Comparison of the effectiveness of two protocols for vaccination (standard and double dosage) against hepatitis B virus in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Immunogenicity of Hepatitis B Vaccination in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis on Infliximab Is Attenuated Compared to Those on 5-Aminosalicylic Acid Therapies: A Prospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection has been associated with chronic hepatitis and cirrhosis. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may be at a higher risk of HBV infection reactivation, especially those on biologic therapies. This study intends to compare the effectiveness of the HBV vaccine in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) on infliximab (IFX) compared to those on 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA).

METHODS

Patients with UC aged >18 years old were prospectively enrolled in the study. The patients were divided into two groups: patients treated with 5-ASA (control group) and patients treated with IFX (study group). HBV vaccination was administered (20 mcg) following the standard regimen, and Hepatitis B serum antibody (HbsAb) titers were assessed three months after the final dose. The response to HBV vaccines was categorized as an 'adequate' immune response (≥10 IU/L) and 'effective' immune response (≥100 IU/L).

RESULTS

In our final analysis of 118 patients with UC, 54.2% were male and 52.5% had extensive colitis. HBsAb titer levels were significantly higher in the 5-ASA group (126.7 ± 37.5) compared to the IFX group (55.5 ± 29.4). Stratifying HBsAb levels into two categories (≥10-99 IU/L and ≥100 IU/L) revealed a significantly greater proportion of subjects in the 5-ASA group with levels ≥100 IU/L compared to the IFX group (76.7% vs. 12.1%, p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that patients with UC receiving 5-ASA were 23.94 times more likely to exhibit HBsAb levels ≥ 100 compared to those treated with IFX (OR = 23.94, 95% CI 8.89-64.49).

CONCLUSION

The immune response to hepatitis B vaccination in patients with ulcerative colitis treated with IFX is attenuated compared to those treated with 5-ASA. Therefore, emphasizing the importance of HBV vaccination for patients with IBD before starting anti-TNF therapy, especially IFX, and advocating for screening is imperative in high-risk countries. Determining what levels of HBsAb provide protection and what happens to the levels over time after a booster dose are important clinical questions to be answered by follow-up studies.

Prevalence, Risk Factors and Vaccine Response against Hepatitis B in People Aged 50 Years or Older

Universal immunization against hepatitis B has contributed to reducing incidence of the disease, but older individuals remain susceptible to acquiring the hepatitis B virus worldwide. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the epidemiology of HBV infection in individuals aged 50 years and over in central Brazil and to evaluate the immunogenicity of the monovalent vaccine against hepatitis B in this age group using two vaccine regimens. Method: Initially, a cross-sectional and analytical study was carried out to investigate the epidemiology of hepatitis B. Then, individuals without proof of vaccination for hepatitis B were recruited for a phase IV randomized and controlled clinical trial using two vaccine regimens: Intervention Regimen (IR) (three doses of 40 μg at months 0, 1 and 6) vs. Comparison Regimen (CR) (three doses of 20 μg at months 0, 1 and 6). Results: The overall prevalence of exposure to HBV was 16.6% (95% CI: 14.0%–9.5%). In the clinical trial, statistical differences in protective titers were observed (p = 0.007; IR 96% vs. CR 86%) and the geometric mean of anti-HBs titers was higher in individuals who received the IR (518.2 mIU/mL vs. 260.2 mIU/mL). In addition, the proportion of high responders was higher among those who received the IR (65.3%). Conclusion: reinforced doses should be used in individuals aged 50 years or older to overcome the lower efficacy of the vaccine against hepatitis B.

Efficacy of Hepatitis B Vaccination with a Novel Immunostimulatory Sequence Adjuvant (Heplisav-B) in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Owing to the use of immunosuppressive agents, patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have an increased risk of vaccine preventable diseases, including infection with hepatitis B virus (HBV). Heplisav-B, an FDA-approved vaccine, is more effective (90% to 100%) than Engerix-B (70.5% to 90.2%) at inducing immunity to HBV in clinical studies. Available data on efficacy of Heplisav-B vaccine in patients with IBD are limited.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included patients age 18 years and older with ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn's disease (CD) who received 1 or 2 doses of Heplisav-B vaccine and had postvaccination serologic testing. Prior to immunization, all participants were seronegative for HBsAb antibodies (HBsAb) measured as <10 IU/mL. Postvaccination HBsAb of ≥10 IU/mL was considered successful vaccination. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, and medications were abstracted.

RESULTS

One hundred six patients were included in the analysis. Median age was 43 years, and 44 (42%) were female. Thirty-nine patients (37%) had UC, whereas 67 (63%) had CD. Eighty-three patients (78.3%) had active immunity after vaccination with Heplisav-B, with median postvaccination HBsAb levels of 114 IU/L. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus, immunomodulator use, or those on 2 or more of immunosuppressive medications were less likely to respond to Heplisav-B, though these findings were not statistically significant on a multivariate analysis aside from chronic kidney disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Heplisav-B, a 2-dose vaccine, is an effective vaccine for HBV in patients with IBD. In our study, its overall efficacy (78.3%) is greater than that reported for the presently available 3-dose vaccination (Engerix) in patients with IBD.

Recommendations of the Spanish Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis on the importance, screening and vaccination in inflammatory bowel disease patients

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may require different immunosuppressive treatments throughout their illness. It is essential to assess the immunization status of patients at diagnosis or, if this is not possible, at least before the beginning of immunosuppressive therapy and, subsequently, administering the appropriate vaccines. Therefore, the aim of this work is to establish clear and concise recommendations on vaccination in patients with IBD in the different settings of our clinical practice including vaccination in children, during pregnancy, breastfeeding or on trips. This consensus document emphasises the differences between inactivated and attenuated vaccines and the different degrees of immunosuppression and correlates them with the administration of both mandatory and optional vaccines recommended to our patients with IBD. Finally, as a summary, 17 recommendations are established based on the available scientific evidence and expert opinion. A multidisciplinary team with extensive experience in IBD and vaccination, made up of specialists in gastroenterology, paediatrics, nursing and pharmacy, has participated in the preparation of these recommendations of the Spanish Working Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis.

A comparison of two Fendrix hepatitis B vaccination schedules in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Systemic immunosuppressive therapy (IS) renders patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) vulnerable to fulminant hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Seroprotection against HBV through a full vaccination scheme is preferably obtained before IS is initiated, but often conflicts with the clinical need to initiate therapy rapidly. Consequently, the vast majority of patients will use IS during booster vaccinations. In this retrospective cohort study, we examined the serological response after a modified vaccination schedule which includes an initial double dose of Fendrix in patients with IBD and compared the results with the serological responses of patients with IBD who received the standard schedule. Seroprotection rates were 86.2 % and 88.9 % in the modified and standard schedule groups respectively. One-third of patients obtained seroprotection after only one double dose vaccine. A double dose may be considered in patients with IBD at high short-term risk of HBV infection when a rapid protective response is warranted.

