Dose-related safety and immunogenicity of baculovirus-expressed trivalent influenza vaccine: a double-blind, controlled trial in adult patients with non-Hodgkin B cell lymphoma

Management of vaccinations in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Vaccinations are fundamental tools in preventing infectious diseases, especially in immunocompromised patients like those affected by non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs). The COVID-19 pandemic made clinicians increasingly aware of the importance of vaccinations in preventing potential life-threatening SARS-CoV-2-related complications in NHL patients. However, several studies have confirmed a significant reduction in vaccine-induced immune responses after anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody treatment, thus underscoring the need for refined immunization strategies in NHL patients. In this review, we summarize the existing data about COVID-19 and other vaccine's efficacy in patients with NHL and propose multidisciplinary team-based recommendations for the management of vaccines in this specific group of patients.

Lessons learnt from influenza vaccination in immunocompromised children undergoing treatment for cancer

Influenza infection contributes substantially to global morbidity and mortality, with children undergoing treatment for cancer among the most vulnerable due to immunosuppression associated with disease and treatment. However, influenza remains one of the most common vaccine-preventable diseases. Despite international guidelines recommending inactivated influenza vaccination on the basis of data supporting efficacy and an excellent safety profile in this population, uptake has often been suboptimal due to persisting hesitancy among both patients and oncologists regarding the ability of the vaccine to mount a sufficient immune response, the optimal vaccine schedule and timing, and the best method to assess response in immunocompromised populations. In this Review, we discuss the evidence regarding influenza vaccination in children with cancer, factors that influence response, and highlight strategies to optimise vaccination. Host immune factors play a substantial role, thus principles learnt from influenza vaccination can be broadly applied for the use of inactivated vaccines in children with cancer.

Influenza Viruses and Vaccines: The Role of Vaccine Effectiveness Studies for Evaluation of the Benefits of Influenza Vaccines

Influenza is a vaccine preventable disease and vaccination remains the most effective method of controlling the morbidity and mortality of seasonal influenza, especially with respect to risk groups. To date, three types of influenza vaccines have been licensed: inactivated, live-attenuated, and recombinant haemagglutinin vaccines. Effectiveness studies allow an assessment of the positive effects of influenza vaccines in the field. The effectiveness of current influenza is suboptimal, being estimated as 40% to 60% when the vaccines strains are antigenically well-matched with the circulating viruses. This review focuses on influenza viruses and vaccines and the role of vaccine effectiveness studies for evaluating the benefits of influenza vaccines. Overall, influenza vaccines are effective against morbidity and mortality in all age and risk groups, especially in young children and older adults. However, the effectiveness is dependent on several factors such as the age of vaccinees, the match between the strain included in the vaccine composition and the circulating virus, egg-adaptations occurring during the production process, and the subject’s history of previous vaccination.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of recombinant haemagglutinin seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age

The most effective means of preventing seasonal influenza is through vaccination. In this systematic review, we investigated the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of recombinant haemagglutinin (HA) seasonal influenza vaccines to prevent laboratory-confirmed influenza. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions were eligible for inclusion. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 10 studies on recombinant HA influenza vaccine met our inclusion criteria. One study found that the quadrivalent recombinant HA influenza vaccine had higher relative vaccine efficacy (rVE) in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza during the 2014-15 season compared with traditional quadrivalent vaccination in adults aged ≥50 years (rVE = 30%, 95% CI 10%-47%, moderate-certainty evidence). In a subgroup analysis, higher rVE was reported for influenza A (rVE = 36%, 95% CI 14% to 53%), but not for B (non-significant). Another study reported higher efficacy for the trivalent recombinant HA vaccine compared with placebo (VE = 45%, 95% CI 19-63, 1 RCT, low-certainty evidence) in adults aged 18-55 years. With the exception of a higher rate of chills (RR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.03-1.72), the safety profile of recombinant HA vaccines was comparable to that of traditional influenza vaccines. The evidence base for the efficacy and effectiveness of recombinant HA influenza vaccines is limited at present, although one study found that the quadrivalent recombinant HA influenza vaccine had higher rVE compared with traditional quadrivalent vaccination in adults aged ≥50 years.

