Dataset Information

Vaccination Guidelines for Patients With Immune-Mediated Disorders on Immunosuppressive Therapies.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND::Patients with immune-mediated diseases on immunosuppressive therapies have more infectious episodes than healthy individuals, yet vaccination practices by physicians for this patient population remain suboptimal. OBJECTIVES::To evaluate the safety and efficacy of vaccines in individuals exposed to immunosuppressive therapies and provide evidence-based clinical practice recommendations. METHODS::A literature search for vaccination safety and efficacy in patients on immunosuppressive therapies (2009-2017) was conducted. Results were assessed using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. RESULTS::Several immunosuppressive therapies attenuate vaccine response. Thus, vaccines should be administered before treatment whenever feasible. Inactivated vaccines can be administered without treatment discontinuation. Similarly, evidence suggests that the live zoster vaccine is safe and effective while on select immunosuppressive therapy, although use of the subunit vaccine is preferred. Caution regarding other live vaccines is warranted. Drug pharmacokinetics, duration of vaccine-induced viremia, and immune response kinetics should be considered to determine appropriate timing of vaccination and treatment (re)initiation. Infants exposed to immunosuppressive therapies through breastmilk can usually be immunized according to local guidelines. Intrauterine exposure to immunosuppressive agents is not a contraindication for inactivated vaccines. Live attenuated vaccines scheduled for infants and children ?12 months of age, including measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella, can be safely administered as sufficient time has elapsed for drug clearance. CONCLUSIONS::Immunosuppressive agents may attenuate vaccine responses, but protective benefit is generally maintained. While these recommendations are evidence based, they do not replace clinical judgment, and decisions regarding vaccination must carefully assess the risks, benefits, and circumstances of individual patients.

SUBMITTER: Papp KA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6330697 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan/Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Vaccination Guidelines for Patients With Immune-Mediated Disorders on Immunosuppressive Therapies.

Papp Kim A KA Haraoui Boulos B Kumar Deepali D Marshall John K JK Bissonnette Robert R Bitton Alain A Bressler Brian B Gooderham Melinda M Ho Vincent V Jamal Shahin S Pope Janet E JE Steinhart A Hillary AH Vinh Donald C DC Wade John J

Journal of cutaneous medicine and surgery 20181121 1

<h4>Background:</h4>Patients with immune-mediated diseases on immunosuppressive therapies have more infectious episodes than healthy individuals, yet vaccination practices by physicians for this patient population remain suboptimal.<h4>Objectives:</h4>To evaluate the safety and efficacy of vaccines in individuals exposed to immunosuppressive therapies and provide evidence-based clinical practice recommendations.<h4>Methods:</h4>A literature search for vaccination safety and efficacy in patients ...[more]