[Viral Hepatitis in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease]

There has been a rise in the incidence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in developing countries, including South Korea. Consequently, the use of immunosuppressive agents such as immunomodulators or biologics has also increased. Due to immunosuppression, patients on these agents are at increased risk of various opportunistic infections during treatment, which may sometimes lead to serious adverse outcomes. Viral hepatitis, especially hepatitis B, is one of the infectious conditions that can be reactivated during immunosuppressive therapy, and adequate strategies for monitoring and prophylaxis are needed to prevent it. South Korea is one of the countries with intermediate endemicity for hepatitis A and B. Thus, taking adequate precautions against viral hepatitis could prevent new infections or reactivation of these conditions in patients with IBD on immunosuppressive therapy. In this review article, we have summarized the latest evidence on viral hepatitis in patients with IBD that would be of assistance in clinical practice.

Efficacy of Hepatitis B Virus Vaccines HBVaxpro40© and Fendrix© in Patients with Chronic Liver Disease in Clinical Practice

Chronic liver disease results in a low response rate to the hepatitis B virus vaccine. Information on the efficacy of the double adjuvanted vaccine FENDRIX® (3-O-desacyl-4'-monophosphoryl lipid A and aluminum phosphate) and single adjuvant HBVAXPRO®40 (aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate) in chronic liver disease is scarce. The primary aim of this prospective study in clinical practice was to evaluate the effectiveness of HBVAXPRO®40 and FENDRIX® in this setting. Patients received HBVAXPRO® (0, 1 and 6 months) or FENDRIX® (0, 1, 2 and 6 months) depending on availability. Clinical data and anti-HBs levels were collected at 2, 6 and 12 months. A total of 125 patients were included (mean age 61.8 years; 57.6% males; 43.2% liver cirrhosis; 75.9% Child A and 24.1% Child B): 76 were vaccinated with HBVAXPRO® and 49 with FENDRIX®. There were no significant differences between the two vaccines. The overall response rates at 2, 6 and 12 months were 76.8, 72.8 and 59.2%, respectively. In the univariate analysis, active alcohol intake, alcohol etiology, liver cirrhosis and ultrasound signs of portal hypertension were associated with a lower response to vaccination, whereas in the multivariate analysis, liver cirrhosis was the only factor that significantly increased the likelihood of nonresponse (OR 10.5). HBVAXPRO® and FENDRIX® are good options for HBV vaccination in patients with chronic liver disease.

Meta-analysis: hepatitis B vaccination in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

The response rate of hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is variable. Increasing dose or accelerated schedule is the suggested strategy to improve seroconversion.

AIM

We performed a meta-analysis to determine the pooled response rate of HBV vaccination and to identify the predictors of seroconversion.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library databases. Studies reporting the response of HBV vaccination in IBD patients were included. Response was recorded as adequate immune response (AIR, >10 IU/L) and Effective immune response (EIR, >100 IU/L). Pooled AIR and EIR rates were calculated for different doses (10-20 μg or 40 μg) and schedules (standard: 0, 1 and 6 months or accelerated: 0, 1 and 2 months). Meta-analysis was performed to identify the predictors of response.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies including 2602 patients were eligible. Pooled AIR and EIR rates after HBV vaccination were 62% (95% CI, 55-68) and 42% (95% CI, 37-48), respectively. Pooled AIR and EIR rates for standard and double dose were similar. Pooled AIR and EIR rates were also comparable for different schedules of HBV vaccination. Gender, IBD subtype and disease activity did not affect the response rate. Use of immunosuppression [immunomodulators (RR: 0.73, 95% CI, 0.62-0.87) and anti-TNFs (RR: 0.72, 95% CI, 0.60-0.87)] was a predictor of poor immune response compared to no immunosuppressive therapy.

CONCLUSION

Patients with IBD have a poor serological response after HBV vaccination. HBV screening and vaccination should preferably be done before starting the immunosuppressive drugs.

Immunisation status of children and adolescents with a new diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) are at increased risk of serious infections, including vaccine preventable diseases. Current evidence suggests uptake of additional recommended special risk vaccinations is low. Identification of IBD patients prior to commencing immunosuppressive therapy allows for optimisation of vaccination, including timely administration of live-attenuated and additional recommended vaccines, such as influenza and pneumococcal vaccines.

METHODS

Paediatric patients (0-18 years) seen at the tertiary Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, with a recent diagnosis of IBD were referred by the Gastroenterology Unit to our Specialist Immunisation Clinic (SIC) for assessment and provision of routine and special risk vaccines. Data was collected via a standardised REDCap questionnaire completed in or post attendance at the SIC and included serology results where available.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine paediatric patients were recruited to the study between 2014 and 2017. Median age at IBD diagnosis was 11.25 years (IQR 4.64 years), with median time between diagnosis and SIC review of 0.88 years (IQR 2.84 years). At initial review 84.1% (58/69) of patients were up to date with vaccines on the Australian National Immunisation Program (NIP) schedule. Of those who were tested, serological evidence of immunity was demonstrated in 38.3% (23/60) of patients for Hepatitis B, 66.7% (36/54) for measles, 51.9% (28/54) for rubella and 41.9% (26/62) for Varicella Zoster Virus. Prior to SIC review 47.8% (33/69) had additional vaccinations and 92.8% (64/69) had vaccinations administered in the 12 months following SIC assessment. The Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (76.8%, 53/69) was the most commonly administered vaccine after SIC review, followed by influenza vaccine (69.6%, 48/69). Within 12 months of SIC review 43.5% (30/69) of patients had completed the schedule and were up-to-date as recommended by the SIC.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with IBD and other special risk groups can benefit from early referral to a SIC team to ensure optimal administration of routine and additionally recommended vaccines, especially live and additional special risk vaccines. The value of optimising immunisations could also be applied to other special risk groups, including adult IBD cohorts, particularly those commencing newer biologic immunosuppressive medications.

Review Article: vaccination for patients with inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Poor immune responses are frequently observed in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving established vaccines; risk factors include immunosuppressants and active disease.

AIMS

To summarise available information regarding immune responses achieved in patients with IBD receiving established vaccines. Using this information, to identify risk factors in the IBD population related to poor vaccine-induced immunity that may be applicable to vaccines against COVID-19.

METHODS

We undertook a literature review on immunity to currently recommended vaccines for patients with IBD and to COVID-19 vaccines and summarised the relevant literature.