Influenza vaccines in immunosuppressed adults with cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the Cochrane review published in 2013, Issue 10.Immunosuppressed cancer patients are at increased risk of serious influenza-related complications. Guidelines, therefore, recommend influenza vaccination for these patients. However, data on vaccine effectiveness in this population are lacking, and the value of vaccination in this population remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of influenza vaccine in immunosuppressed adults with malignancies. The primary review outcome is all-cause mortality, preferably at the end of the influenza season. Influenza-like illness (ILI, a clinical definition), confirmed influenza, pneumonia, any hospitalisations, influenza-related mortality and immunogenicity were defined as secondary outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS databases up to May 2017. We searched the following conference proceedings: ICAAC, ECCMID, IDSA (infectious disease conferences), ASH, ASBMT, EBMT (haematological), and ASCO (oncological) between the years 2006 to 2017. In addition, we scanned the references of all identified studies and pertinent reviews. We searched the websites of the manufacturers of influenza vaccine. Finally, we searched for ongoing or unpublished trials in clinical trial registry databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies and case-control studies were considered, comparing inactivated influenza vaccines versus placebo, no vaccination or a different vaccine, in adults (16 years and over) with cancer. We considered solid malignancies treated with chemotherapy, haematological cancer patients treated or not treated with chemotherapy, cancer patients post-autologous (up to six months after transplantation) or allogeneic (at any time) haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data from included studies adhering to Cochrane methodology. Meta-analysis could not be performed because of different outcome and denominator definitions in the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six studies with a total of 2275 participants: five studies comparing vaccination with no vaccination, and one comparing adjuvanted vaccine with non-adjuvanted vaccine. Three studies were RCTs, one was a prospective observational cohort study and two were retrospective cohort studies.For the comparison of vaccination with no vaccination we included two RCTs and three observational studies, including 2202 participants. One study reported results in person-years while the others reported results per person. The five studies were performed between 1993 and 2015 and included adults with haematological diseases (three studies), patients following bone marrow transplantation (BMT) (two studies) and solid malignancies (three studies).One RCT and two observational studies reported all-cause mortality; the RCT showed similar mortality rates in both arms (odds ratio (OR) 1.25 (95% CI 0.43 to 3.62; 1 study, 78 participants, low-certainty evidence)); and the observational studies demonstrated a significant association between vaccine receipt and lower risk of death, adjusted hazard ratio 0.88 (95% CI 0.78 to 1; 1 study, 1577 participants, very low-certainty evidence) in one study and OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.24 to 0.75; 1 study, 806 participants, very low-certainty evidence) in the other. One RCT reported a reduction in ILI with vaccination, while no difference was observed in one observational study. Confirmed influenza rates were lower with vaccination in one RCT and the three observational studies, the difference reaching statistical significance in one. Pneumonia was observed significantly less frequently with vaccination in one observational study, but no difference was detected in another or in the RCT. One RCT showed a reduction in hospitalisations following vaccination, while an observational study found no difference. No life-threatening or persistent adverse effects from vaccination were reported. The strength of evidence was limited by the low number of included studies and by their low methodological quality and the certainty of the evidence for the mortality outcome according to GRADE was low to very low.For the comparison of adjuvanted vaccine with non-adjuvanted vaccine, we identified one RCT, including 73 patients. No differences were found for the primary and all secondary outcomes assessed. Mortality risk ratio was 0.54 (95% CI 0.05 to 5.73; low-certainty evidence) in the adjuvanted vaccine group. The quality of evidence was low due to the small sample size and the large confidence intervals for all outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Observational data suggest lower mortality and infection-related outcomes with influenza vaccination. The strength of evidence is limited by the small number of studies and low grade of evidence. It seems that the evidence, although weak, shows that the benefits overweigh the potential risks when vaccinating adults with cancer against influenza. However, additional placebo or no-treatment controlled RCTs of influenza vaccination among adults with cancer is ethically questionable.There is no conclusive evidence regarding the use of adjuvanted versus non-adjuvanted influenza vaccine in this population.

Randomized Comparison of Immunogenicity and Safety of Quadrivalent Recombinant Versus Inactivated Influenza Vaccine in Healthy Adults 18-49 Years of Age

Background

Seasonal influenza vaccines are transitioning to quadrivalent formulations including the hemagglutinins of influenza A subtypes H1N1 and H3N2 and B lineages Yamagata and Victoria.

Methods

A new quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4) was compared directly with a standard-dose, egg-grown, quadrivalent-inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV4) for immunogenicity and safety in adults 18-49 years of age. The coprimary endpoints for noninferiority were hemagglutination inhibition seroconversion rates and postvaccination geometric mean titer ratios for each antigen using US regulatory criteria. Reactogenicity solicited for 7 days, other safety events collected for 28 days, and serious or medically attended adverse events collected for 6 months after vaccination comprised the safety evaluation.

Results

The immunogenicity of RIV4 was comparable to that of IIV4; the coprimary noninferiority criteria were met for 3 antigens, and the antibody responses to the fourth antigen, influenza B/Brisbane/60/2008, were low in each group, making comparisons uninterpretable. Systemic and injection site reactions were mild, transient, and similar in each group, whereas none of the spontaneously reported adverse events, serious or nonserious, were considered related to study vaccine.

Conclusions

This first head-to-head comparison of recombinant versus inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccines in 18-49 year old adults showed comparable immunogenicity, safety, and tolerability for both vaccines.

Efficacy of Recombinant Influenza Vaccine in Adults 50 Years of Age or Older

BACKGROUND

Improved influenza vaccines are needed to control seasonal epidemics. This trial compared the protective efficacy in older adults of a quadrivalent, recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4) with a standard-dose, egg-grown, quadrivalent, inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV4) during the A/H3N2-predominant 2014-2015 influenza season, when antigenic mismatch between circulating and vaccine influenza strains resulted in the reduced effectiveness of many licensed vaccines.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial of RIV4 (45 μg of recombinant hemagglutinin [HA] per strain, 180 μg of protein per dose) versus standard-dose IIV4 (15 μg of HA per strain, 60 μg of protein per dose) to compare the relative vaccine efficacy against reverse-transcriptase polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed, protocol-defined, influenza-like illness caused by any influenza strain starting 14 days or more after vaccination in adults who were 50 years of age or older. The diagnosis of influenza infection was confirmed by means of RT-PCR assay and culture of nasopharyngeal swabs obtained from participants with symptoms of an influenza-like illness. The primary end point was RT-PCR-confirmed, protocol defined, influenza-like illness between 14 days or more after vaccination and the end of the influenza season.