PMID: 30463418

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundReal world data on the response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with immunomediated diseases (IMIDs) treated with immunesuppressants is of great interest because vaccine response may be impaired. The main aim was to study the humoral and cellular immune response after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with IMIDs treated with immunosuppressants. The secondary aim was to describe the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 infections after vaccination in these patients.Material and methodsThis is an observational study including 86 patients with IMIDs. All patients were treated with biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [b/tsDMARDs: TNF inhibitors (TNFi), rituximab, anti-interleukin 6 receptor (anti-IL6R) or JAK inhibitors (JAKi)]. Demographic and clinical information were collected. After 4-6 weeks of 2nd and 3rd vaccine doses, humoral response was assessed using the Thermo Scientific ELiA SARS-CoV-2-Sp1 IgG Test. Also, in patients with serum SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels under 100UI/ml, cellular response was analyzed using the QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 Starter Pack.ResultsA total of 86 patients under b/tsDMARDs and 38 healthy controls were included. Most patients received TNFi (45 with TNFi, 31 with rituximab, 5 with anti-IL6R and 5 with JAKi). SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (Ab) were present in an 86% of patients with IMIDs and in 100% healthy controls (p = 0.017). However, 12 (14%) patients had undetectable SARS-CoV-2 Ab levels, all treated with rituximab. In addition, SARS-CoV-2 Ab (IU/ml) were statistically lower in patients (Mdn (IQR): 59.5 (17-163) in patients vs 625 (405-932) in controls, p < 0.001). Patients treated with rituximab had lower Ab levels than those treated with TNFi and controls (p < 0.001). The cellular response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was evaluated in 30 patients. Eleven patients had a positive cellular response, being more frequent in patients treated with rituximab (p = 0.03). SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in 43% of patients and 34% of controls after vaccination. Only 6 (7%) patients required hospitalization, most of whom treated with rituximab (67%).ConclusionSARS-CoV-2 antibody levels were lower in patients than in controls, especially in patients treated with rituximab. A cellular response can be detected despite having a poor humoral response. Severe infections in vaccinated patients with IMIDs are rare, and are observed mainly in patients treated with rituximab.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Substantial numbers of patients are now receiving either immunosuppressive therapies or chemotherapy. There are significant risks in such patients of developing opportunistic infections or re-activation of latent infections, with higher associated morbidity and mortality. The aim of this quality improvement project was to determine how effective 5 different specialties were in assessing and mitigating risks of developing opportunistic infections or re-activation of latent infections in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapies. METHODS:This was a single centre audit where records of patients attending clinics providing immunosuppressive therapies were reviewed for the following: evidence of screening for blood-borne virus [BBV] infections, varicella and measles immunity, latent/active TB or hypogammaglobulinaemia, and whether appropriate vaccines had been advised or various infection risks discussed. These assessments were audited against both national and international guidelines, or a cross-specialty consensus guideline where specific recommendations were lacking. Two sub-populations were also analysed separately: patients receiving more potent immunosuppression and black and minority ethnic [BME] patients,. RESULTS:For the 204 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria, BBV, varicella/measles and latent TB screening was inconsistent, as was advice for vaccinations, with few areas complying with specialty or consensus guidelines. Less than 10% of patients in one specialty were tested for HIV. In BME patients screening for HIV [60%], measles [0%] and varicella [40%] immunity and latent [30%] or active [20%] TB was low. Only 38% of patients receiving potent immunosuppression received Pneumocystis prophylaxis, with 3 of 4 specialties providing less than 15% of patients in this category with prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS:Compliance with guidelines to mitigate risks of infection from immunosuppressive therapies was either inconsistent or poor for most specialties. New approaches to highlight such risks and assist appropriate pre-immunosuppression screening are needed.

Project description:BackgroundLimited data exist regarding the disease course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its relationship with immunosuppressants among patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). Therefore, this study aims to investigate the association between COVID-19, frequent rheumatological, dermatological, gastrointestinal, and neurological IMIDs and immunosuppressants.MethodsWe conducted a Danish population-based cohort study including all residents living within Capital Region of Denmark and Region Zealand from January 28th, 2020 until September 15th, 2020 with the only eligibility criterion being a test for SARS-CoV-2 via reverse transcription-polymerase chain-reaction. Main outcomes included development of COVID-19, COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality.ResultsCOVID-19 was less common among patients with IMIDs than the background population (n = 328/20,513 (1.60%) and n = 10,792/583,788(1.85%), p < 0.01, respectively). However, those with IMIDs had a significantly higher risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization (31.1% and 18.6%, p < 0.01, respectively) and mortality (9.8% and 4.3%, p < 0.01, respectively), which were associated with patients older than 65 years, and presence of comorbidities. Furthermore, systemic steroids were independently associated with a severe course of COVID-19 (Odds ratio (OR) = 3.56 (95%CI 1.83-7.10), p < 0.01), while biologic therapies were associated with a reduced risk hereof (OR = 0.47 (95%CI 0.22-0.95), p = 0.04). Patients suspending immunosuppressants due to COVID-19 had an increased risk of subsequent hospitalization (OR = 3.59 (95%CI 1.31-10.78), p = 0.02).ConclusionThis study found a lower occurrence, but a more severe disease course, of COVID-19 among patients with IMIDs, which was associated with the use of systemic steroids for IMIDs and suspension of other immunosuppressants. This study emphasizes the importance of weighing risks before suspending immunosuppressants during COVID-19.

