Maintenance of antibody response to diphtheria/tetanus vaccine in patients aged 2-5 years with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis receiving subcutaneous abatacept

Safety and effectiveness of abatacept in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results from the PRINTO/PRCSG registry

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to report the interim 5-year safety and effectiveness of abatacept in patients with JIA in the PRINTO/PRCSG registry.

METHODS

The Abatacept JIA Registry (NCT01357668) is an ongoing observational study of children with JIA receiving abatacept; enrolment started in January 2013. Clinical sites enrolled patients with JIA starting or currently receiving abatacept. Eligible patients were assessed for safety (primary end point) and effectiveness over 10 years. Effectiveness was measured by clinical 10-joint Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (cJADAS10) in patients with JIA over 5 years. As-observed analysis is presented according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines.

RESULTS

As of 31 March 2020, 587 patients were enrolled; 569 are included in this analysis (including 134 new users) with 1214.6 patient-years of safety data available. Over 5 years, the incidence rate (IR) per 100 patient-years of follow-up of serious adverse events was 5.52 (95% CI: 4.27, 7.01) and of events of special interest was 3.62 (95% CI: 2.63, 4.86), with 18 serious infections [IR 1.48 (95% CI: 0.88, 2.34)]. As early as month 3, 55.9% of patients achieved cJADAS10 low disease activity and inactive disease (20.3%, 72/354 and 35.6%, 126/354, respectively), sustained over 5 years. Disease activity measures improvement over 5 years across JIA categories.

CONCLUSION

Abatacept was well tolerated in patients with JIA, with no new safety signals identified and with well-controlled disease activity, including some patients achieving inactive disease or remission.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01357668.

Immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in children with paediatric rheumatic diseases: a scoping review

Children with paediatric rheumatic diseases (PRDs) are at increased risk of vaccine-preventable disease. Safe and effective vaccination is central to preventive care in PRD patients; however, uncertainty surrounding immunogenicity and safety has contributed to suboptimal vaccination. The aim of this study was to evaluate treatment effect on immunogenicity to vaccination in PRD patients and assess vaccine safety, specifically adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) and disease flare. Scoping review. In this scoping review, a systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL and Embase databases was conducted from 2014 to 23 August 2022 to identify observational studies evaluating the immunogenicity and safety of commonly used vaccinations in PRD patients. The primary outcome was immunogenicity (defined as seroprotection and protective antibody concentrations), with secondary outcomes describing AEFI and disease flare also extracted. Due to extensive heterogeneity related to diagnostic and vaccination variability, narrative synthesis was used to describe the findings of each study. Study quality was assessed via the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022307212). The search yielded 19 studies evaluating immunogenicity to vaccination and incidence of AEFI and disease flares in this population, which were of acceptable quality. Corticosteroids did not have deleterious effects on vaccine response. Treatment with conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and biologic DMARDs generally had no effect immunogenicity in PRD patients. While patients exhibited adequate seroprotection, protective antibody levels were lower in patients on some immunosuppressant agents. Varicella infections were recorded post vaccination in several patients with low protective antibody levels undergoing treatment with DMARDs and corticosteroids. Most vaccines appear safe and effective in PRD patients, despite immunosuppressant treatment. Booster vaccinations should be considered with some studies highlighting inadequate seroprotection following primary course of vaccinations with acceleration of antibody decline over time. There was limited evidence to support avoiding live vaccines in PRD patients.

Vaccination in children with immune-mediated disorders

OBJECTIVE

To present an updated review of recommendations for the vaccination of children with immune-mediated diseases, with an emphasis on rheumatic and inflammatory diseases.

SOURCE OF DATA

Studies published in the PubMed and Scielo databases between 2002 and 2022, Guidelines of Brazilian Scientific Societies, Manuals and Technical Notes of the Ministry of Health of Brazil, on current immunization schedules for special populations.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Immunosuppressive drugs and biological agents reduce the immunogenicity of vaccines and favor susceptibility to infections. The safety and efficacy of immunogens are important points for vaccination in children with immune-mediated diseases. The safety threshold of a vaccine applied to immunocompromised individuals can be reduced when compared to healthy individuals. Very often, the recommendations for the immunization of children with immune-mediated diseases follow the recommendations for immunocompromised patients. Vaccination against COVID-19, on the other hand, should ideally occur when the disease is stabilized and in the absence of a low degree of immunosuppression. The patients should be informed about the possibility that the immunization may fail during treatment with immunosuppressants. Specific vaccination schedules should be considered to ensure better protection.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent studies have allowed updating the recommendations on the safety and immunogenicity of vaccination in children with immune-mediated diseases, especially for live attenuated vaccines. There is a scarcity of data on the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in patients, particularly pediatric patients, with rheumatic diseases. The completion of ongoing studies is expected to help guide recommendations on COVID-19 vaccines in this group of patients.