RESULTS

A total of 9003 participants were enrolled and underwent randomization; 8855 (98.4%) received a trial vaccine and underwent an efficacy follow-up (the modified intention-to-treat population), and 8604 (95.6%) completed the per-protocol follow-up (the modified per-protocol population). Among RIV4 recipients, the RT-PCR-confirmed influenza attack rate was 2.2% (96 cases among 4303 participants) in the modified per-protocol population and 2.2% (96 cases among 4427 participants) in the modified intention-to-treat population. Among IIV4 recipients, the attack rate was 3.2% (138 cases among 4301 participants) in the modified per-protocol population and 3.1% (138 cases among 4428 participants) in the modified intention-to-treat population. A total of 181 cases of influenza A/H3N2, 47 cases of influenza B, and 6 cases of nonsubtypeable influenza A were detected. The probability of influenza-like illness was 30% lower with RIV4 than with IIV4 (95% confidence interval, 10 to 47; P=0.006) and satisfied prespecified criteria for the primary noninferiority analysis and an exploratory superiority analysis of RIV4 over IIV4. The safety profiles of the vaccines were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

RIV4 provided better protection than standard-dose IIV4 against confirmed influenza-like illness among older adults. (Funded by Protein Sciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02285998 .).

Clinical and Serologic Responses After a Two-dose Series of High-dose Influenza Vaccine in Plasma Cell Disorders: A Prospective, Single-arm Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and other plasma cell disorders are highly susceptible to influenza infections, which are major causes of morbidity in this population, despite the routine administration of a seasonal influenza vaccination. Existing data are limited by small and retrospective studies, which suggest poor seroprotection rates of < 20% after standard influenza vaccination in patients with MM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with plasma cell dyscrasia (n = 51) were treated with a 2-dose series of high-dose inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine during the 2014 to 2015 influenza season. Laboratory-confirmed influenza infections were identified through seasonal surveillance, sera were collected for influenza hemagglutination antibody inhibition (HAI) titer assays, and logistic regression models were used to identify the clinical correlates to the HAI serologic responses.

RESULTS

Influenza vaccine was well tolerated, without any vaccine-related grade ≥ 2 adverse events. Only 3 patients (6%) experienced laboratory-confirmed influenza. The rates of HAI seroprotection against all 3 vaccine strains (A/California/7/2009 [H1N1] pdm09-like virus; A/Texas/50/2012 [H3N2]-like virus; and a B/Massachusetts/2/2012-like virus) increased from 4% at baseline to 49% and 65% after 1 and 2 doses, respectively. The risk factors associated with a lower likelihood of HAI serologic response included plasma cell disorder requiring therapy, less than a partial response found on disease response assessment, and active conventional chemotherapy. Alternatively, active therapy with an immunomodulatory drug alone or with a proteasome inhibitor was associated with a greater likelihood of an HAI serologic response.

CONCLUSION

These data have demonstrated that, in contrast to the historically poor results with standard influenza vaccination, this novel high-dose booster vaccination strategy leads to high rates of seroprotection. Randomized controlled studies are needed to compare this novel strategy to the standard vaccination strategy.

Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccination in Hematological Malignancies: a Systematic Review of Efficacy, Effectiveness, and Safety

Background

The risk of getting influenza and pneumococcal disease is higher in cancer patients, and serum antibody levels tend to be lower in patients with hematological malignancy.

Objective

To assess flu and pneumococcal vaccinations efficacy, effectiveness, and safety in onco-hematological patients.

Methods

Two systematic reviews and possible meta-analysis were conducted to summarize the results of all primary study in the scientific literature about the flu and pneumococcal vaccine in onco-hematological patients. Literature searches were performed using Pub-Med and Scopus databases. StatsDirect 2.8.0 was used for the analysis.

Results

22 and 26 studies were collected respectively for flu and pneumococcal vaccinations. Protection rate of booster dose was 30% (95% CI=6–62%) for H1N1. Pooled prevalence protection rate of H3N2 and B was available for meta-analysis only for first dose, 42.6% (95% CI=23.2 – 63.3 %) and 39.6 % (95% CI=26%–54.1%) for H3N2 and B, respectively. Response rate of booster dose resulted 35% (95% CI=19.7–51.2%) for H1N1, 23% (95% CI=16.6–31.5%) for H3N2, 29% (95% CI=21.3–37%) for B.

Conclusion

Despite the low rate of response, flu, and pneumococcal vaccines are worthwhile for patients with hematological malignancies. Patients undergoing chemotherapy in particular rituximab, splenectomy, transplant recipient had lower and impaired response. No serious adverse events were reported for both vaccines.

Improved immunogenicity of high-dose influenza vaccine compared to standard-dose influenza vaccine in adult oncology patients younger than 65 years receiving chemotherapy: A pilot randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

Patients undergoing chemotherapy often fail to develop robust responses to influenza vaccination. Compared to standard-dose influenza vaccine (SD), high-dose influenza vaccine (HD) has shown improved immunogenicity and protection against influenza illness in adults 65 years and older. This study compared the immunogenicity and tolerability of HD to SD in adults younger than 65 years of age receiving chemotherapy.

METHODS

This double-blind study randomized patients receiving chemotherapy to vaccination with either SD or HD influenza vaccine. Hemagglutination inhibition assays (HAI) were performed prior to and 4 weeks after vaccination. HAI were summarized as geometric mean titers (GMT), seroconversion rates, and seroprotection rates.

RESULTS

A total of 105 subjects were enrolled in the trial (51 received SD and 54 received HD). Subjects were well matched for demographic and medical conditions. Both vaccines were well tolerated with no SAEs. Of the 100 subjects with evaluable data, seroconversion rates for all 3 influenza antigens & post-vaccination GMTs for H3N2 & B strains were significantly improved with HD compared to SD. Seroprotection was excellent and equivalent in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Trivalent high-dose influenza vaccine can be safely administered to patients receiving chemotherapy with improved immunogenicity and seroconversion compared to standard-dose vaccine. Post-vaccination seroprotection rates were similar in both groups. A larger study is needed to show clinical benefits with HD in this population. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01666782.

Safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of Flublok in the prevention of seasonal influenza in adults

Flublok is the first recombinant hemagglutinin (HA) vaccine licensed by the US Food and Drugs Administration for the prevention of influenza in adults aged 18 and older. The HA proteins produced in insect cell culture using the baculovirus expression system technology are exact analogues of wild type circulating influenza virus HAs. The universal HA manufacturing process that has been successfully scaled to the 21,000L contributes to rapid delivery of a substantial number of doses. This review discusses the immunogenicity, efficacy and safety data from five pivotal clinical studies used to support licensure of trivalent Flublok for adults 18 years of age and older in the United States. The trial data demonstrate that the higher antigen content in Flublok results in improved immunogenicity. Data further suggest improved efficacy and a slightly lower local reactogenicity compared with standard inactivated influenza vaccine, despite the presence of more antigen (statistically significant). Flublok influenza vaccine can include HAs designed to mimic 'drift' in influenza viruses as the process of predicting antigenic drift advances and, at a minimum, could address late appearing influenza viruses. The implementation of the latter will require support from regulatory authorities.

Recombinant hemagglutinin protein vaccine: a new option in immunization against influenza

Influenza continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Vaccination is the most effective strategy to prevent influenza complications. Traditional influenza vaccines rely on an egg-based production system that has several limitations like dependence on egg supply, long production time and contraindication in people with severe egg allergy. Alternative vaccine production systems are then necessary. The insect cell-baculovirus-based production technology has shown the ability to overcome these limitations. A recombinant trivalent hemagglutinin vaccine (RIV3 – Flublok®) produced using this system is available and licensed in the USA since 2013 for use in adults. This is the first vaccine to contain recombinant influenza virus proteins, with a hemagglutinin concentration that is three-times the one found in inactivated influenza vaccine. Different studies have shown that RIV3 is well tolerated, immunogenic and efficacious, thus proving it to be an additional option for immunization against influenza in adults.

Practical review of immunizations in adult patients with cancer

Compared with the general population, patients with cancer in general are more susceptible to vaccine-preventable infections, either by an increased risk due to the malignancy itself or immunosuppressive treatment. The goal of immunizations in these patients is therefore to provide protection against these infections, and to decrease the number of vulnerable patients who can disseminate these organisms. The proper timing of immunization with cancer treatment is key to achieving better vaccine protection. As the oncology field continues to advance, leading to better quality of life and longer survival, immunization and other aspects of preventive medicine ought to move to the frontline in the care of these patients. Herein, we review the vaccines most clinically relevant to patients with cancer, as well as special cases including vaccines after splenectomy, travel immunization and recommendations for family members.

Influenza vaccination in cancer patients undergoing systemic therapy

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients often experience preventable infections, including influenza A and B. These infections can be a cause of significant morbidity and mortality. The increased risk of infection may be because of either cancer itself or treatment-induced immunosuppression.1 Influenza immunization has been shown to decrease the risk of influenza infection in patients with intact immunity.2 In cancer patients, active immunization has been shown to confer protective immunity against several infections at similar rates to healthy individuals, which has translated into decreased duration and severity of infection and potentially improved morbidity and mortality.3

OBJECTIVES

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE/PubMed database for articles published from 1964 to 2013 using the search terms “cancer,” “adult,” “influenza vaccination,” and “chemotherapy.”

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies based on systematic sampling with defined clinical criteria irrespective of the vaccination status of cancer patients. Studies measure the serological response or clinical response to compare between the study group and the control group. Studies assessed the inactivated influenza vaccines and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) protective serological reaction and the clinical outcomes after vaccination.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent authors assessed the methodological quality of included studies and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 studies (total number of participants = 1,076). None of the included studies reported clinical outcomes. All included studies reported on influenza immunity and adverse reaction on vaccination. We included 6 solid tumor studies and 10 hematological studies. In 12 studies, the serological response to influenza vaccine was compared in patients receiving chemotherapy (n = 425) versus those not receiving chemotherapy (n = 376). In three studies, the serological responses to influenza vaccination in patients receiving chemotherapy are compared to that in healthy adult. Measures used to assess the serological responses included a four-fold rise increase in antibody titer development of hemagglutination inhibition (HI) titer >40, and pre- and post-vaccination geometric mean titers (GMTs). Immune responses in patients receiving chemotherapy were consistently weaker (four-fold rise of 17–52%) than in those who had completed chemotherapy (50–83%) and healthy patients (67–100%). Concerning adverse effects, oncology patients received influenza vaccine, and the side effects described were mild local reactions and low-grade fever. No life-threatening or persistent adverse effects were reported.

