedule had higher mean scores regarding; total knowledge (15.5 ± 2.1), p < 0.0001 and attitude (14.34 ± 3.8) p < 0.05. A significant improvement is recorded from the posttest results, p < 0.000.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive protective program against HBV is an effective tool. A compulsory vaccination program is still needed for interns. Post vaccination monitoring program, including protective measures for vaccine non responders is urgently needed with strict follow up of at risk groups. Occult HBV cases should not be overlooked when screening for immune response to vaccine.

Factors affecting inadequate response to HBV vaccine in hemodialysis patients: northeast anatolia survey with six hemodialysis centers

BACKGROUND

In hemodialysis patients Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is one of the problems. Because of HBV vaccine response is lower than in the general population, in this study it is aimed to determine the factors that may cause inadequate HBV vaccine response in hemodialysis patients.

METHODS

In study, HBsAg, anti-HBs, anti-HBc IgG data belonging to 278 patients were obtained from file and computer records. It was seen that seronegative cases had been given recombinant HBV vaccine. Anti-HBs titers were monitored 1 month after vaccination was completed. According to this, the patients are divided into two groups. Those with anti-HBs < 10 IU/mL were identified as non-responders and with anti-HBs ≥ 10 IU/mL as responders. Factors such as age, serum albumin and urea reduction rate which may affect inadequate response to HBV vaccine were evaluated. As statistical examination, Chi-square test was used for the analysis of the data determined by counting, and logistic regression was used for statistically significant independent variables in chi-square test. p value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant (Confidence interval: 95%).

RESULTS

Out of 278 patients, according to exclusion criteria 81 patients were excluded. 13.2%(26/197) of HBV vaccinated patients had insufficient response. The inadequate response rate to HBV vaccination was found to be higher in patients with age ≥ 65 (p = 0.039), serum albumin < 3.5 g/dL (p = 0.024) and urea reduction rate ≤ 65 (p = 0.028). No statistically significant relationship was found between inadequate response to HBV vaccine and anti-HCV positivity, presence of diabetes mellitus, anemia status, vitamin D therapy and vascular access pathway variability.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that relatively high patient age, low albumin level and insufficient urea reduction rate may cause inadequate HBV vaccine response. Taking these factors into consideration may provide a useful insight for an adequate response to vaccination.

Vaccine uptake and immune responses to HBV infection amongst vaccinated and non-vaccinated healthcare workers, household and sexual contacts to chronically infected HBV individuals in the South West Region of Cameroon

Background

HBV infection affects about 257 million people globally and Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest burden. The disease still constitutes a major public health problem despite the advent of preventive measures like the HBV vaccine. This study was aimed at identifying factors that influence vaccine uptake and the efficacy of administered vaccines among people at high risk of HBV infection.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study conducted between January 2016 and December 2017. A pretested semi-structured questionnaire was used to capture information on sociodemographic and vaccination status from healthcare workers, household and sexual contacts to HBV infected people. HBV serological panel as well as quantitative anti-HBs ELISA test was done for all participants. Additional information was obtained from the institutions that administered the vaccines.

Results

A total of 265 participants with a mean age of 32.1±8.7 were enrolled. Eighty (30.2%) of them had received at least 1 dose of the HBV vaccine while 185 (69.8%) were unvaccinated. Healthcare workers were the most vaccinated (37%). Ignorance, negligence, fear of injection and the cost of the vaccine all contributed to poor vaccine uptake in the study population. Natural immunity was seen in 9 (3.4%) of the participants. Only 64.9% of the vaccinated participants attained the desirable level of anti-HBs (≥10mIU/ml) 1–2 months after ≥ 3 doses of the vaccine. Age, gender, obesity, alcohol and smoking were not significantly associated with poor immune responses. No standardized protocol was followed by the institutions administering the vaccine.

Conclusion

This study revealed very poor vaccine uptake and poor immune responses to the HBV vaccine in the study population and this should urge the health sector in Cameroon to intensify their sensitization on HBV vaccine, standardize the protocol for storing and administering the vaccine, subsidize the cost of the vaccine especially amongst healthcare workers and encourage anti-HBs post vaccination testing.

Cancer; an induced disease of twentieth century! Induction of tolerance, increased entropy and 'Dark Energy': loss of biorhythms (Anabolism v. Catabolism)