RESULTS

Patients with IBD have reduced immune responses following vaccination compared to the general population. Factors including the use of immunomodulators and anti-TNF agents reduce response rates. Patients with IBD should be vaccinated against COVID-19 at the earliest opportunity as recommended by International Advisory Committees, and vaccination should not be deferred because a patient is receiving immune-modifying therapies. Antibody titres to COVID-19 vaccines appear to be reduced in patients receiving anti-TNF therapy, especially in combination with immunomodulators after one vaccination. Therefore, we should optimise any established risk factors that could impact response to vaccination in patients with IBD before vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Ideally, patients with IBD should be vaccinated at the earliest opportunity against COVID-19. Patients should be in remission and, if possible, have their corticosteroid dose minimised before vaccination. Further research is required to determine the impact of different biologics on vaccine response to COVID-19 and the potential for booster vaccines or heterologous prime-boost vaccinations in the IBD population.

Hepatitis-B Vaccine Response in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Data on efficacy of hepatitis-B vaccine (HBV) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is limited. Our aim was to review the literature and perform meta-analysis of available studies to quantify efficacy of HBV in patients with IBD.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (inception to July 2020) to identify studies evaluating efficacy of HBV in patients with IBD. Random effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates and I2 percentage values were used to assess the heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies (2375 patients) were included. Four data sets were available from 2 studies that compared HBV response in patients with IBD against healthy controls. The pooled odds ratio of HBV response in IBD patients was 0.13 (95% CI, 0.05-0.33, P = 0.001). The pooled proportion of adequate immune response (AIR) was 64% (95% CI, 55-72.1, P = 0.003) from 13 data sets, and effective immune response (EIR) was 39.7% (95% CI, 30.7-49.5, P = 0.04) from 10 data sets.

CONCLUSION

Patients with IBD on immunosuppression demonstrated significantly reduced HBV response as compared with general population.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for Immunizations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)-Part 2: Inactivated Vaccines

Background and Aims

The effectiveness and safety of vaccinations can be altered by immunosuppressive therapies, and perhaps by inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) itself. These recommendations developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and endorsed by the American Gastroenterological Association, aim to provide guidance on immunizations in adult and pediatric patients with IBD. This publication focused on inactivated vaccines.

Methods

Systematic reviews evaluating the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of vaccines in patients with IBD, other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, and the general population were performed. Critical outcomes included mortality, vaccine-preventable diseases, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was considered a surrogate outcome for vaccine efficacy. Certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Key questions were developed through an iterative online platform, and voted on by a multidisciplinary group. Recommendations were formulated using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. Strong recommendation means that most patients should receive the recommended course of action, whereas a conditional recommendation means that different choices will be appropriate for different patients.

Results

Consensus was reached on 15 of 20 questions. Recommendations address the following vaccines: Haemophilus influenzae type b, recombinant zoster, hepatitis B, influenza, pneumococcus, meningococcus, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis, and human papillomavirus. Most of the recommendations for patients with IBD are congruent with the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Canada’s National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommendations for the general population, with the following exceptions. In patients with IBD, the panel suggested Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine for patients older than 5 years of age, recombinant zoster vaccine for adults younger than 50 year of age, and hepatitis B vaccine for adults without a risk factor. Consensus was not reached, and recommendations were not made for 5 statements, due largely to lack of evidence, including double-dose hepatitis B vaccine, timing of influenza immunization in patients on biologics, pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccines in adult patients without risk factors, and human papillomavirus vaccine in patients aged 27–45 years.

Conclusions

Patients with IBD may be at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable diseases. Therefore, maintaining appropriate vaccination status in these patients is critical to optimize patient outcomes. In general, IBD is not a contraindication to the use of inactivated vaccines, but immunosuppressive therapy may reduce vaccine responses.

Evaluation of hepatitis B vaccine efficacy and factors affecting vaccine nonresponse in patients receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor agents

OBJECTIVES

The response rate of patients to hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents is quite low. We aimed to assess the efficiency of HBV vaccination in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases (CIDs) receiving anti-TNF agents as well as in healthy controls. We also evaluated the impact of different factors on the efficacy of HBV vaccination.

METHODS

Patients with CIDs receiving anti-TNF agents and healthy controls vaccinated for HBV were included in the study during 2018-2019. An adequate immune response and an effective immune response to HBV were defined as >10 IU/L and > 100 IU/L, respectively.

RESULTS

Among 274 participants, 187 were patients with CID and 87 were healthy controls. The mean age of the patients with CID (43.9 ± 11.7 years) was significantly higher than that of the healthy controls (31.4 ± 7 years) (P = 0.000). Adequate immune response was 60.8 and 94.3% in patients with CID and healthy controls (P = 0.000), respectively, whereas effective immune response was 37.9 and 75.9% (P = 0.000), respectively. In logistic regression analysis, male sex [odds ratio (OR), 0.408; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.201-0.830; P = 0.013), use of infliximab (OR, 2.694; 95% CI, 1.203-6.035; P = 0.016) and sertoluzimab (OR, 3.307; 95% CI, 1.287-8.498; P = 0.013), vaccination after anti-TNF treatment (OR, 0.224; 95% CI, 0.083-0.602; P = 0.003) were identified as risk factors of nonresponse to HBV vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Infliximab and sertoluzimab usage, male sex, and vaccination after anti-TNF treatment were risk factors of nonresponse. HBV vaccination should be given to patients with CID before initiation of anti-TNF treatment and awareness should be spread on this subject.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for Immunizations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)-Part 2: Inactivated Vaccines

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The effectiveness and safety of vaccinations can be altered by immunosuppressive therapies, and perhaps by inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) itself. These recommendations developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and endorsed by the American Gastroenterological Association, aim to provide guidance on immunizations in adult and pediatric patients with IBD. This publication focused on inactivated vaccines.

METHODS

Systematic reviews evaluating the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of vaccines in patients with IBD, other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, and the general population were performed. Critical outcomes included mortality, vaccine-preventable diseases, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was considered a surrogate outcome for vaccine efficacy. Certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Key questions were developed through an iterative online platform, and voted on by a multidisciplinary group. Recommendations were formulated using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. Strong recommendation means that most patients should receive the recommended course of action, whereas a conditional recommendation means that different choices will be appropriate for different patients.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 15 of 20 questions. Recommendations address the following vaccines: Haemophilus influenzae type b, recombinant zoster, hepatitis B, influenza, pneumococcus, meningococcus, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis, and human papillomavirus. Most of the recommendations for patients with IBD are congruent with the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommendations for the general population, with the following exceptions. In patients with IBD, the panel suggested Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine for patients older than 5 years of age, recombinant zoster vaccine for adults younger than 50 year of age, and hepatitis B vaccine for adults without a risk factor. Consensus was not reached, and recommendations were not made for 5 statements, due largely to lack of evidence, including double-dose hepatitis B vaccine, timing of influenza immunization in patients on biologics, pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccines in adult patients without risk factors, and human papillomavirus vaccine in patients aged 27-45 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IBD may be at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable diseases. Therefore, maintaining appropriate vaccination status in these patients is critical to optimize patient outcomes. In general, IBD is not a contraindication to the use of inactivated vaccines, but immunosuppressive therapy may reduce vaccine responses.