AUTHORS’ CONCLUSION

Patients with solid and some of hematological tumors are able to mount a serological response to influenza vaccine, but it remains unclear how much this response protects them from influenza infection or its complications. Meanwhile, influenza vaccine appears to be safe in these patients. While waiting results of randomized controlled trials to give us more details about the clinical benefits of the influenza vaccination, the clinicians should consider the currently proved benefits of influenza vaccination on management of the cancer patients undergoing systematic chemotherapy such as decrease in the duration and severity of the of the disease, and significant decrease in influenza-associated morbidity and mortality in these high-risk patients.3

Influenza vaccines in immunosuppressed adults with cancer

BACKGROUND

Immunosuppressed cancer patients are at increased risk of serious influenza-related complications. Guidelines, therefore, recommend influenza vaccination for these patients. However, data on vaccine effectiveness in this population is lacking, and the value of vaccination in this population remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of influenza vaccine in immunosuppressed adults with malignancies. The primary review outcome is all-cause mortality, preferably at the end of the influenza season. Influenza-like illness (ILI, a clinical definition), confirmed influenza, pneumonia, any hospitalization and influenza-related mortality were defined as secondary outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS databases up to August 2013. We searched the following conference proceedings: ICAAC, ECCMID, IDSA (infectious disease conferences), ASH, ASBMT, EBMT (hematological), and ASCO (oncological) between the years 2006 to 2010. In addition, we scanned the references of all identified studies and pertinent reviews. We searched the websites of the manufacturers of influenza vaccine. Finally, we searched for ongoing or unpublished trials in clinical trial registry databases using the website.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies and case-control studies were considered, comparing inactivated influenza vaccines versus placebo, no vaccination or a different vaccine, in adults (16 years and over) with cancer. We considered solid malignancies treated with chemotherapy, haematological cancer patients treated or not treated with chemotherapy, cancer patients post-autologous (up to six months after transplantation) or allogeneic (at any time) hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data from included studies adhering to Cochrane methodology. Meta-analysis could not be performed because of different outcome and denominator definitions in the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four studies: one RCT and three observational studies, including 2124 participants. One study reported results in person-years while the other three reported per person. The studies were performed between 1993 and 2012 and included adults with haematological diseases (two studies), patients following bone marrow transplantation (one study) and solid malignancies (three studies). Only two observational studies reported all-cause mortality; one showing an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.99) for death with vaccination and the other reporting an odds ratio (OR) of 0.43 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.71). The RCT reported a statistically significant reduction in ILI with vaccination, while no difference was observed in one observational study. Confirmed influenza rates were lower with vaccination in the three observational studies, the difference reaching statistical significance in one. Pneumonia was observed significantly less frequently with vaccination in one observational study, but no difference was detected in another or in the RCT. The RCT showed a reduction in hospitalizations following vaccination, while an observational study found no difference. No life-threatening or persistent adverse effects from vaccination were reported. The strength of evidence is limited by the low number of included studies and by their low methodological quality (high risk of bias).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Observational data suggests a lower mortality with influenza vaccination. Infection-related outcomes were lower or similar with influenza vaccination. The strength of evidence is limited by the small number of studies and by the fact that only one was a RCT. Influenza vaccination is safe and the evidence, although weak, is in favour of vaccinating adults with cancer receiving chemotherapy.

Modeling dendritic cell vaccination for influenza prophylaxis: potential applications for niche populations

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients can exhibit negligible responses to prophylactic vaccinations, including influenza vaccination. To help address this issue, we developed in vitro and in vivo models of dendritic cell (DC) immunotherapy for the prevention of influenza virus infection.

METHODS

Human cord blood (CB)-derived or mouse splenocyte-derived DCs were loaded with purified recombinant hemagglutinin (rHA). T-cell responses to HA-loaded CB-derived DCs were determined by ELISpot. Protective efficacy was determined by vaccination of BALB/c mice with a single injection of 10(6) autologous DCs. DC migration to peripheral lymphoid organs was verified by carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl ester staining, and HA-specific antibody titers were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Mice were then challenged intranasally with BALB/c-adapted A/New Caledonia influenza virus derived from four consecutive lung pool passages. Antigen-presenting cell (APC) dysfunction was modeled using the MAFIA transgenic system, in which the Csf1r promoter conditionally drives AP20178-inducible Fas.

RESULTS

CB-derived human DCs were able to generate de novo T-cell responses against rHA, as determined by a system of rigorous controls. Mice vaccinated intraperitoneally developed HA titers detectable at serum dilutions of >1:1000. HA seroconverters survived virus challenge, whereas unvaccinated controls and vaccinated nonseroconverters lost weight and died. Furthermore, use of a model of APC-specific immunosuppression revealed that DC vaccination could generate HA-specific antibody titers under conditions in which protein vaccination could not.

CONCLUSIONS

The model demonstrates that DC immunotherapy for the prevention of influenza is feasible, and studies are underway to determine whether populations of immunosuppressed individuals might ultimately benefit from the procedure.