EULAR/PRES recommendations for vaccination of paediatric patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: update 2021

OBJECTIVES

Recent insights supporting the safety of live-attenuated vaccines and novel studies on the immunogenicity of vaccinations in the era of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in paediatric patients with autoimmune/inflammatory rheumatic diseases (pedAIIRD) necessitated updating the EULAR recommendations.

METHODS

Recommendations were developed using the EULAR standard operating procedures. Two international expert committees were formed to update the vaccination recommendations for both paediatric and adult patients with AIIRD. After a systematic literature review, separate recommendations were formulated for paediatric and adult patients. For pedAIIRD, six overarching principles and seven recommendations were formulated and provided with the level of evidence, strength of recommendation and Task Force level of agreement.

RESULTS

In general, the National Immunisation Programmes (NIP) should be followed and assessed yearly by the treating specialist. If possible, vaccinations should be administered prior to immunosuppressive drugs, but necessary treatment should never be postponed. Non-live vaccines can be safely given to immunosuppressed pedAIIRD patients. Mainly, seroprotection is preserved in patients receiving vaccinations on immunosuppression, except for high-dose glucocorticoids and B-cell depleting therapies. Live-attenuated vaccines should be avoided in immunosuppressed patients. However, it is safe to administer the measles-mumps-rubella booster and varicella zoster virus vaccine to immunosuppressed patients under specific conditions. In addition to the NIP, the non-live seasonal influenza vaccination should be strongly considered for immunosuppressed pedAIIRD patients.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations are intended for paediatricians, paediatric rheumatologists, national immunisation agencies, general practitioners, patients and national rheumatology societies to attain safe and effective vaccination and optimal infection prevention in immunocompromised pedAIIRD patients.

Efficacy, Immunogenicity and Safety of Vaccination in Pediatric Patients With Autoimmune Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases (pedAIIRD): A Systematic Literature Review for the 2021 Update of the EULAR/PRES Recommendations

Background

In 2011, the first European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) vaccination recommendations for pediatric patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (pedAIIRD) were published. The past decade numerous new studies were performed to assess the safety, efficacy and immunogenicity of vaccinations in pedAIIRD. A systematic literature review (SLR) was therefore performed to serve as the basis for the updated 2021 EULAR/PRES recommendations.

Methods

An SLR was performed according to the standard operating procedures for EULAR-endorsed recommendations. Primary outcomes were efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in pedAIIRD. The search was performed in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library and included studies published from November 2010 until July 2020.

Results

The SLR yielded 57 studies which were included for critical appraisal and data extraction. Only 8 studies described the occurrence of vaccine-preventable infections after vaccination (efficacy), none of these studies were powered to assess efficacy. The majority of studies assessed (humoral) immune responses as surrogate endpoint for vaccine efficacy. Studies on non-live vaccines showed that these were safe and in general immunogenic. Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in general did not significantly reduce seroprotection rates, except for B-cell depleting therapies which severely hampered humoral responses. Four new studies on human papilloma virus vaccination showed that this vaccine was safe and immunogenic in pedAIIRD. Regarding live-attenuated vaccinations, level 1 evidence of the measles mumps rubella (MMR) booster vaccination became available which showed the safety of this booster for patients treated with methotrexate. In addition, level 3 evidence became available that suggested that the MMR and varicella zoster virus (VZV) vaccination for patients on low dose glucocorticosteroids and bDMARDs might be safe as well.

Conclusions

The past decade, knowledge on the safety and immunogenicity of (live-attenuated) vaccines in pedAIIRD significantly increased. Data on efficacy (infection prevention) remains scarce. The results from this SLR are the basis for the updated EULAR/PRES vaccination recommendations in pedAIIRD.

Response to Vaccines in Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Narrative Review

Patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), such as rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, are at increased risk of infection. International guidelines recommend vaccination to limit this risk of infection, although live attenuated vaccines are contraindicated once immunosuppressive therapy has begun. Biologic therapies used to treat IMIDs target the immune system to stop chronic pathogenic process but may also attenuate the protective immune response to vaccines. Here, we review the current knowledge regarding vaccine responses in IMID patients receiving treatment with biologic therapies, with a focus on the interleukin (IL)-12/23 inhibitors. B cell-depleting therapies, such as rituximab, strongly impair vaccines immunogenicity, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) fusion protein abatacept are also associated with attenuated antibody responses, which are further diminished in patients taking concomitant immunosuppressants. On the other hand, integrin, IL-6, IL-12/23, IL-17, and B-cell activating factor (BAFF) inhibitors do not appear to affect the immune response to several vaccines evaluated. Importantly, treatment with biologic therapies in IMID patients is not associated with an increased risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or developing severe disease. However, the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines on IMID patients may be reduced compared with healthy individuals. The impact of biologic therapies on the response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines seems to replicate what has been described for other vaccines. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination appears to be safe and well tolerated in IMID patients. Attenuated but, in general, still protective responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the context of certain therapies warrant current recommendations for a third primary dose in IMID patients treated with immunosuppressive drugs.

Immunogenicity and safety of routine vaccines in children and adolescents with rheumatic diseases on immunosuppressive treatment - a systematic review

The immunogenicity of vaccines in children with juvenile autoimmune rheumatic diseases (JARDs) can be reduced, there are additional safety concerns around vaccination, and there is a potential for worsening in disease activity. In this systematic review, we summarise studies that investigated the immunogenicity and safety of routine vaccines in children and adolescents with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment. We identified 37 studies investigating 2571 children and adolescents with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment and 4895 control children. Of the 56 geometric mean antibody titres measured, 19 (34%) were lower, six (11%) higher, and 31 (55%) similar; of the 39 seroprotection rates measured, 10 (26%) were lower, two (5%) higher, and 27 (69%) similar; and of the 27 seroconversion rates measured, nine (33%) were lower, two (8%) higher, and 16 (59%) similar in children with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment compared with control children. However, many of the studies were underpowered, and not designed to show non-inferiority between children with JARD and controls. Subgroup analysis for different types of immunosuppressive treatments was not feasible, as most studies did not report results by treatment. Severe adverse events were reported in 38 children (33 with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, four with systemic lupus erythematosus, and one in a healthy child); most of them were likely not related to the vaccination (e.g. elective hospitalisation or surgery). A worsening in disease activity was reported in 44 (2%) children with JARD; again, many of them were likely not related to the vaccination. There were no safety concerns with live attenuated vaccines; however, only few studies reported results for this.

CONCLUSION

Vaccination in children with JARD on immunosuppressive treatment is safe and should be promoted, especially since these children are at increased risk for infection. The importance for the completion of vaccination schedules should be stressed. Strategies to compensate for the lower vaccine responses, which are found in approximately one-third of these children, include measuring antibody levels to determine the optimal timing for the administration of additional booster doses.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Children with juvenile autoimmune rheumatic diseases (JARDs) are at higher risk for infections, due to their underlying disease and their immunosuppressive treatment. • In children with JARD, the immunogenicity of vaccines might be reduced, and concerns about safety or the potential for worsening in disease activity after vaccination exist.

WHAT IS NEW

• Our systematic review shows that vaccines in children with JARDs on immunosuppressive treatment are safe and immunogenic. • There are several limitations of the currently published studies, including random timing of measuring vaccine responses and age differences between children with JARD and control groups. Many of the studies were underpowered, and not designed to show non-inferiority between children with JARD and controls.

Vaccination completeness in children with rheumatic diseases: A longitudinal, observational multicenter cohort study in Switzerland

INTRODUCTION

Children with pediatric inflammatory rheumatic diseases (PRD) have an increased infection risk. Vaccinations are effective to avoid vaccine-preventable diseases. This study aimed to assess the vaccination completeness in Swiss PRD patients stratified by immunosuppressive treatment (IST).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter observational cohort study of PRD patients was performed in Basel, Geneva, Lucerne, Lausanne, and Zurich in PRD patients aged < 18 years included in the Juvenile Inflammatory Rheumatism Cohort. Completeness was assessed for i) the overall vaccination status (Swiss national immunization program (NIP) and specific additional PRD-recommended vaccinations), ii) for all and each vaccination of the NIP at PRD diagnosis and reference date (RefD) and iii) all and each specific additional PRD-recommended vaccination at RefD. Completeness was assessed over the disease course and stratified by IST.