Viral infections in inflammatory bowel disease: Tips and tricks for correct management

Over the past decades, the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) has become more targeted, anticipating the use of immune-modifying therapies at an earlier stage. This top-down approach has been correlated with favorable short and long-term outcomes, but it has also brought with it concerns regarding potential infectious complications. This large IBD population treated with immune-modifying therapies, especially if combined, has an increased risk of severe infections, including opportunistic infections that are sustained by viral, bacterial, parasitic, and fungal agents. Viral infections have emerged as a focal safety concern in patients with IBD, representing a challenge for the clinician: they are often difficult to diagnose and are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The first step is to improve effective preventive strategies, such as applying vaccination protocols, adopt adequate prophylaxis and educate patients about potential risk factors. Since viral infections in immunosuppressed patients may present atypical signs and symptoms, the challenges for the gastroenterologist are to suspect, recognize and diagnose such complications. Appropriate treatment of common viral infections allows us to minimize their impact on disease outcomes and patients’ lives. This practical review supports this standard of care to improve knowledge in this subject area.

Management of hepatitis B virus infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease under immunosuppressive treatment

Hepatitis B remains a significant global clinical problem, despite the implementation of safe and effective vaccination programs. The prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) largely follows the regional epidemiologic status. Serological screening with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and antibodies to hepatitis B surface (anti-HBs) and core (anti-HBc) proteins is a key element in the management of IBD patients and, ideally, should be performed at IBD diagnosis. Stratification of individual cases should be done according to the serologic profile and the IBD-specific treatment, with particular emphasis in patients receiving immunosuppressive regimens. In patients who have not contracted HBV, vaccination is indicated to accomplish protective immunity. Vaccination in immunosuppressed patients, however, is a challenging issue and several strategies for primary and revaccination have been proposed. The risk of HBV reactivation in patients with IBD should be considered in both HBsAg-positive and HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients, when immunosuppressive therapies are administered. HBV reactivation is preventable via the administration of prophylactic nucleot(s)ide analogues and should be the standard approach in HBsAg-positive patients. HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients represent a non-homogeneous group and bear a significantly lower risk of HBV reactivation. Biochemical, serological and molecular monitoring is currently the recommended approach for anti-HBc patients. Acute HBV infection is rarely reported in IBD patients. In the present review, we outline the problems associated with HBV infection in patients with IBD and present updated evidence for their management.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in IBD: Past Lessons, Current Evidence, and Future Challenges

Since the beginning of the pandemic, patients with inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] have been considered at high risk for infection and complications of COVID-19. IBD patients and patients taking immunosuppressive therapy were excluded from clinical phase III vaccine trials, complicating the assessment of effectiveness of these new vaccines. From past experience we know that adapted vaccination strategies may be appropriate in some IBD patients to optimise immunogenicity. We review current evidence on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination relevant to IBD patients, including immune responses from humoral to cellular, emerging data on new variants, and off-label vaccination schemes. We also identify clinical and scientific knowledge gaps that can be translated into both large-scale population-based studies and targeted vaccine studies to describe the precise immune responses induced by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in IBD patients. We strongly endorse the recommendation of vaccinating IBD patients to ensure maximal protection from COVID-19 both for the individual and the community.

Optimizing Immunization Strategies in Patients with IBD

Recent advances in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) include the use of immune modifiers and monoclonal antibodies, such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF) alpha inhibitors, anti-integrin agents, janus kinase inhibitors, and interleukin-12/23 inhibitors. These agents achieve higher rates of clinical remission and mucosal healing than conventional therapy. However, these therapies increase the risk of infections, including some vaccine-preventable diseases. Infections are one of the most common adverse event of immunosuppressive therapy. Thus, providers should optimize immunization strategies to reduce the risk of vaccine-preventable infections in patients with IBD. There are several newly licensed vaccines recommended for adults by the US Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. This review will focus on how gastroenterology providers can implement the adult immunization schedule approved by ACIP for patients with IBD.

Fendrix vs Engerix-B for Primo-Vaccination Against Hepatitis B Infection in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION

To compare Engerix-B and Fendrix hepatitis B virus for primo vaccination in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

Patients with IBD were randomized 1:1 to receive Engerix-B double dose or Fendrix single dose at months 0, 1, 2, and 6. Anti-HBs titers were measured 2 months after the third and fourth doses. Response to vaccination was defined as anti-HBs ≥100 UI/L. Anti-HBs titers were measured 2 months after the third and fourth doses and again at 6 and 12 months after the fourth dose.

RESULTS

A total of 173 patients were randomized (54% received Engerix-B and 46% Fendrix). Overall, 45% of patients responded (anti-HBs ≥100 IU/L) after 3 doses and 71% after the fourth dose. The response rate after the fourth dose was 75% with Fendrix vs 68% with Engerix-B (P = 0.3). Older age and treatment with steroids, immunomodulators, or anti-tumor necrosis factor were associated with a lower probability of response. However, the type of vaccine was not associated with the response. Anti-HBs titer negativization occurred in 13% of patients after 6 months and 20% after 12 months. Anti-HBs ≥100 IU/L after vaccination was the only factor associated with maintaining anti-HBs titers during follow-up.

DISCUSSION

We could not demonstrate a higher response rate of Fendrix (single dose) over Engerix-B (double dose). A 4-dose schedule is more effective than a 3-dose regimen. Older age and treatment with immunomodulators or anti-tumor necrosis factors impaired the success. A high proportion of IBD patients with protective anti-HBs titers after vaccination loose them over time. The risk of losing protective anti-HBs titers is increased in patients achieving anti-HBs <100 IU/L after the vaccination.

Improving Hepatitis B Virus Vaccination Responses in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Does Greater Dose and Greater Frequency Lead to Greater Protection?

Prevention of hepatitis B (HBV) infection is particularly important for patients with inflammatory bowel disease because of risks of HBV reactivation on immunosuppressive therapies. However, immune responses to standard HBV vaccination regimens are suboptimal. Chaparro et al. compared immune responses to 2 vaccines, an adjuvanted HBV vaccine (Fendrix) and double-dosed standard vaccine (Engerix-B) using an accelerated, 4-dose regimen (0, 1, 2, and 6 months). Although the study did not demonstrate superiority of one vaccine over another, several lessons can be derived regarding immune response to vaccinations among patients with inflammatory bowel disease, including the need to consider nonstandard regimens for patients on immunosuppression. These lessons can be translated broadly, including to a potential future severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine when one becomes available.