A fast track influenza virus vaccine produced in insect cells

The viral surface protein hemagglutinin (HA) has been recognized as a key antigen in the host response to influenza virus in both natural infection and vaccination because neutralizing antibodies directed against HA can mitigate or prevent infection. The baculovirus-insect cell system can be used for the production of recombinant HA molecules and is suitable for influenza vaccine production where annual adjustment of the vaccine is required. This expression system is generally considered safe with minimal potential for growth of human pathogens. Extensive characterization of this novel cell substrate has been performed, none of which has revealed the presence of adventitious agents. Multiple clinical studies have demonstrated that the vaccine is safe, well-tolerated and immunogenic. The baculovirus-insect cell system could, therefore, be used for the expedited production of a safe and efficacious influenza vaccine. As a result, this technology should provide a fast track worldwide solution for newly emerging influenza strains or pandemic preparedness within a few years.

Vaccines for prophylaxis of viral infections in patients with hematological malignancies

BACKGROUND

Viral infections cause significant morbidity and mortality in patients with hematological malignancies. It remains uncertain whether viral vaccinations in these patients are supported by good evidence.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the effectiveness and safety of viral vaccines in patients with hematological malignancies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (June 2010), reference lists of relevant papers, abstracts from scientific meetings and contacted vaccine manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating viral vaccines in patients with hematological malignancies were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Relative risk (RR) was used for binary data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data. Primary outcome was incidence of infection. Secondary outcomes were mortality, incidence of complications and severe viral infection, hospitalization, immune response and adverse effects. Fixed-effect model was used in meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight RCTs were included, with 305 patients in the intervention groups and 288 in the control groups. They evaluated heat-inactivated varicella zoster virus (VZV) vaccine (two trials), influenza vaccines (five trials) and inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) (one trial). Seven trials had high and one trial had moderate risk of bias.VZV vaccine might reduce herpes zoster compared to no vaccine (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.3 to 1.0, P=0.05), but not statistically significant. Vaccination also demonstrated efficacy in immune response but frequently caused local adverse effects. One trial reported severity score of zoster, which favored vaccination (MD 2.6, 95% CI 0.94 to 4.26, P=0.002).Two RCTs compared inactivated influenza vaccine with no vaccine and reported lower risk of lower respiratory infections (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.78, P=0.008) and hospitalization (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.31, P<0.00001) in vaccine recipients. However, vaccine recipients more frequently experienced irritability and local adverse effects. There was no significant difference in seroconversion between one and two doses of influenza vaccine (one trial), or between recombinant and standard influenza vaccine (one trial), or influenza vaccine given with or without re-induction chemotherapy (one trial).The IPV trial comparing vaccination starting at 6 versus 18 months after stem cell transplant (SCT) found no significant difference in seroconversion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Inactivated VZV vaccine might reduce zoster severity in adult SCT recipients. Inactivated influenza vaccine might reduce respiratory infections and hospitalization in adults with multiple myeloma or children with leukemia or lymphoma. However, the quality of evidence is low. Local adverse effects occur frequently. Further high-quality RCTs are needed.

Utility of Influenza Vaccination for Oncology Patients

Every fall and winter, patients with cancer and their families ask oncologists whether they should be vaccinated for influenza. This season, with escalating concerns regarding the novel H1N1 influenza virus and its recently approved vaccine, this question has become more frequent and increasingly urgent. The purpose of this article is to review evidence related to the ability of patients with cancer to mount protective immunological responses to influenza vaccination. The literature on immunogenicity in pediatric and adult patients, those with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies, untreated and actively treated patients, and patients receiving biologic agents is summarized and reviewed. In addition, we report on potential strategies to improve the efficacy of influenza vaccination in patients with cancer, such as the timing of vaccination, use of more than a one-shot series, increasing the antigen dose, and the use of adjuvant therapies. We conclude that there is evidence that patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy are able to respond to influenza vaccination, and because this intervention is safe, inexpensive, and widely available, vaccination for seasonal influenza and the novel H1N1 strain is indicated.

Gastrointestinal delivery of baculovirus displaying influenza virus hemagglutinin protects mice against heterologous H5N1 infection

The recent outbreaks of influenza A H5N1 virus in birds and humans have necessitated the development of potent H5N1 vaccines. In this study, we evaluated the protective potential of an immediate-early promoter-based baculovirus displaying hemagglutinin (BacHA) against highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 virus infection in a mouse model. Gastrointestinal delivery of BacHA significantly enhanced the systemic immune response in terms of HA-specific serum IgG and hemagglutination inhibition (HI) titers. In addition, BacHA vaccine was able to significantly enhance the mucosal IgA level. The inclusion of recombinant cholera toxin B subunit as a mucosal adjuvant along with BacHA vaccine did not influence either the systemic or mucosal immunity. Interestingly, an inactivated form of BacHA was able to induce only a negligible level of immune responses compared to its live counterpart. Microneutralization assay also indicated that live BacHA vaccine was able to induce strong cross-clade neutralization against heterologous H5N1 strains (clade 1.0, clade 2.1, and clade 8.0) compared to the inactivated BacHA. Viral challenge studies showed that live BacHA was able to provide 100% protection against 5 50% mouse lethal doses (MLD(50)) of homologous (clade 2.1) and heterologous (clade 1) H5N1. Moreover, histopathological examinations revealed that mice vaccinated with live BacHA had only minimal bronchitis in lungs and regained their body weight more rapidly postchallenge. Furthermore, immunohistochemistry results demonstrated that the live BacHA was able to transduce and express HA in the intestinal epithelial cells in vitro and in vivo. We have demonstrated that recombinant baculovirus with a white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) immediate-early promoter 1 (ie1) acted as a vector as well as a protein vaccine and will enable the rapid production of prepandemic and pandemic vaccines without any biosafety concerns.