Maintenance of health involves a synchronized network of catabolic and anabolic signals among organs/tissues/cells that requires differential bioenergetics from mitochondria and glycolysis (biological laws or biorhythms). We defined biological circadian rhythms as Yin (tumoricidal) and Yang (tumorigenic) arms of acute inflammation (effective immunity) involving immune and non-immune systems. Role of pathogens in altering immunity and inducing diseases and cancer has been documented for over a century. However, in 1955s decision makers in cancer/medical establishment allowed public (current baby boomers) to consume million doses of virus-contaminated polio vaccines. The risk of cancer incidence and mortality sharply rose from 5% (rate of hereditary/genetic or innate disease) in 1900s, to its current scary status of 33% or 50% among women and men, respectively. Despite better hygiene, modern detection technologies and discovery of antibiotics, baby boomers and subsequent 2–3 generations are sicker than previous generations at same age. American health status ranks last among other developed nations while America invests highest amount of resources for healthcare. In this perspective we present evidence that cancer is an induced disease of twentieth century, facilitated by a great deception of cancer/medical establishment for huge corporate profits. Unlike popularized opinions that cancer is 100, 200 or 1000 diseases, we demonstrate that cancer is only one disease; the severe disturbances in biorhythms (differential bioenergetics) or loss of balance in Yin and Yang of effective immunity. Cancer projects that are promoted and funded by decision makers are reductionist approaches, wrong and unethical and resulted in loss of millions of precious lives and financial toxicity to society. Public vaccination with pathogen-specific vaccines (e.g., flu, hepatitis, HPV, meningitis, measles) weakens, not promotes, immunity. Results of irresponsible projects on cancer sciences or vaccines are increased population of drug-dependent sick society. Outcome failure rates of claimed ‘targeted’ drugs, ‘precision’ or ‘personalized’ medicine are 90% (± 5) for solid tumors. We demonstrate that aging, frequent exposures to environmental hazards, infections and pathogen-specific vaccines and ingredients are ‘antigen overload’ for immune system, skewing the Yin and Yang response profiles and leading to induction of ‘mild’, ‘moderate’ or ‘severe’ immune disorders. Induction of decoy or pattern recognition receptors (e.g., PRRs), such as IRAK-M or IL-1dRs (‘designer’ molecules) and associated genomic instability and over-expression of growth promoting factors (e.g., pyruvate kinases, mTOR and PI3Ks, histamine, PGE2, VEGF) could lead to immune tolerance, facilitating cancer cells to hijack anabolic machinery of immunity (Yang) for their increased growth requirements. Expression of constituent embryonic factors would negatively regulate differentiation of tumor cells through epithelial–mesenchymal-transition and create “dual negative feedback loop” that influence tissue metabolism under hypoxic conditions. It is further hypothesized that induction of tolerance creates ‘dark energy’ and increased entropy and temperature in cancer microenvironment allowing disorderly cancer proliferation and mitosis along with increased glucose metabolism via Crabtree and Pasteur Effects, under mitophagy and ribophagy, conditions that are toxic to host survival. Effective translational medicine into treatment requires systematic and logical studies of complex interactions of tumor cells with host environment that dictate clinical outcomes. Promoting effective immunity (biological circadian rhythms) are fundamental steps in correcting host differential bioenergetics and controlling cancer growth, preventing or delaying onset of diseases and maintaining public health. The author urges independent professionals and policy makers to take a closer look at cancer dilemma and stop the ‘scientific/medical ponzi schemes’ of a powerful group that control a drug-dependent sick society before all hopes for promoting public health evaporate.

Vaccination practices in dialysis patients: A narrative review

In a period of turmoil concerning vaccination practices, there is a serious conflict between scientifically reasonable, evidence-based guidelines and the far-fetched rumors or misconceptions concerning the vaccination practices in the general population. When a significant portion of the medical and paramedical personnel may be deliberately unvaccinated against common biological agents, achieving effective vaccination rates in the dialysis population may be complicated. Vaccination rates are unacceptably low in dialysis patients and seroconversion rates are even lower; further, serological follow-up is generally poor. The particularly anergic immune system of the advanced chronic kidney disease patients is partly a cause of both high rates of infection and low rates of seroconversions. This narrative review is an effort to summarize current knowledge concerning the vaccination practices in dialysis patients with some specific recommendations based on these facts. Of particular interest is a new vaccine, the Zoster Recombinant, Adjuvanted Vaccine (Shingrix), which we will include in our discussion.

Immunogenicity, antibody persistence, and safety of the 60 μg hepatitis B vaccine in hemodialysis patients: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the immunogenicity, antibody persistence, and safety of the 60 µg hepatitis B vaccine in hemodialysis patients in China.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled trial including 352 hemodialysis patients who were centrally randomized in a ratio of 1:1 to receive a 20 µg (IM20 group) or 60 µg (IM60 group) recombinant hepatitis B vaccine at months 0, 1, and 6.

RESULTS

The vaccine-elicited antibody responses peaked at month 7, and declined at month 12. At month 7, the IM60 group had stronger GMC of anti-HBs, and a higher proportion of seroconversion and high-level response than the IM20 group did (P < 0.05). Better immune responses were observed in the IM60 group, especially for those aged or in the high-frequency hemodialysis population.

CONCLUSION

The high dose 60 µg recombinant hepatitis B vaccines elicited stronger immune responses than the 20 µg hepatitis B vaccine did among hemodialysis patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02963714.