SEROCONVERSION ANALYSIS AFTER HABITUAL HEPATITIS B VACCINATION SCHEME IN PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASES

BACKGROUND

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) vaccinated for hepatitis B have a low success rate in achieving protective antibody levels. The main factors suggested for this are IBD itself and the use of immunosuppressive drugs.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the concentration of anti-HBs antibodies and to verify factors associated with the effectiveness of hepatitis B vaccination in patients with IBD.

METHODS

This is a prospective, consecutive, observational, descriptive and analytical, non-randomized, qualitative study that evaluated the levels of anti-HBs antibodies in IBD patients at the Interdisciplinary Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinic of the Family and Community Health Unit of UNIVALI - Itajaí, Santa Catarina.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were vaccinated against hepatitis B virus (HBV), of which 29 were female. The average age was 46.2 years. Regarding the type of IBD, twenty-four patients had Crohn's disease and the duration of inflammatory bowel disease was 74 months. Fifteen patients were on concomitant immunosuppressive therapy. The effective response rate to HBV vaccine was 72.2%, verified by anti-HBs titration ≥10 UI/L. Statistical analysis revealed a negative response to vaccination in patients with Crohn's disease and immunosuppressive drugs.

CONCLUSION

The success rate of HBV immunization in IBD patients is low compared to the general population. Type of disease and use of immunosuppressive drugs appear to influence the vaccine response.

Prevention and management of viral hepatitis in inflammatory bowel disease: a clinical practice guideline by the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases

The treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been revolutionized for the last 10 years by the increasing use of immunomodulators and biologics. With immunosuppression of this kind, opportunistic infection is an important safety concern for patients with IBD. In particular, viral hepatitis is determined by the interaction between the virus and the host's immunity, and the risk of reactivation increases if immunity is compromised by immunosuppression therapy. Parts of Asia, including Korea, still show intermediate endemicity for the hepatitis A virus and hepatitis B virus compared with the United States and Western Europe. Thus, members of IBD research group of the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases have produced a guideline on the prevention and management of viral hepatitis in IBD.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

Hepatic Complications of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Hepatobiliary disorders are commonly encountered in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Although primary sclerosing cholangitis is the stereotypical hepatobiliary disorder associated with IBD, other diseases, including autoimmune hepatitis and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, also are encountered in this population. Several agents used for treatment of IBD may cause drug-induced liver injury, although severe hepatotoxicity occurs infrequently. Furthermore, reactivation of hepatitis B virus infection may occur in patients with IBD treated with systemic corticosteroids and biologic agents.

Updates on vaccinating the inflammatory bowel disease patient

Many of the therapeutic options for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) suppress the immune system, which increases the risk of certain infections in these patients. Effective vaccines exist and offer protection against a number of infectious diseases. However, data has shown that IBD patients are inadequately vaccinated and, as a result, are at risk of developing certain preventable infections. Furthermore, gastroenterologists' knowledge regarding the appropriate immunizations to administer to their IBD patients is suboptimal. Areas covered: Over the past several years, there has been a considerable amount of research contributing to our knowledge regarding vaccination of patients with IBD. Expert opinion: This updated review article focuses on the current immunization schedule for the IBD patient and stresses the important role of the gastroenterologist as an active participant in the health maintenance of their IBD patients.

Vaccinations in Adult Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases in the West

BACKGROUND

Patients with moderate-severe inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) such as Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis are commonly treated with long-term immunosuppressive therapies involving immunomodulators such as thiopurines, biologics (anti-TNF and anti-adhesion molecules), or novel small molecules such as Janus kinase inhibitors.

SUMMARY

Some infections seen with immunosuppressive therapy in IBD are preventable with vaccines. IBD-specific immunosuppressive therapy is generally initiated by gastroenterologists. Therefore, gastroenterologists should comprehend the appropriate application of vaccines such as hepatitis B, pneumonia, and herpes zoster vaccinations. This review summarizes the current guidance for vaccinations of IBD patients in the United States.

KEY MESSAGE

Gastroenterologists treating IBD patients must be aware of necessary vaccination schedules in the setting of immunosuppressive therapies.

Hepatitis B Vaccination Effective in Children Exposed to Anti-Tumour Necrosis Factor Alpha in Utero

INTRODUCTION

Neonates exposed to tumour necrosis factor [TNF] alpha inhibitors in utero are born with detectable drug levels which can still be detected throughout the first year of life. Since 2011, the hepatitis B virus [HBV] vaccine is routinely administered to all newborns in the Netherlands. Adults treated with anti-TNF have been reported to respond inadequately to the HBV vaccine. The aim of this study was to compare anti-HB levels in anti-TNF-exposed children with non-exposed children following routine Dutch HBV vaccination.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional, controlled cohort study from 2014 to 2017 in a single, tertiary referral centre. Pregnant women treated with anti-TNF for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] and their subsequent children were recruited from the IBD preconception outpatient clinic. Pregnant women not treated with anti-TNF for IBD and their subsequent children were eligible as controls. Adherence to the Dutch National Vaccination Programme was mandatory for participation in this study. A venous blood sample was obtained 1 month after final HBV vaccination. Anti-HB levels were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

Anti-HB levels at 12 months did not differ between the anti-TNF-exposed [n = 15] and the control group [n = 12] [> 1000 IU/l vs > 1000 IU/l, p = 0.59]. All children were successfully immunized against HBV, defined as anti-HB > 10 IU/l. Median anti-TNF levels determined in cord blood at birth were 9.0 µg/ml [interquartile range: 3.0-15.0 µg/ml] for infliximab and 0.4. µg/ml [interquartile range: 0.3-0.6 µg/ml] for adalimumab. There were no differences in general birth and health outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Children born with detectable anti-TNF levels can be effectively vaccinated against HBV.