Attenuated antibody reaction for the primary antigen but not for the recall antigen of influenza vaccination in patients with non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma after the administration of rituximab-CHOP

To assess the humoral response to the influenza vaccine in patients undergoing R-CHOP therapy (rituximab combined with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and predonisolone) for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), the anti-hemagglutinin (HA) titer in 7 NHL patients undergoing therapy was compared with those in 10 control group subjects in the 2005/2006 season. Four weeks after vaccination, the HA titers against the influenza type A H1N1 and type B antigens, the same antigens that had been used in the previous seasons, were elevated in all patients treated with R-CHOP. In contrast, there was no increase in the geometric mean titer for type A H3N2 antigen, which was newly included in 2005/2006 season, in the patients treated with R-CHOP, while there was a significant increase in the 10 control subjects (p = 0.014). This study showed that vaccination against influenza virus generated an appreciable humoral response to recall antigens in NHL patients treated with R-CHOP therapy, but not to the primary antigen.

Advances and challenges in infectious diseases supportive care of patients with hematologic malignancies, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and severe aplastic anemia

Infectious diseases are important causes of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients with hematological malignancies, severe aplastic anemia (SAA), and myelodysplasia. Major advances in infectious diseases supportive care have been critical to improving the outcome of patients suffering from these life-threatening diseases. Advances in diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of life-threatening infections have reduced morbidity and mortality, improved quality of life, and enabled the use of potentially curative chemotherapy, radiation, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), and immunosuppressive therapy to patients battling these devastating diseases. Despite these advances, the continued development of antimicrobial resistance, emergence of new pathogens, and the evolution of host factors present evolving challenges to the successful management of infectious complications in this expanding patient population.

FluBlok, a recombinant hemagglutinin influenza vaccine

Abstract  FluBlok, a recombinant trivalent hemagglutinin (HA) vaccine produced in insect cell culture using the baculovirus expression system, provides an attractive alternative to the current egg‐based trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) manufacturing process. FluBlok contains three times more HA than TIV and does not contain egg‐protein or preservatives. This review discusses the four main clinical studies that were used to support licensure of FluBlok under the ‘Accelerated Approval’ mechanism in the United States.

De novo T-lymphocyte responses against baculovirus-derived recombinant influenzavirus hemagglutinin generated by a naive umbilical cord blood model of dendritic cell vaccination

Cancer patients and recipients of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation exhibit a negligible response to influenza vaccine. Toward the goal of addressing this issue, we developed an in vitro model of dendritic cell (DC) immunotherapy utilizing DCs generated from naïve umbilical cord blood (UCB). UCB DCs were loaded with purified rHA protein and used to stimulate autologous T-lymphocytes. Upon recall with HA-loaded autologous DC, a 4-10-fold increase in the number of IFN-gamma producing T-lymphocytes was observed in comparison to T-cells stimulated with control DCs. Antigen-specific T-cell functionality was determined by (51)Cr lytic assay. Using a peptide library of predicted HA binding epitopes, we mapped an HA-specific, DR15-restricted CD4 T-cell epitope and observed tetramer positive cells. This model demonstrates that HA-specific immune responses might possibly be generated in a de novo fashion and suggests that dendritic cell immunotherapy for the prevention of influenza in populations of immunosuppressed individuals could be feasible.

Comparing the antibody responses against recombinant hemagglutinin proteins of avian influenza A (H5N1) virus expressed in insect cells and bacteria

The hemagglutinin (HA) of influenza A virus plays an essential role in mediating the entry of the virus into host cells. Here, recombinant full-length HA5 protein from a H5N1 isolate (A/chicken/hatay/2004(H5N1)) was expressed and purified from the baculovirus-insect cell system. As expected, full-length HA5 elicits strong neutralizing antibodies, as evaluated in micro-neutralization tests using HA5 pseudotyped lentiviral particles. In addition, two fragments of HA5 were expressed in bacteria and the N-terminal fragment, covering the ectodomain before the HA1/HA2 polybasic cleavage site, was found to elicit neutralizing antibodies. But the C-terminal fragment, which covers the remaining portion of the ectodomain, did not. Neutralizing titer of the anti-serum against the N-terminal fragment is only four times lower than the anti-serum against the full-length HA5 protein. Using a novel membrane fusion assay, the abilities of these antibodies to block membrane fusion were found to correlate well with the neutralization activities.

Protective immunity against influenza H5N1 virus challenge in mice by intranasal co-administration of baculovirus surface-displayed HA and recombinant CTB as an adjuvant

