Dataset Information

Comparative safety of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccination in patients with end-stage renal disease.

ABSTRACT:

Background

High-dose influenza vaccine (HDV) is an alternative vaccination strategy in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), though the safety of HDV has not been evaluated in this population. The objective of this study was to estimate the relative occurrence of adverse vaccine reactions in patients with ESRD following vaccination with HDV compared with standard-dose influenza vaccine (SDV).

Methods

Using data from the United States Renal Data System, we identified patients with ESRD aged ≥ 65 years at influenza vaccination during yearly influenza seasons from 2010 through 2016. Patients were followed after vaccination to observe serious (anaphylaxis, angioedema, seizure, encephalopathy, Guillain-Barré syndrome [GBS], and short-term, all-cause mortality) and milder (urticaria/hives, rash, pain in limb, cellulitis, myalgia/myositis, fever, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, and syncope) adverse events. Propensity score-weighted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for HDV versus SDV were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

Of 520,876 vaccinations observed (mean age = 74.7 years at vaccination; 63% white race), 7.4% were HDV. For serious events, the weighted HRs were null for seizure, encephalopathy, and mortality and inestimable due to too few cases for anaphylaxis, angioedema, and GBS. For milder vaccine reactions, the weighted HRs demonstrated generally increased risks in the HDV group, including rash (HR = 1.86; 95% CI, 1.34-2.57), diarrhea (HR = 1.26; 95% CI, 1.07-1.50), pain in limb (HR = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.12-1.34), and myalgia/myositis (HR = 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04-1.30).

Conclusions

The risks of serious adverse events were low and similar between treatment groups; however, HDV recipients had increased risks of several milder adverse events compared with SDV recipients, consistent with clinical trial findings in the general population of older adults. These results add important information to inform the risk-benefit tradeoff of the use of HDV versus SDV in patients with ESRD.