Recommendations of the Spanish Working Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis (GETECCU) on the use of thiopurines in inflammatory bowel disease

Thiopurines (azathioprine and mercaptopurine) are widely used in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. In this paper, we review the main indications for their use, as well as practical aspects on efficacy, safety and method of administration. They are mainly used to maintain remission in steroid-dependent disease or with ciclosporin to control a severe ulcerative colitis flare-up, as well as to prevent postoperative Crohn's disease recurrence, and also in combination therapy with biologics. About 30-40% of patients will not respond to treatment and 10-20% will not tolerate it due to adverse effects. Before they are prescribed, immunisation status against certain infections should be checked. Determination of thiopurine methyltransferase activity (TPMT) is not mandatory but it increases initial safety. The appropriate dose is 2.5mg/kg/day for azathioprine and 1.5mg/kg/day for mercaptopurine. Some adverse effects are idiosyncratic (digestive intolerance, pancreatitis, fever, arthromyalgia, rash and some forms of hepatotoxicity). Others are dose-dependent (myelotoxicity and other types of hepatotoxicity), and their surveillance should never be interrupted during treatment. If therapy fails or adverse effects develop, management can include switching from one thiopurine to the other, reducing the dose, combining low doses of azathioprine with allopurinol and assessing metabolites, before their use is ruled out. Non-melanoma skin cancer, lymphomas and urinary tract tumours have been linked to thiopurine therapy. Thiopurine use is safe during conception, pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Management of ulcerative colitis in Taiwan: consensus guideline of the Taiwan Society of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is an inflammatory bowel disease characterized by chronic mucosal inflammation of the colon, and the prevalence and incidence of UC have been steadily increasing in Taiwan. A steering committee was established by the Taiwan Society of Inflammatory Bowel Disease to formulate statements on the diagnosis and management of UC taking into account currently available evidence and the expert opinion of the committee. Accurate diagnosis of UC requires thorough clinical, endoscopic, and histological assessment and careful exclusion of differential diagnoses, particularly infectious colitis. The goals of UC therapy are to induce and maintain remission, reduce the risk of complications, and improve quality of life. As outlined in the recommended treatment algorithm, choice of treatment is dictated by severity, extent, and course of disease. Patients should be evaluated for hepatitis B virus and tuberculosis infection prior to immunosuppressive treatment, especially with steroids and biologic agents, and should be regularly monitored for reactivation of latent infection. These consensus statements are also based on current local evidence with consideration of factors, and could be serve as concise and practical guidelines for supporting clinicians in the management of UC in Taiwan.

Immune response to hepatitis B vaccination among people with inflammatory bowel diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The response rate to hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is low and varies markedly. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the response rate to HBV vaccination and identified the factors predictive of an immune response.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases, and reviewed the titles and abstracts of studies on the efficacy of HBV vaccination in IBD patients performed through July 2016. Anti-HBs levels>10IU/L was considered to be an effective immune response. The primary outcome measure was the response rate to HBV vaccination after series completion, and the secondary outcome was identification of factors at baseline predictive of an immune response.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies including 1688 patients were eligible for inclusion. Based on a random-effects model, the pooled rate of a response to HBV vaccination among patients with IBD was 61% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 53-69). Young age (mean difference [MD]: -5.7; 95% CI: -8.46, -2.95) and vaccination during disease remission (relative risk [RR]: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.15-2.29) were associated with a positive response to HBV vaccination. In addition, no immunosuppressive therapy was predictive of an immune response compared to immunomodulatory (RR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.08-1.63) or anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) (RR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.19-2.08) therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this meta-analysis, only three of five IBD patients will show a serological response to HBV vaccination. Vaccination should be performed at the time of IBD diagnosis, during disease remission, or before starting immunosuppressive therapy.

Hepatic Issues and Complications Associated With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Clinical Report From the NASPGHAN Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Hepatology Committees

Hepatobiliary disorders are common in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and persistent abnormal liver function tests are found in approximately 20% to 30% of individuals with IBD. In most cases, the cause of these elevations will fall into 1 of 3 main categories. They can be as a result of extraintestinal manifestations of the disease process, related to medication toxicity, or the result of an underlying primary hepatic disorder unrelated to IBD. This latter possibility is beyond the scope of this review article, but does need to be considered in anyone with elevated liver function tests. This review is provided as a clinical summary of some of the major hepatic issues that may occur in patients with IBD.

Infections in inflammatory bowel disease

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease constitute a population with a special predisposition to develop bacterial, viral and fungal infections. Iatrogenic immunosuppression, frequent contact with healthcare facilities and surgical interventions are some of the risk factors that explain why these infections are one of the main causes of morbi-mortality in this disease. Some of these infections follow a subtle and paucisymptomatic evolution; their diagnosis and management may become a real challenge for the attending physician if their screening is not systematized or they are not considered in the differential diagnosis. The objective of this review is to provide an update from a practical and concise perspective on the knowledge regarding the epidemiology, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of the most common infections.

ACG Clinical Guideline: Preventive Care in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Recent data suggest that inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients do not receive preventive services at the same rate as general medical patients. Patients with IBD often consider their gastroenterologist to be the primary provider of care. To improve the care delivered to IBD patients, health maintenance issues need to be co-managed by both the gastroenterologist and primary care team. Gastroenterologists need to explicitly inform the primary care provider of the unique needs of the IBD patient, especially those on immunomodulators and biologics or being considered for such therapy. In particular, documentation of up to date vaccinations are crucial as IBD patients are often treated with long-term immune-suppressive therapies and may be at increased risk for infections, many of which are preventable with vaccinations. Health maintenance issues addressed in this guideline include identification, safety and appropriate timing of vaccinations, screening for osteoporosis, cervical cancer, melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer as well as identification of depression and anxiety and smoking cessation. To accomplish these health maintenance goals, coordination between the primary care provider, gastroenterology team and other specialists is necessary.

Care of inflammatory bowel disease patients in remission

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) comprises two distinct conditions: ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, both of which are chronic, relapsing disorders carrying significant morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. With growing attention to coordinated healthcare for patients with chronic systemic diseases, this review focuses on the care of IBD patients in remission, their concerns, quality of life, follow-up, the role of primary care physicians and the IBD-specific aspects of long-term care. We did an extensive PubMed search for articles pertaining to IBD patients in remission and, along with the authors’ experience, formulated a comprehensive review. The difficulties faced by IBD patients in remission include but are not limited to education and employment concerns, psychosocial issues, problems related to health insurance, nutrition, fertility and infections. This review also addresses newer treatment modalities, the debatable effects of smoking on IBD and the importance of vaccination. IBD in remission can be a challenge due to its multifaceted nature; however, with a coordinated approach by gastroenterologists and other involved practitioners, several of these issues can be addressed.

Sci-B-VacTM Vs ENGERIX-B Vaccines for Hepatitis B Virus in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Randomised Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Response rate to second-generation hepatitis B virus vaccines is relatively low in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases compared with the general healthy population. We compared the efficacy and safety of a third- vs a second-generation hepatitis B virus vaccine in a group of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases treated with immunosuppressive medications.