The increasing number of recent outbreaks of HPAI H5N1 in birds and humans brings out an urgent need to develop potent H5N1 vaccine regimens. Here we present a study on the intranasal vaccination of recombinant baculovirus surface-displayed hemagglutinin (BacHA) or inactivated whole H5N1 viral (IWV) vaccine with a recombinant cholera toxin B subunit (rCTB) as a mucosal adjuvant in a BALB/c mouse model. Two groups of mice were vaccinated with different doses (HA titer of log 2(4) or log 2(8)) of either HA surface-displayed baculovirus or inactivated whole viral vaccine virus adjuvanted with different doses (2 mug or 10 mug) of rCTB. The vaccinations were repeated after 28 days. HA specific serum IgG and mucosal IgA antibodies were quantified by indirect ELISA, and serum neutralizing antibody titer were estimated by hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay and virus neutralization titer assay. Functional protective efficacy of the vaccine was assessed by host challenge against HPAI H5N1 strains. The results revealed that mice co-administered with log 2(8) HA titer of BacHA vaccine and adjuvanted with 10 mug of rCTB had a significantly enhanced serum IgG and mucosal IgA immune response and serum microneutralization titer compared with mice administered with unadjuvanted log 2(4) or log 2(8) HA titer of BacHA alone. Also vaccination with 10 mug of rCTB and log 2(8) HA titer of BacHA elicited higher HA specific serum and mucosal antibody levels and serum HI titer than vaccination with log 2(8) HA titer of inactivated H5N1 virus adjuvanted with the same dose of rCTB. The host challenge study also showed that 10 mug rCTB combined with log 2(8) HA titer of BacHA provided 100% protection against 10MLD(50) of homologous and heterologous H5N1 strains. The study shows that the combination of rH5 HA expressed on baculovirus surface and rCTB mucosal adjuvant form an effective mucosal vaccine against H5N1 infection. This baculovirus surface-displayed vaccine is more efficacious than inactivated H5N1 influenza vaccine when administered by intranasal route and has no biosafety concerns associated with isolation, purification and production of the latter vaccine.

Multiple-dose granulocyte-macrophage-colony-stimulating factor plus 23-valent polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccine in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a prospective, randomized trial of safety and immunogenicity

BACKGROUND

For the current study, the authors sought to determine whether administration of multiple-dose granulocyte-macrophage-colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) could improve response to standard 23-valent polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccine (PPV) in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

METHODS

Patients were allocated randomly to receive PPV either alone or with 3 doses of GM-CSF (250 microg) given before or after vaccination. Serum was obtained before, 4 weeks after, and 12 weeks after vaccination for antibody determination. Thirty-two patients with CLL were given PPV. They were randomized to receive 3 doses of GM-CSF either before or after vaccination or to receive no GM-CSF.

RESULTS

A 4-fold rise in immunoglobulin G (IgG) to capsular polysaccharides from Streptococcus pneumoniae types 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 19F, and 23F occurred in <10% of patients in each of the 3 groups. There were no differences in geometric mean IgG levels in any of the 3 groups 4 weeks or 12 weeks after vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CLL, the response to pure polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccine was low despite immune enhancement with multiple doses of GM-CSF. In all patients, reactogenicity was minor.

Influenza vaccines and vaccination strategies in birds

Although it is well accepted that the present Asian H5N1 panzootic is predominantly an animal health problem, the human health implications and the risk of human pandemic have highlighted the need for more information and collaboration in the field of veterinary and human health. H5 and H7 avian influenza (AI) viruses have the unique property of becoming highly pathogenic (HPAI) during circulation in poultry. Therefore, the final objective of poultry vaccination against AI must be eradication of the virus and the disease. Actually, important differences exist in the control of avian and human influenza viruses. Firstly, unlike human vaccines that must be adapted to the circulating strain to provide adequate protection, avian influenza vaccination provides broader protection against HPAI viruses. Secondly, although clinical protection is the primary goal of human vaccines, poultry vaccination must also stop transmission to achieve efficient control of the disease. This paper addresses these differences by reviewing the current and future influenza vaccines and vaccination strategies in birds.

Baculovirus-expressed influenza vaccine. A novel technology for safe and expeditious vaccine production for human use

Effectiveness of the influenza vaccine in persons with high-risk conditions needs to be improved. In this paper, the authors review various vaccination strategies, including repeated doses of the vaccine or the use of higher hemagglutinin (HA) content vaccines that have been shown to result in improved immunogenicity. A recombinant HA vaccine produced in insect cells using the baculovirus vectors system presents the possibility for safe and expeditious vaccine production. The high purity of the antigen enables administration at much higher doses without a significant increase in side effects in human subjects. An overview of the use of this production system for the development of alternative influenza vaccine targets is also provided, such as neuraminidase and possibly M2. However, the role of M2 may be more appropriate as an adjuvant vaccine in combination with standard HA vaccine supplement and needs further evaluation. The conclusion that the insect cell-baculovirus production technology is a modern solution for rapid viral or parasitic antigen production is made and that this technology is particularly suitable for influenza where annual adjustment of the vaccine is required. In addition, a highly purified recombinant protein vaccine results in an improved influenza vaccine response in those with high-risk medical conditions.

Production of a novel influenza vaccine using insect cells: protection against drifted strains

A recombinant trivalent hemagglutinin (HA) vaccine produced in cell culture using the baculovirus expression system provides an attractive alternative to the current egg-based influenza vaccine (Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine [TIV]) manufacturing process. The HA genes from the annual World Health Organization-recommended strains are cloned, expressed, and purified using a general purification process. Here, we provide an overview of the expression technology used to make the annual adjustment of the vaccine and the clinical studies completed to date with recombinant HA. The highly purified protein vaccine, administered at three times higher antigen content than TIV, results in stronger immunogenicity, a long-lasting immune response and provides cross-protection against drift variant influenza viruses. Furthermore, the vaccine does not contain egg proteins, adjuvants, preservatives, endotoxins, or antibiotics and can therefore be used in a broader population.