Improved serologic responses to DTaP over Tdap vaccination in adult hematopoietic cell transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) recipients have reduced antibody titers to tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis. Tdap is approved for revaccinating adult HCT recipients in the United States, whereas DTaP is not approved in this population. To our knowledge, no studies to date have compared responses to DTaP versus Tdap in adult HCT patients. We conducted a retrospective study comparing responses to DTaP versus Tdap vaccines in otherwise similar adult HCT patients in order to determine if one of these vaccines elicits superior antibody responses.

METHODS

We evaluated 43 allogeneic and autologous transplant recipients as a combined cohort and as separate subsets for vaccine specific antibody titers and proportion of strong vaccine responders. Subset analysis focused on the autologous transplant recipients.

RESULTS

Higher median antibody titers were found to all vaccine components among DTaP recipients (diphtheria p = .021, pertussis p = .020, tetanus p = .007). DTaP recipients also had more strong responders to diphtheria and pertussis (diphtheria p = .002, pertussis p = .006). Among the autologous HCT recipient subset, there were more strong responders to diphtheria (p = .036).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data shows that post-HCT vaccination with DTaP leads to higher antibody titers and more strong responders, which suggests that DTaP is more effective than Tdap in HCT recipients.

What about tocilizumab? A retrospective study from a NYC Hospital during the COVID-19 outbreak

BACKGROUND

Tocilizumab, an interleukin-6 receptor blocker, has been used in the inflammatory phase of COVID-19, but its impact independent of corticosteroids remains unclear in patients with severe disease.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis of patients with COVID-19 admitted between March 2 and April 14, 2020 to a large academic medical center in New York City, we describe outcomes associated with tocilizumab 400 mg (without methylprednisolone) compared to a propensity-matched control. The primary endpoints were change in a 7-point ordinal scale of oxygenation and ventilator free survival, both at days 14 and 28. Secondary endpoints include incidence of bacterial superinfections and gastrointestinal perforation. Primary outcomes were evaluated using t-test.

RESULTS

We identified 33 patients who received tocilizumab and matched 74 controls based on demographics and health measures upon admission. After adjusting for illness severity and baseline ordinal scale, we failed to find evidence of an improvement in hypoxemia based on an ordinal scale at hospital day 14 in the tocilizumab group (OR 2.2; 95% CI, 0.7-6.5; p = 0.157) or day 28 (OR 1.1; 95% CI, 0.4-3.6; p = 0.82). There also was no evidence of an improvement in ventilator-free survival at day 14 (OR 0.8; 95% CI, 0.18-3.5; p = 0.75) or day 28 (OR 1.1; 95% CI, 0.1-1.8; p = 0.23). There was no increase in secondary bacterial infection rates in the tocilizumab group compared to controls (OR 0.37; 95% CI, 0.09-1.53; p = 0.168).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence to support an improvement in hypoxemia or ventilator-free survival with use of tocilizumab 400 mg in the absence of corticosteroids. No increase in secondary bacterial infections was observed in the group receiving tocilizumab.

Extended letermovir administration, beyond day 100, is effective for CMV prophylaxis in patients with graft versus host disease

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation is associated with significant morbidity and mortality after an allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (AHCT), and graft versus host disease (GVHD) increases the risk of CMV reactivation. Letermovir is approved for CMV prophylaxis in CMV-seropositive patients, but has only been studied through day 100 post-transplantation in the registration trial. Its efficacy in preventing CMV in patients with GVHD requiring treatment beyond the day 100 milestone has not been studied.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent an AHCT at a single center over a period of 24 months, and identified a cohort of 20 patients who received extended duration of letermovir (beyond 100 days) after the diagnosis of GVHD. The primary end point was the incidence of clinically significant CMV infection, defined as onset of CMV disease or initiation of preemptive therapy with alternative antiviral agents.

RESULTS

In this high-risk cohort, only one patient (5%) developed a clinically significant CMV infection, requiring preemptive therapy. No patients developed CMV organ disease. Three additional patients developed CMV viremia of ≥150 IU/mL while on letermovir and after the onset of GVHD, and none required additional treatment. Receipt of post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) and low CD4 count after the development of GVHD were associated with breakthrough CMV viremia while on extended duration letermovir.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended duration letermovir was efficacious in preventing clinically significant CMV infections in patients with GVHD.