METHODS

Prospective, randomised, single-blind, controlled study. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive one of two vaccines, ENGERIX-B or Sci-B-Vac. The vaccines were administered in three doses at 0, 1, and 6 months. The primary endpoint was defined as the titre of anti-hepatitis B S [HBs] antibodies following the standard three-dose hepatitis B virus vaccination schedule.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients complied with study protocol [37 and 35 patients in the ENGERIX-B and Sci-B-Vac groups, respectively]. Overall, 75% of the cohort seroconverted. The primary endpoint was met in 81.1% in the ENGERIX-B group and 68.6% in the Sci-B-Vac group [p = 0.22]. Patients in the Sci-B-Vac group showed a statistically significant decreased seroconversion rate compared with the ENGERIX-B group, with use of tumour necrosis factor [TNF] alpha inhibitors [p = 0.03], and higher degree of disease activity [p = 0.03].

CONCLUSIONS

Overall seroconversion rate in our cohort was higher than in previous reports in the literature, possibly due to a low disease activity state in the majority of participants. Third-generation hepatitis B virus vaccines showed no apparent advantage over standard of care vaccine in this patient group.

Inadequate seroprotection against hepatitis B virus and one detected case of hepatitis C virus infection among patients with inflammatory bowel disease

OBJECTIVES

The prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections among patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) from central and eastern European countries is unknown. Postvaccination HBV immunity in an immunocompromised host may wane. The aims of the study were as follows: to assess the immune status for HBV and HCV among IBD patients, the level of HBV seroprotection, and to compare the immune status of patients who received mandatory versus recommended HBV vaccination.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Serological markers of HBV and HCV (anti-HBs, anti-HBc, HBsAg, and anti-HCV) were determined in 147 consecutive IBD patients. An anti-HBs of 10 IU/l or more was considered as immunity to HBV infection.

RESULTS

HBV infection was detected in 21 patients, whereas 11 of them recalled previous HBV vaccination. Sixty-eight noninfected patients had a level of anti-HBs 10 IU/l or more and only 29% reached the cut-off level of 100 IU/l. Among patients vaccinated obligatorily, two patients had previous HBV infection and 15% did not have an adequate seroprotection against HBV. Patients who received a mandatory HBV vaccine more frequently had a protective anti-HBs level than those vaccinated voluntarily (P<0.001). One positive anti-HCV result was found.

CONCLUSION

A mandatory HBV vaccination significantly increased the number of patients effectively protected against HBV; however, a remarkable number of vaccinated IBD patients had inadequate HBV seroprotection. All IBD patients should be screened for HBV and HCV infections and monitored for anti-HBs titers.

Immunogenicity and mechanisms impairing the response to vaccines in inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an immunological disorder that is usually treated with immunosuppressive therapy, potentially leading to increases in vulnerability to infections. Although many infections can be prevented by vaccination, vaccination coverage in these patients in clinical practice is insufficient. Therefore, the seroprotection condition should be verified, even for routine vaccines, such as hepatitis B or pneumococcus. Response to vaccines in IBD patients is thought to be impaired due to the immunological alterations generated by the disease and to the immunomodulatory treatments. The immunogenicity of hepatitis B, influenza, and pneumococcal vaccines is impaired in IBD patients, whereas the response to papillomavirus vaccine seems similar to that observed in the healthy population. On the other hand, data on the immunogenicity of tetanus vaccine in IBD patients are conflicting. Studies assessing the response to measles-mumps-rubella, varicella, and herpes zoster vaccines in IBD patients are scarce. The cellular and molecular mechanisms responsible for the impairment of the response to vaccination in IBD patients are poorly understood. Studies aiming to assess the response to vaccines in IBD patients and to identify the mechanisms involved in their immunogenicity are warranted. A better understanding of the immune response, specifically to vaccines, in patients with immune-mediated diseases (such as IBD), is crucial when developing vaccines that trigger more potent immunologic responses.

Management of IBD Patients with Current Immunosuppressive Therapy and Concurrent Infections

In an era of increasing use of immunomodulator therapy and biologics, opportunistic infections (OI) have emerged as a pivotal safety issue in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Clinical studies, registries and case reports warn about the increased risk for infections, particularly OIs. Today, the challenge for a physician is not only to manage IBD, but also to recognize, prevent and treat common and uncommon infections. The 2014 European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (ECCO) guidelines on the management and prevention of OIs in patients with IBD provide clinicians with guidance on the prevention, detection and management of OIs. Proposals may appear radical, potentially changing the current practice, but we believe that the recommendations will help optimize patient outcomes by reducing the morbidity and mortality related to OIs. In this ongoing process, prevention is by far the first and most important step. Prevention of OIs relies on recognition of risk factors for infection, the use of primary or secondary chemoprophylaxis, careful monitoring (clinical and laboratory work-up) before and during the use of immunomodulators, vaccination and education of the patient. Special recommendations should also be given to patients before and after travel.

Impact of immunosuppressive therapy on hepatitis B vaccination in inflammatory bowel diseases

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The vaccination rate against hepatitis B virus (HBV) is low in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. The Consensus from the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation on opportunistic infections recommends testing all IBD patients for HBV at diagnosis and vaccinating all HBV-negative patients. We compared the efficacy of HBV vaccine between IBD patients and healthy controls and investigated the impact of immunosuppressive therapy on vaccine response in IBD patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

IBD patients and healthy adult workers were vaccinated against HBV following a standard protocol (at 0, 1, and 6 months; Engerix B). The efficacy of vaccination was evaluated at 8 months by a titer of antibodies against hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs).

RESULTS

Among 164 participants (96 with IBD and 68 healthy workers), the level of anti-HBs was greater than 10 IU/l in 80.2 and 94.1% (P=0.0115) of IBD patients and healthy controls, respectively, and anti-HBs levels greater than 100 IU/l were seen in 45.8 versus 77.9% (P<0.0001) of IBD patients and healthy controls, respectively. The median level of anti-HBs was significantly higher in healthy controls (497.0±386.2) than in IBD patients (253.9±34.5) (P<0.0001). None of the baseline characteristics of IBD patients, including immunomodulators and antitumor necrosis factor therapy, influenced the vaccine response. In the multivariate analysis, ileal disease was the only factor associated with a lower response to the vaccine (odds ratio=3.2; 95% confidence interval=1.0-9.7; P=0.049).

CONCLUSION

The response rate to HBV vaccination is significantly lower in IBD patients than in the general population. Immunosuppressive therapy for IBD did not influence the vaccine response.

Effect of Immunosuppressive Therapies for the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Response to Routine Vaccinations: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Several studies have evaluated the effect of immunosuppressive therapy for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on response to routine vaccinations. The overall effect of specific classes of medications (i.e., immunomodulator vs. biologics) on vaccine response remains undefined. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of each class of immunosuppressive therapy in IBD patients on response to routine vaccinations.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases was performed (December 2014). All studies on adults comparing vaccine response among IBD patients on immunosuppression with non-immunosuppressed patients were included. Meta-analysis was performed using the Mantel-Haenszel (fixed effects) model with odds ratio (OR) to assess for adequate vaccine response.

RESULTS

In the pooled analysis of nine studies (N = 1474), we found that there was nearly a 60 % lower chance of achieving adequate seroprotection in the group that received immunosuppressive therapy compared to the group that was not on any immunosuppressive therapies (OR 0.41 95 % CI 0.30, 0.55, p < 0.001). Specifically, we also demonstrated that patients on immunomodulator monotherapy had a twofold higher probability of achieving adequate immune response to vaccination, compared to patients on anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) monotherapy (OR 1.92 95 % CI 1.30, 2.84).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, IBD patients on immunosuppressive therapy have a significantly lower response to routine vaccinations. The greatest effect is seen among patients on anti-TNF and combination immunosuppressive therapy. Routine monitoring of vaccine titers post-vaccination is important to ensure that adequate immunologic response has been achieved among IBD patients.

Evaluation of factors associated with response to hepatitis B vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

It is recommended to investigate the serology of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and vaccinate seronegative patients at the time of diagnosis in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of HBV vaccine and factors affecting the response.In this retrospective, observational study, HBV-seronegative IBD patients were administered 3 doses (at months 0, 1, and 6) recombinant 20  μg HbsAg. Patients' demographics, IBD attributes, and treatment methods were investigated as the factors with potential impacts on vaccination outcomes.One hundred twenty-five patients with IBD were evaluated. The number of patients with Anti-HBs >10  IU/L was 71 (56.8%), and the number of patients with anti-HBs >100  IU/L was 50 (40%). Age, disease activity, Crohn disease subtype, and immunosuppressive treatment (IST) were found to have significant effects on immune response (P = 0.011, P < 0.001, P = 0.003, and P < 0.001, respectively). With multivariate analysis, age < 45 years (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.2-8.3, P = 0.020), vaccination during remission (OR 5.6, 95% CI 2.3-14, P < 0.001), and non-IST (OR 11.1, 95% CI 2.9-43.2, P = 0.001) had favorable effects on the occurrence of adequate vaccine response.The likelihood of achieving adequate immune response with standard HBV vaccination protocol in IBD is low. Selecting vaccination protocols with more potent immunogenicity is a better approach to achieve effective vaccine response in patients with multiple unfavorable factors.

Immunogenicity of hepatitis B vaccine in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and the benefits of revaccination

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The vaccination against hepatitis B virus (HBV) is recommended in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the response to this vaccine seems to be lower in IBD patients than in the general population. This study aims to evaluate the immunogenicity of the HBV vaccine in a cohort of patients with IBD, to associate factors with the response and to analyze the effects of a second schedule vaccination.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with IBD, susceptible to HBV infection. All patients received a three-dose standard schedule of HBV vaccine. Non-responders were revaccinated with a second three-dose standard schedule. Adequate immunity to HBV was defined as antibodies against hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) ≥ 10 mIU/mL. Age, comorbidities, treatment, and other variables were collected.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-two patients were included and received the first HBV vaccine schedule. Eighty-seven developed anti-HBs ≥ 10 mIU/mL (50.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 42.9-58.3). From the non-responders, 53 were revaccinated and 28 showed an adequate serological response (52.8%; 95% CI: 38.6-66.7). Age older than 55 years (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 1.3-10.2) and comorbidities (OR: 2.8; 95% CI: 1.1-7.1) were associated with suboptimal response. In the multivariate analysis, only age was a predictor of non-response (age higher than 55 years; OR: 3.9; 95% CI: 1.3-11.9) CONCLUSION: The response rate to the HBV vaccine is lower in patients with IBD compared with the general population, especially in those older than 55 years. Revaccination improved response rate by 50%.

Vaccinating the inflammatory bowel disease patient

Current therapeutic options for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) include several agents that can alter their immune response to infections. Effective vaccines exist and offer protection against a number of infectious diseases. However, recent data has shown that IBD patients are inadequately vaccinated and, as a result, at risk to develop certain preventable infections. Furthermore, gastroenterologists' knowledge regarding the appropriate immunizations to administer to their IBD patients is suboptimal. This review article focuses on the current immunization schedule for the IBD patient and stresses the important role of the gastroenterologist as an active participant in the management of vaccination in their IBD patients.

Approach and management of patients with chronic hepatitis B and C during the course of inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel disease and chronic viral hepatitis are 2 distinct but common conditions throughout the world. Mostly, both need life-long follow-up. Since immunosuppressive drugs remain corner stones of inflammatory bowel disease management, one should be aware of the concomitant presence of chronic viral hepatitis in such patients to prevent serious (even fatal) outcomes. Recently, new treatment options have become available in the treatment of both inflammatory bowel disease and chronic viral hepatitis. In this review, we have discussed and summarized current treatment and follow-up strategies for those 2 important public health issues in light of available literature.

Impact of surveillance of hepatitis b and hepatitis c in patients with inflammatory bowel disease under anti-TNF therapies: multicenter prospective observational study (REPENTINA 3)

AIMS

Assess IBD patients starting anti-TNF for the impact of preventive measures in HBV and/or HCV, and the predictive response factors to HBV vaccination.

METHODS

Multicenter prospective study including 389 IBD patients. Four interventions were established: I-1) anti-HBs <100IU/L: HBV vaccination with double doses at 0-1-2months, and revaccination if titres <100IU/L (seroprotection defined as anti-HBs10-100IU/L and effective vaccination anti-HBs >100IU/L); I-2) anti-HBs >100IU/L (previous effective vaccination): monitoring levels; I-3) anti-HBc and/or HCV+: analysis every two months; I-4) HBsAg+: start anti-virals.

RESULTS

I-1 and I-2) For first vaccination, effective vaccination and seroprotection were obtained in 26.4% and 43.5%, and for revaccination 31.3% and 44.4%, respectively. Predictive factors of effective vaccination were age ≤30years (OR=2.2) and being vaccinated simultaneously with anti-TNF (OR=5.2) instead of late vaccination, whereas age ≤30years (OR=2.6) and anti-TNF monotherapy (OR=2.4) were predictive for seroprotection. 80.8% of patients previously vaccinated maintained titres at 29months follow-up. The only factor related to maintaining titres was previous vaccination versus achieving effective vaccination during anti-TNF (HR=2.49); I-3 and I-4) HBV-DNA + without reactivation was detected in 7% of 29 anti-HBc. No reactivation was found in the remaining HCV (n=5) or HBsAg (n=4) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

1) Response to vaccination/revaccination is low in patients with anti-TNF. Young patients vaccinated at the beginning of anti-TNF and receiving it as a monotheraphy showed better response. 2) Long-lasting effective vaccination is greatest in patients previously vaccinated. 3) Following-up the established surveillance and/or preventive anti-viral therapy seems to be safe in HBV and HCV patients.