Prospective study of live attenuated vaccines for patients receiving immunosuppressive agents

Safety and immunogenicity of the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine in immunocompromised children with inflammatory bowel disease, or after liver transplantation: An observational study

Safety of live vaccines is questioned in children with inflammatory bowel diseases and after liver transplantation receiving immunosuppressive therapy. The objective was to monitor the immunogenicity and safety of attenuated live vaccines against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) in children receiving immunosuppressive therapy. In this prospective multicenter observational study (DRKS00014569) 22 children and adolescents with incomplete MMR vaccination status were identified. Following individual assessment of vaccination readiness with stable immunosuppressive therapy in the last three months with no evidence of underlying disease activity, a risk-benefit assessment regarding vaccination with live-attenuated vaccines was performed. A checklist was used to assess the immune status based on thresholds for leukocyte, lymphocyte and CD4+ T cell counts, serum immunoglobulin G and M levels and detectable in vitro T cell activation. Sixteen patients were vaccinated against MMR, eleven after liver transplantation and five with inflammatory bowel disease. At the time of vaccination, four patients were receiving moderate (e.g., tacrolimus drug level below 5 ng/ml), eleven were receiving high-intensity immunosuppression (e.g. anti-tumor-necrosis factor agents, mycophenolate mofetil) and one child had previously discontinued immunosuppressive treatment. There were no serious adverse events or complications related to the vaccination. In children receiving immunosuppressive medications, the seroconversion rate for measles after the first MMR vaccination was 73.3 % (11/15) and after the second vaccination 80 % (12/15). Specific in vitro lymphocyte reactivity to measles antigen was detectable in three out of four patients after vaccination. This study shows that MMR vaccination can be carried out under immunosuppressive therapy in selected patients without relevant side effects, and a specific humoral and cellular immune response could be achieved.

Post-varicella vaccination uveitis in a child with nephrotic syndrome receiving immunosuppressive treatment: a case report

Patients with nephrotic syndrome are at heightened risk of infections due to the underlying disease pathophysiology and the effects of immunosuppressive therapies. Varicella-zoster virus (VZV) infection can cause severe complications in immunocompromised individuals. Concerns about the safety of live attenuated vaccines in this population persist. Emerging vaccination strategies incorporate pre-vaccination risk stratification algorithms based on immunological criteria. We present a case of a five-year-old male with corticosteroid-dependent nephrotic syndrome, in complete remission on mycophenolate mofetil therapy, who received the varicella vaccine after meeting immunocompetence criteria. Fourteen days post-vaccination, he developed scant vesicular lesions, with VZV DNA detected by PCR via swab. By day 16 post-vaccination, he presented with left-eye panuveitis. VZV DNA was also detected in the blood by PCR. Differentiation of VZV vaccine strains from wild-type strains was not possible. Additionally, molecular testing for VZV in the aqueous humor was not performed. However, given the temporal association with varicella vaccination, the detection of VZV in the blood and cutaneous lesions, and most importantly, the immunosuppression of the patient, post-vaccination ocular varicella was assumed even without an epidemiological history of varicella exposure. This case highlights the importance of a thorough immunocompetence assessment before administering live vaccines to immunosuppressed patients, as well as close post-vaccine monitoring and a high index of suspicion for complications to optimize vaccine safety in this vulnerable group. Patients with nephrotic syndrome require vaccination strategies tailored to their individual risk.

Long-term persistence of seroprotection against measles following measles-mumps-rubella vaccination administered before and after pediatric liver transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) recipients are susceptible to infections, including measles. Concerns about the safety and efficacy of live-attenuated vaccines, such as the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, have led to hesitancy among providers in administering them to immunocompromised patients. This 9-year interventional study assessed seroprotection against measles following MMR vaccination in pediatric LT recipients. Of 119 participants enrolled, 60 (50%) were seroprotected against measles after transplantation. Among the 59 nonseroprotected participants, 56 fulfilled safety criteria and received MMR vaccination with a seroprotection rate of 90% (95% confidence interval [CI], 73%-98%) after a first dose, 95% (95% CI, 85%-99%) after primary vaccination with 1 to 3 doses, comparable to nonimmunocompromized populations. However, measles antibodies declined over time, suggesting the need for regular monitoring, and booster doses. Half of the vaccinees (26/53, 49%) subsequently lost seroprotection. Among them, 23 received additional doses of MMR, with a high seroconversion rate. At their last follow-up (median, 6.1 years; interquartile range, 3.0-8.1 after inclusion), 63% (95% CI, 49%-75%) of all vaccinees were seroprotected against measles. In conclusion, MMR vaccination in pediatric LT recipients offers seroprotection against measles, but long-term immunity should be monitored closely.

Mumps vaccination and immune status among Japanese university students: A multicenter cross-sectional study

Background

During the mumps outbreak in Japan in 2016, 159,031 cases were reported. In a survey conducted in 2015, mumps vaccination rates for the first dose were 30%-40%. However, the rates for two or more doses were not determined. We assessed the mumps vaccination rates and mumps infection prevalence according to vaccine doses received.

Design and methods

This was a multicenter cross-sectional study. Students from three universities participated in 2019. Informed consent was obtained from the students and their guardians. The primary outcome was the prevalence of breakthrough mumps infection according to the number of doses of vaccine received. We collected data on past illnesses of vaccine-preventable diseases and vaccination history using a questionnaire, photocopies of the Maternal and Child Health Handbook from the guardians, and virus antibody titers from the universities' health centers.

Results

This study assessed 2004 eligible students and included 593 (29.6%); of these, 250 (42.7%) had a mumps infection history. Furthermore, 264 (44.6%), 31 (5.2%), and 2 (0.3%) students received the first, second, and third doses of mumps vaccine, respectively. The mumps seropositivity prevalence was 43.2% (n = 127), 36.7% (n = 97), 26.7% (n = 8), and 100% (n = 2) for the no-, first-, second-, and third-dose groups, respectively (p for trend = 0.09). The mumps infection prevalence rates were 69.8% (n = 203), 11.3% (n = 28), 3.9% (n = 1), and 0% for the no-, first-, second-, and third-dose groups, respectively.

Conclusions

Approximately 1 in 10 students who had received only one dose of mumps-containing vaccine had a breakthrough infection history.

Live-attenuated vaccination for measles, mumps, and rubella in pediatric liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Infections are a serious short- and long-term problem after pediatric organ transplantation. In immunocompromised patients, they can lead to transplant rejection or a severe course with a sometimes fatal outcome. Vaccination is an appropriate means of reducing morbidity and mortality caused by vaccine-preventable diseases. Unfortunately, due to the disease or its course, it is not always possible to establish adequate vaccine protection against live-attenuated viral vaccines (LAVVs) prior to transplantation. LAVVs such as measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) are still contraindicated in solid organ transplant recipients receiving immunosuppressive therapy (IST), thus creating a dilemma.

AIM

This review discusses whether, when, and how live-attenuated MMR vaccines can be administered effectively and safely to pediatric liver transplant recipients based on the available data.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We searched PubMed for literature on live-attenuated MMR vaccination in pediatric liver transplantation (LT).

RESULTS

Nine prospective observational studies and three retrospective case series were identified in which at least 833 doses of measles vaccine were administered to 716 liver transplant children receiving IST. In these selected patients, MMR vaccination was well tolerated and no serious adverse reactions to the vaccine were observed. In addition, an immune response to the vaccine was demonstrated in patients receiving IST.

CONCLUSION

Due to inadequate vaccine protection in this high-risk group, maximum efforts must be made to ensure full immunization. MMR vaccination could also be considered for unprotected patients after LT receiving IST following an individual risk assessment, as severe harm from live vaccines after liver transplantation has been reported only very rarely. To this end, it is important to establish standardized and simple criteria for the selection of suitable patients and the administration of the MMR vaccine to ensure safe use.

Live attenuated vaccines in patients receiving immunosuppressive agents

The use of live attenuated vaccines in patients with immunosuppressive agents is contraindicated in package inserts and guidelines in Japan and other countries. However, patients receiving immunosuppressants have a high risk of infectious disease becoming severe, and the necessity to prevent infectious disease is high. To date, 2,091 vaccinations have been reported in 25 reports of live attenuated vaccines in people receiving immunosuppressants. Twenty-three patients (1.1%) became infected with the virus strain used in the vaccine, which was varicella virus in 21 patients. No reports have described life-threatening complications. A prospective study at the National Center for Child Health and Development conducted under certain immunological conditions (CD4 cell count ≥ 500/mm3, stimulation index of lymphocyte blast transformation by phytohemagglutinin (PHA) ≥ 101.6, serum immunoglobulin G ≥ 300 mg/dL) confirmed the serological effectiveness and safety. The evidence suggests that live attenuated vaccines can be used even in combination with immunosuppressants. Further evidence must be gathered and immunological criteria investigated to determine the conditions for safe use. Depending on the results of these investigations, the wording in package inserts and guidelines may need to be revised.

Vaccination in the Era of Immunosuppression

Patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) are at increased risk for severe infections. Vaccine responses and safety profiles may differ between AIIRD patients and the general population. While patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) often experience diminished humoral responses and reduced vaccine efficacy, factors such as the type of immunosuppressant medications used and the specific vaccine employed contribute to these outcomes. Notably, individuals undergoing B cell depletion therapy tend to have poor vaccine immunogenicity. However, despite these considerations, vaccine responses are generally considered clinically sufficient. Ideally, immunosuppressed AIIRD patients should receive vaccinations at least two weeks before commencing immunosuppressive treatment. However, it is common for many patients to already be on immunosuppressants during the immunization process. Vaccination rarely triggers flares in AIIRDs; if flares occur, they are typically mild. Despite the heightened infection risk, including COVID-19, among AIIRD patients with rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, sarcoidosis, and other diseases on immunosuppressants, the vaccination rates remain suboptimal. The future directions of vaccination in the era of immunosuppression will likely involve customized vaccines with enhanced adjuvants and alternative delivery methods. By addressing the unique challenges faced by immunosuppressed individuals, we may improve vaccine efficacy, reduce the risk of infections, and ultimately enhance the health outcomes. Additionally, clinical trials to evaluate the safety and efficacy of temporarily discontinuing immunosuppressants during vaccination in various AIIRDs are crucial.

Expert consensus on vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in Japan

Immunosuppressive therapies can affect the immune response to or safety of vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The appropriateness of vaccination should be assessed prior to the initiation of IBD treatment because patients with IBD frequently undergo continuous treatment with immunosuppressive drugs. This consensus was developed to support the decision-making process regarding appropriate vaccination for pediatric and adult patients with IBD and physicians by providing critical information according to the published literature and expert consensus about vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) [excluding cervical cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)] in Japan. This consensus includes 19 important clinical questions (CQs) on the following 4 topics: VPDs (6 CQs), live attenuated vaccines (2 CQs), inactivated vaccines (6 CQs), and vaccination for pregnancy, childbirth, and breastfeeding (5 CQs). These topics and CQs were selected under unified consensus by the members of a committee on intractable diseases with support by a Health and Labour Sciences Research Grant. Physicians should provide necessary information on VPDs to their patients with IBD and carefully manage these patients' IBD if various risk factors for the development or worsening of VPDs are present. This consensus will facilitate informed and shared decision-making in daily IBD clinical practice.

Lack of persisting antibody in a post-transplant patient after vaccine-strain varicella

BACKGROUND

LAVV have historically been avoided in children after solid organ transplantation. However, it has been reported that post-transplant, children without severe immunosuppression can generate anti-varicella antibody after immunization but the duration of the response is not clear. Furthermore, the origin of the varicella virus in immunosuppressed patients who develop varicella after vaccination is often unclear.

CLINICAL PROGRESS

A female child received LAVV 30 months after a living donor liver transplant at the age of 2 months. Varicella rash appeared on the trunk 16 days after vaccination and gradually spread over the body. The patient was treated with intravenous acyclovir followed by oral therapy and recovered fully. The virus detected in blisters was derived from the vaccine-type strain. Paired sera before and after the onset of varicella showed an increase in antibody titer. However, 2 years after onset, the antibody titer decreased to undetectable again.

CONCLUSIONS

This was an informative case of varicella due to vaccine strain attenuated virus. Antibody levels were not maintained over many years. Although varicella was caused by the vaccine-type strain, repeated vaccinations may be necessary for post-transplant patients who develop varicella.