Project description:ObjectiveTo provide guidelines on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases (IMRD) to rheumatologists considering specific scenarios of the daily practice based on the shared-making decision (SMD) process.MethodsA task force was constituted by 24 rheumatologists (panel members), with clinical and research expertise in immunizations and infectious diseases in immunocompromised patients, endorsed by the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology (BSR), to develop guidelines for COVID-19 vaccination in patients with IMRD. A consensus was built through the Delphi method and involved four rounds of anonymous voting, where five options were used to determine the level of agreement (LOA), based on the Likert Scale: (1) strongly disagree; (2) disagree, (3) neither agree nor disagree (neutral); (4) agree; and (5) strongly agree. Nineteen questions were addressed and discussed via teleconference to formulate the answers. In order to identify the relevant data on COVID-19 vaccines, a search with standardized descriptors and synonyms was performed on September 10th, 2021, of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and LILACS to identify studies of interest. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess the quality of nonrandomized studies.ResultsAll the nineteen questions-answers (Q&A) were approved by the BSR Task Force with more than 80% of panelists voting options 4-agree-and 5-strongly agree-, and a consensus was reached. These Guidelines were focused in SMD on the most appropriate timing for IMRD patients to get vaccinated to reach the adequate covid-19 vaccination response.ConclusionThese guidelines were developed by a BSR Task Force with a high LOA among panelists, based on the literature review of published studies and expert opinion for COVID-19 vaccination in IMRD patients. Noteworthy, in the pandemic period, up to the time of the review and the consensus process for this document, high-quality evidence was scarce. Thus, it is not a substitute for clinical judgment.

Project description:BackgroundDisease-specific studies have reported impaired humoral responses after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disorders treated with specific immunosuppressants. Disease-overarching studies, and data on recall responses and third vaccinations are scarce. Our primary objective was to investigate the effects of immunosuppressive monotherapies on the humoral immune response after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with prevalent immune-mediated inflammatory disorders.MethodsWe did a cohort study in participants treated in outpatient clinics in seven university hospitals and one rheumatology treatment centre in the Netherlands as well as participants included in two national cohort studies on COVID-19-related disease severity. We included patients aged older than 18 years, diagnosed with any of the prespecified immune-mediated inflammatory disorders, who were able to understand and complete questionnaires in Dutch. Participants with immune-mediated inflammatory disorders who were not on systemic immunosuppressants and healthy participants were included as controls. Anti-receptor binding domain IgG responses and neutralisation capacity were monitored following standard vaccination regimens and a three-vaccination regimen in subgroups. Hybrid immune responses-ie, vaccination after previous SARS-CoV-2 infection-were studied as a proxy for recall responses.FindingsBetween Feb 2 and Aug 1, 2021, we included 3222 participants in our cohort. Sera from 2339 participants, 1869 without and 470 participants with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were analysed (mean age 49·9 years [SD 13·7]; 1470 [62·8%] females and 869 [37·2%] males). Humoral responses did not differ between disorders. Anti-CD20 therapy, sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor (S1P) modulators, and mycophenolate mofetil combined with corticosteroids were associated with lower relative risks for reaching seroconversion following standard vaccination (0·32 [95% CI 0·19-0·49] for anti-CD20 therapy, 0·35 [0·21-0·55] for S1P modulators, and 0·61 [0·40-0·90] for mycophenolate mofetil combined with corticosteroids). A third vaccination increased seroconversion for mycophenolate mofetil combination treatments (from 52·6% after the second vaccination to 89·5% after the third) but not significantly for anti-CD20 therapies (from 36·8% to 45·6%) and S1P modulators (from 35·5% to 48·4%). Most other immunosuppressant groups showed moderately reduced antibody titres after standard vaccination that did not increase after a third vaccination, although seroconversion rates and neutralisation capacity were unaffected. In participants with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were boosted after vaccination, regardless of immunosuppressive treatment.InterpretationHumoral responses following vaccination are impaired by specific immunosuppressants. After standard vaccination regimens, patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disorders taking most immunosuppressants show similar seroconversion to controls, although antibody titres might be moderately reduced. As neutralisation capacity and recall responses are also preserved in these patients, this is not likely to translate to loss of (short-term) protection. In patients on immunosuppressants showing poor humoral responses after standard vaccination regimens, a third vaccination resulted in additional seroconversion in patients taking mycophenolate mofetil combination treatments, whereas the effect of a third vaccination in patients on anti-CD20 therapy and S1P modulators was limited.FundingZonMw (The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development).

Dataset Information

Vaccination Guidelines for Patients With Immune-Mediated Disorders on Immunosuppressive Therapies.

Publications

Vaccination Guidelines for Patients With Immune-Mediated Disorders on Immunosuppressive Therapies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets