Panel Reactive Antibody Responses Against Influenza Vaccination in Kidney Transplant Recipients

IntroductionSeasonal influenza is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the post-transplant period; therefore, the influenza vaccination has been recommended for all kidney transplant recipients before the influenza season. However, at least theoretically, the introduction of antigens via vaccines may trigger rejection attacks by causing an antibody response. In this study, we examined the development of de novo panel reactive antibody (PRA) development against the influenza vaccine in kidney transplant recipients.Materials and MethodsOverall, 41 kidney transplant recipients who received the influenza vaccination and 50 kidney transplant recipients (study group) who refused to receive the influenza vaccination (control group) were enrolled in the study. Following basal biochemistry examination, the inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine was administered intramuscularly. Panel reactive antibodies were screened in all patients before and after vaccination on days 30 and 180. The primary outcome variable was development of de novo panel reactive antibodies.ResultsOne patient in the study group developed de novo class I and II PRA at 6 months after vaccination (P > .05), while no antibody development was noted in the control group. Graft dysfunction or biopsy-confirmed rejection was not observed during the follow-up period in both groups.ConclusionThe influenza vaccination is generally effective and safe in solid organ transplant recipients. The vaccination procedure has the potential to trigger antibody development and occurrence of rejection. Therefore, vaccinated kidney transplant recipients should be monitored more carefully with regard to PRA; if the graft deteriorates, a rapid transplant biopsy should be performed.     

Vaccination of solid organ transplant candidates and recipients: Guidelines from the American society of transplantation infectious diseases community of practice

These updated guidelines of the AST IDCOP review vaccination of solid organ transplant candidates and recipients. General principles of vaccination as well as the use of specific vaccines in this population are discussed. Vaccination should be reviewed in the pre‐transplant setting and appropriate vaccines updated. Both inactivated and live vaccines can be given pre‐transplant. The timing of vaccination post‐transplant should be taken into account. In the post‐transplant setting, inactivated vaccines can be administered starting at 3 months post‐transplant with the exception of influenza which can be given as early as one month. Inactivated vaccines can be safely administered post‐transplant. There is accumulating data that live‐attenuated vaccines can also be given to select post‐transplant patients. Close contacts of transplant patients can receive most routine live vaccines. Specific vaccines including pneumococcal, influenza, hepatitis B, HPV, and meningococcal vaccines are discussed. Newer vaccines for seasonal influenza vaccine and herpes zoster are highlighted. Live‐attenuated vaccines such as measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella are also discussed. Emerging data on live‐attenuated vaccines post‐transplant are highlighted.     

Safety and efficacy of influenza vaccination in renal transplant recipients

This Practice Point commentary discusses Scharpé et al.'s single-center, nonrandomized, prospective trial of influenza vaccination in renal transplant recipients. In total, 165 transplant recipients and 41 healthy volunteers were vaccinated with a standard inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine (containing strains of the A/H1N1, A/H3N2 and B viruses). No rejection episodes or other adverse events were reported in either group. Influenza-specific antibody titers increased in renal transplant recipients following vaccination, as measured by comparison of pre-vaccination and post-vaccination seroprotection and seroresponse rates. This commentary discusses the limitations of the trial, and urges caution in extending the conclusions drawn by Scharpé et al. regarding the safety of the trivalent, non-adjuvant-containing influenza vaccine to newer adjuvant-assisted vaccines. Annual vaccination for influenza by use of the trivalent vaccine strategy without adjuvant should, however, be standard of care for all stable renal transplant recipients who do not have clinical contraindications.     

Influenza Infection in Patients Before and After Liver Transplantation

Infection with influenza virus poses specific problems in pediatric and adult liver transplant recipients, both before and after liver transplantation. These include a higher rate of pulmonary and extrapulmonary complications, development of rejection with graft dysfunction, prolonged shedding of influenza virus, and increased drug-resistance. Hepatic decompensation may occur during influenza infection in patients with cirrhosis. Current prophylaxis includes yearly vaccination with trivalent inactivated vaccine. Appropriate diagnosis and prompt treatment of any upper respiratory infections are indicated in these patients. In this review, we describe a case of influenza viral pneumonia in an adult liver transplant recipient, review basic and clinical aspects of influenza infection in this patient population, and discuss current modes of prevention and treatment in detail. (Liver Transpl 2000;6:531-542.)     

Cell-mediated immune response to influenza vaccination in lung transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Lung transplant recipients are susceptible to complications from influenza infection. Antibody responses to influenza vaccination have been shown to be decreased in lung transplant recipients. Cellular immune mechanisms serve an important role in influenza clearance. The cellular immune response to influenza vaccination has not been studied in transplant populations. METHODS: Interleukin-2, interleukin-10, interferon-gamma, and granzyme B levels to the three viral antigens included in the 1999 to 2000 influenza vaccine were measured before and 4 weeks post-vaccination in 43 lung transplant recipients and 21 healthy adult controls. RESULTS: Interleukin-2, interleukin-10, interferon-gamma, and granzyme B levels did not increase from pre- to post-vaccination in the lung transplant group. Both pre- and post-cytokine levels were lower in the transplant group compared to the control group. Pre- and post-granzyme B levels did not differ significantly between the groups. The T-helper response in the control group varied with the different viral strains. A correlation between acute rejection episodes and the absence of both azathioprine and mycophenolate was found. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination does not stimulate a cell-mediated immune response in lung transplant recipients as judged by interleukin-2, interleukin-10, interferon-gamma, and granzyme B levels. Alternative prevention strategies may be needed.     