RESULTS

Of 616 eligible patients, 234 children were analyzed. Of these, 147 (63%) were girls. Median age at PRD diagnosis was 6.5 years (IQR 2.9-10.3) and 10.9 years at RefD (6.9-14.3). The median follow-up since PRD diagnosis was 3 years (1.1-5.5). 120/234 children received IST. At RefD, overall vaccination completeness was 3.8% (9/234 children), completeness for the NIP vaccinations was 70.1% (164/234 children; IST 65%, no IST: 75.4%) and for all specific additional PRD-recommended vaccinations was 3.8% (9/234 children; IST 2.5%; no IST 5.3%). Vaccination completeness against pneumococcal disease, hepatitis B virus, and human papilloma virus (HPV) was 50.4, 20, 37.9%, respectively. In 25/35 children with negative varicella zoster virus history vaccination status was complete (IST: 94.4%, no IST: 47%). Annual non-live influenza vaccination was complete in 24.2% of children during IST; adherence decreased over the disease course.

DISCUSSION

This study identified a low overall vaccination completeness in children with PRD. Particularly, the completeness of specific additional PRD-recommended vaccinations was low. If not performed early after PRD diagnosis, vaccination status remained frequently incomplete. Close collaboration between pediatrician and rheumatologist to improve vaccination completeness is essential. Exchange of vaccination records, standardized assessment of specific PRD-recommended vaccinations and those of the NIP, and annual reminder for influenza vaccination are crucial to improve vaccination completeness in this vulnerable pediatric population.

Effectiveness and Safety of Vaccination in Patients with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Background. Vaccination is the most effective method for reducing morbidity, disability, mortality from of various infections. However, there was a view for a long time that vaccines are ineffective and unsafe to use in people with rheumatological diseases, including juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Objective.

The aim of the study is to analyze literature data on safety and efficacy of vaccination for JIA patients with live and non-live vaccines.

Methods: literature analysis was based on data from medical databases PubMed and Google Scholar.

Results. Both live and non-live vaccines are safe and immunogenic enough for children with JIA. Most studies confirm vaccination efficacy in patients with JIA when using glucocorticosteroids (GCS) and methotrexate, while therapy with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) can reduce antibody titers over time. In general, antibodies levels preservation in previously vaccinated children with JIA is less than in global population. This indicates the need to administer booster doses for such patients. No adverse effects on the course of primary disease after vaccination and no post-vaccine complications were revealed.

Conclusion. Vaccination of patients with JIA should be performed with reference to the therapy that the patient already receives, under the control of antibodies level. Booster doses should be implemented in case of titers decrease below the protective levels.

Impact of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs on vaccine immunogenicity in patients with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

Patients with rheumatic diseases are at increased risk of infectious complications; vaccinations are a critical component of their care. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs may reduce the immunogenicity of common vaccines. We will review here available data regarding the effect of these medications on influenza, pneumococcal, herpes zoster, SARS-CoV-2, hepatitis B, human papilloma virus and yellow fever vaccines. Rituximab has the most substantial impact on vaccine immunogenicity, which is most profound when vaccinations are given at shorter intervals after rituximab dosing. Methotrexate has less substantial effect but appears to adversely impact most vaccine immunogenicity. Abatacept likely decrease vaccine immunogenicity, although these studies are limited by the lack of adequate control groups. Janus kinase and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors decrease absolute antibody titres for many vaccines, but do not seem to significantly impact the proportions of patients achieving seroprotection. Other biologics (interleukin-6R (IL-6R), IL-12/IL-23 and IL-17 inhibitors) have little observed impact on vaccine immunogenicity. Data regarding the effect of these medications on the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immunogenicity are just now emerging, and early glimpses appear similar to our experience with other vaccines. In this review, we summarise the most recent data regarding vaccine response and efficacy in this setting, particularly in light of current vaccination recommendations for immunocompromised patients.

The vaccine coverage and vaccine immunity status and risk factors of non-protective levels of antibodies against vaccines in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: cross-sectional Russian tertiary Centre study

BACKGROUND

Immunosuppressive drugs, incomplete vaccine coverage, immune system dysregulation might be factors of a low level of anti-vaccine antibodies in JIA patients. The study aimed to evaluate vaccine coverage, post-vaccine immunity, and risk factors of non-protective levels of antibodies against measles, mumps, rubella, hepatitis B, and diphtheria in JIA patients.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study included 170 children diagnosed with JIA aged 2 to 17 years who received routine vaccinations against measles, rubella, mumps (MMR), diphtheria, and hepatitis B national vaccine schedule. In all patients, the levels of post-vaccination antibodies (IgG) for measles, rubella, mumps, hepatitis B, and diphtheria were measured with ELISA.