SUBMITTER: Layton JB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7332402 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Rationale & objectiveStudies of patients on maintenance dialysis therapy suggest that standard-dose influenza vaccine (SDV) may not prevent influenza-related outcomes. Little is known about the comparative effectiveness of SDV versus high-dose influenza vaccine (HDV) in this population.Study designCohort study using data from the US Renal Data System.Setting & participants507,552 adults undergoing in-center maintenance hemodialysis between the 2010 to 2011 and 2014 to 2015 influenza seasons.ExposuresSDV and HDV.OutcomesAll-cause mortality, hospitalization due to influenza or pneumonia, and influenza-like illness during the influenza season.Analytic approachPatients were eligible for inclusion in multiple yearly cohorts; thus, our unit of analysis was the influenza patient-season. To examine the relationship between vaccine dose and effectiveness outcomes, we estimated risk differences and risk ratios using propensity score weighting of Kaplan-Meier functions, accounting for a wide range of patient- and facility-level characteristics. For nonmortality outcomes, we used competing-risk methods to account for the high mortality rate in the dialysis population.ResultsWithin 225,215 influenza patient-seasons among adults 65 years and older, 97.4% received SDV and 2.6% received HDV. We observed similar risk estimates for HDV and SDV recipients for mortality (risk difference, -0.08%; 95% CI, -0.85% to 0.80%), hospitalization due to influenza or pneumonia (risk difference, 0.15%; 95% CI, -0.69% to 0.93%), and influenza-like illness (risk difference, 0.00%; 95% CI, -1.50% to 1.08%). Our findings were similar among adults younger than 65 years, as well as within other subgroups defined by influenza season, age group, dialysis vintage, month of influenza vaccination, and vaccine valence.LimitationsResidual confounding and outcome misclassification.ConclusionsThe HDV does not appear to provide additional protection beyond the SDV against all-cause mortality or influenza-related outcomes for adults undergoing hemodialysis. The additional cost and side effects associated with HDV should be considered when offering this vaccine. Future studies of HDV and other influenza vaccine strategies are warranted.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccination is essential. However, no study has reported adverse events (AEs) after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on hemodialysis (HD). This study investigated the AEs within 30-days after the first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) in ESRD patients on HD.Methods and findingsA total of 270 ESRD patients on HD were enrolled in this study. To determine the significance of vascular access thrombosis (VAT) post vaccination, we performed a self-controlled case study (SCCS) analysis. Of these patients, 38.5% had local AEs; local pain (29.6%), tenderness (28.9%), and induration (15.6%) were the most common. Further, 62.2% had systemic AEs; fatigue (41.1%), feverishness (20%), and lethargy (19.9%) were the most common. In addition, post-vaccination thirst affected 18.9% of the participants with female predominance. Younger age, female sex, and diabetes mellitus were risk factors for AEs. Five patients had severe AEs, including fever (n = 1), herpes zoster (HZ) reactivation (n = 1), and acute VAT (n = 3). However, the SCCS analysis revealed no association between vaccination and VAT; the incidence rate ratio (IRR)-person ratio was 0.56 (95% CI 0.13-2.33) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.20-2.93) [IRR-event ratio 0.78 (95% CI 0.15-4.10) and 1.00 (95% CI 0.20-4.93)] in the 0-3 months and 3-6 months period prior to vaccination, respectively.ConclusionsThough some ESRD patients on HD had local and systemic AEs after first-dose vaccination, the clinical significance of these symptoms was minor. Our study confirmed the safety profile of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in HD patients and presented a new viewpoint on vaccine-related AEs. The SCCS analysis did not find an elevated risk of VAT at 1 month following vaccination. Apart from VAT, other vaccine-related AEs, irrespective of local or systemic symptoms, had minor clinical significance on safety issues. Nonetheless, further coordinated, multi-center, or registry-based studies are needed to establish the causality.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence is lacking to inform providers' and patients' decisions about many common treatment strategies for patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD).Methods/designThe DEcIDE Patient Outcomes in ESRD Study is funded by the United States (US) Agency for Health Care Research and Quality to study the comparative effectiveness of: 1) antihypertensive therapies, 2) early versus later initiation of dialysis, and 3) intravenous iron therapies on clinical outcomes in patients with ESRD. Ongoing studies utilize four existing, nationally representative cohorts of patients with ESRD, including (1) the Choices for Healthy Outcomes in Caring for ESRD study (1041 incident dialysis patients recruited from October 1995 to June 1999 with complete outcome ascertainment through 2009), (2) the Dialysis Clinic Inc (45,124 incident dialysis patients initiating and receiving their care from 2003-2010 with complete outcome ascertainment through 2010), (3) the United States Renal Data System (333,308 incident dialysis patients from 2006-2009 with complete outcome ascertainment through 2010), and (4) the Cleveland Clinic Foundation Chronic Kidney Disease Registry (53,399 patients with chronic kidney disease with outcome ascertainment from 2005 through 2009). We ascertain patient reported outcomes (i.e., health-related quality of life), morbidity, and mortality using clinical and administrative data, and data obtained from national death indices. We use advanced statistical methods (e.g., propensity scoring and marginal structural modeling) to account for potential biases of our study designs. All data are de-identified for analyses. The conduct of studies and dissemination of findings are guided by input from Stakeholders in the ESRD community.DiscussionThe DEcIDE Patient Outcomes in ESRD Study will provide needed evidence regarding the effectiveness of common treatments employed for dialysis patients. Carefully planned dissemination strategies to the ESRD community will enhance studies' impact on clinical care and patients' outcomes.

Project description:Background:Opioid use is common in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. However, safety of individual opioids and concomitant benzodiazepine use has not been studied. Objective:To study the epidemiology of opioid and concomitant benzodiazepine use in ESRD population. To study the clinical safety profile of individual opioids in patients on hemodialysis. Design:Retrospective analysis of the U.S. Renal Data System. A comprehensive review of the current literature was performed to update currently used opioid safety classification. Participants:ESRD patients ≥18 years on hemodialysis who were enrolled in Medicare A and B and Part D between 2006 and 2012, excluding those with malignancy. Main Measures:Hospital admission with diagnosis of prescription opioid overdose within 30, 60, and 90 days of prescription; death due to opioid overdose. Results:Annually, the percentage of patients prescribed any opioid was 52.2%. Overall trend has been increasing except for a small dip in 2011, despite which the admissions due to opioid overdose have been rising. 30% of those who got a prescription for opioids also got a benzodiazepine prescription. 56.5% of these patients received both prescriptions within a week of each other. Benzodiazepine use increased the odds of being on opioids by 3.27 (CI 3.21-3.32) and increased the odds of hospitalization by 50%. Opioids considered safe such as fentanyl and methadone were associated with 3 and 6 folds higher odds of hospitalization within 30 days of prescription. Hydrocodone had the lowest odds ratio (1.9, CI 1.8-2.0). Conclusions:Concurrent benzodiazepine use is common and associated with higher risk of hospitalization due to opioid overdose. Possible opioid-associated hospital admission rate is 4-5 times bigger in ESRD population than general population. Current safety classification of opioids in these patients is misleading, and even drugs considered safe based on pharmacokinetic data are associated with moderate to very high risk of hospitalization. We propose a risk-stratified classification of opioids and suggest starting to use them in all ESRD patients.