RESULTS

Protective level of antibodies were 50% against hepatitis B, 52% - diphtheria, 58% - measles, 80% - mumps, 98% rubella. MMR's best coverage had patients with enthesitis-related arthritis-85%, compared to oligoarthritis-70%, polyarthritis-69%, systemic arthritis-63%. Diphtheria coverage was 50, 51, 46, 63%, respectively. Incomplete MMR vaccination had 39% patients, treated with biologics, 22% with methotrexate and 14% with NSAID (p = 0.025), and 61, 46, 36% for diphtheria (p = 0.021). Incomplete vaccination was a risk factor of non-protective level of antibodies against measles (HR = 2.03 [95%CI: 1.02; 4.0], p = 0.042), mumps (HR = 6.25 [95%CI: 2.13; 17.9], p = 0.0008) and diphtheria (HR = 2.39 [95%CI: 1.18; 4.85], p = 0.016) vaccines, as well as JIA category, biologics, corticosteroids and long-term methotrexate treatment for distinct vaccines. One-third part of JIA patients continued vaccination against MMR and diphtheria without serious adverse events and JIA flare. There were no differences between patients who continued MMR vaccination or denied in the means of JIA category and treatment options. Patients, continued diphtheria vaccination rare received methotrexate (p = 0.02), biologics (p = 0.004), but had higher levels of anti-diphtheria antibodies (p = 0.024) compare who omitted vaccination. Methotrexate (OR = 9.5 [95%CI: 1.004; 90.3]) and biologics (OR = 4.4 [95%CI: 1.6; 12.1]) were predictors of omitted diphtheria revaccination.

CONCLUSION

Children with JIA may have lower anti-vaccine antibody levels and required routine checks, especially in children with incomplete vaccination, biologics, systemic arthritis, and long-term methotrexate treatment. Revaccination of JIA patients was safe and effective.

Recent progress in the treatment of non-systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is a chronic inflammatory disease affecting the joints and other organs that occurs in 1 in 1,000 children in the United States. Given the various categories of JIA, interpretation of the literature can be difficult. In this review, new developments in understanding non-systemic JIA and its treatment will be covered. Recent advances in the journey toward personalized treatment in JIA will be highlighted, including a review of currently available biologic modifiers. Uveitis and the temporomandibular joint will be discussed as particularly challenging treatment issues. Recent guideline updates and literature-guided treatment decisions will be reviewed.

Abatacept: A Review of the Treatment of Polyarticular-Course Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) encompasses several forms of chronic inflammatory arthritis of unknown etiology presenting in children < 16 years of age, with a minimum symptom duration of 6 weeks. Approximately half of affected children have polyarticular-course JIA (pJIA), a functional concept related to several clinically and genetically heterogeneous JIA categories (systemic, extended oligoarthritis, polyarticular rheumatoid factor-positive or rheumatoid factor-negative, enthesitis-related arthritis, and psoriatic arthritis), which has as its defining feature the involvement of five or more joints during the disease course. Chronic inflammation and joint damage lead to the manifestations of JIA such as pain, limitation of motion, and loss of physical function, all of which negatively impact patients' quality of life. The American College of Rheumatology recommends initial treatment with a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD), such as methotrexate (MTX) and, in patients with pJIA who have an inadequate response or intolerance to MTX, the use of a biologic DMARD (bDMARD) such as a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor, abatacept, or tocilizumab. Abatacept selectively modulates the CD80/CD86:CD28 co-stimulatory signal required for full T cell activation, and thus has a distinct mechanism of action upstream of that of other currently available bDMARD treatments for rheumatic diseases. To enable physicians to make informed treatment decisions, it is important to review available data for the existing therapeutic agents. Here, we summarize the current evidence from phase III pivotal trials of intravenous (IV) and subcutaneous (SC) abatacept and from an ongoing registry of patients with JIA treated with abatacept. In the pivotal trials for IV and SC abatacept, either with or without MTX, both formulations demonstrated clinical efficacy, with a high proportion of patients achieving stringent clinical responses, as well as improvements in patient-reported outcomes and a favorable safety profile, particularly with regard to infections.