Influenza A myocarditis developing in an adult liver transplant recipient despite vaccination: a case report and review of the literature

Solid organ transplant recipients receiving chronic immunosuppressive agents are at increased risk to acquire influenza virus despite vaccination. Myocarditis is a known but rare complication of influenza infection. We present the first adult liver transplant recipient who received prophylactic vaccination but developed influenza A myocarditis. This may occur in solid organ transplant recipients, because they have reduced response to protein vaccines, which may leave them vulnerable to infections. Studies are needed to evaluate if antiviral chemoprophylaxis in solid organ transplant recipients during influenza season would be an effective preventive therapy against influenza in this high-risk population.     

Safety and efficacy of two types of influenza vaccination in heart transplant recipients: a prospective randomised controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Influenza may cause severe disease in immunosuppressed patients. Different vaccines have been proved to be efficacious to prevent influenza in tranplant recipients. Since the last five years the addition of adjuvants to improve the immune response to vaccine preparations has been proposed and evaluated. In this study, two antigenically identical vaccines, but different for the presence of adjuvants were randomised among a cohort of heart transplant recipients to evaluate their safety and immunogenicity. METHODS: 58 patients, receiving an heart transplant more than 6 months before, were randomised to receive one shoot vaccination with Fluad (containing the MF59 adjuvant) or Agrippal (no adjuvant added) or to enter the control, not-vaccinated, group. The immune response to influenza was evaluated separately for type A and type B viruses and for the IgG and the IgM antibodies. Patients were clinically evaluated at least monthly up to 6 months. RESULTS: Influenza symptoms were reported by 33% of patients receiving Fluad, 29% of the Agrippal and 63% of the control group. 4 episodes of acute myocardial rejection >/=3A were identified without difference between the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: The superior efficacy of vaccines containing adjuvants was not found and the data clearly confirmed that vaccination against influenza is safe and effective in heart transplant recipients. The use of vaccine containing adjuvant substances do not ameliorate the clinical performance of the immunisation suggesting that less expensive influenza vaccine preparation without adjuvant substances could be equally useful to protect heart transplant recipients.     

The Effect of Sirolimus Therapy on Vaccine Responses in Transplant Recipients

Different immunosuppressant regimens vary in their effects on antibody responses to vaccination. The combination of prednisolone and azathioprine has only a minor effect, whereas the addition of ciclosporin attenuates protective antibody responses to influenza vaccination. The effect of sirolimus, a new immunosuppressant, on vaccine responses has been little studied. Thirty-two hepatic or renal transplant patients randomized to calcineurin inhibitor-based or sirolimus-based immunosuppression were vaccinated against influenza and pneumococcus. Following tri-valent influenza vaccination, a similar rise in antibody titer occurred in sirolimus and calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) treated patients, though sirolimus treated patients developed a 'protective' titer to more influenza antigens. The pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine was equally effective in both groups. Hence, vaccination guidelines in place for CNI treated patients are likely to be appropriate for transplant recipients maintained on sirolimus.     

Influenza Vaccination in Orthotopic Liver Transplant Recipients: Absence of Post Administration ALT Elevation

Influenza vaccination has reduced life-threatening complications from influenza virus infection in adult liver transplant recipients. We evaluated changes in aminotransferase level and immunogenicity of influenza vaccination in liver transplant recipients. Fifty-one liver transplant recipients were administered a standard dose of the 2002-2003 inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine. ALT values were measured at baseline, 1 week and 4-6 weeks postvaccination. Antibody responses to each component of the vaccine were measured at baseline and after 4-6 weeks by a hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay. Response was defined as an HAI titer > or = 1: 40 and/or a 4-fold increase in antibody titers from baseline. An ALT elevation was defined as a rise of > or = 50% from baseline. There was no difference in the median rise in ALT value between seroconverters and nonseroconverters. A significant number of recipients developed potentially protective antibody titers (p-value < 0.0001). At less than 4 months post transplantation, 1/7 (14%), at 4-12 months, 6/9 (67%), and after 12 months, 30/35 (86%) subjects responded to the H1 strain. Of 51 recipients, one HCV (-) recipients vaccinated within 3 months of transplantation developed acute cellular rejection. Influenza virus vaccination is not associated with allograft rejection or ALT flares in liver transplant recipients.     

Alternative strategies of posttransplant influenza vaccination in adult solid organ transplant recipients

Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at increased risk of influenza disease and associated complications. The mainstay of prevention is the annual standard-dose influenza vaccine, as studies showed decreased influenza-related morbidity and mortality in vaccinated SOT recipients compared to those unvaccinated. Nonetheless, the immune response in this high-risk population is suboptimal compared to healthy individuals. Over the past two decades, several vaccination strategies have been investigated to overcome this inadequate immune response in SOT recipients. Howbeit, the best vaccination strategy and optimal timing of influenza vaccination remain unclear. This review will provide a detailed summary of studies of various influenza vaccination strategies in adult SOT recipients, discussing immunogenicity results, and addressing their limitations and knowledge gaps.     

Impairment of the immune response to influenza vaccination in renal transplant recipients by cyclosporine, but not azathioprine

Influenza vaccination has been strongly recommended for immunosuppressed renal transplant recipients. However, immunosuppression may lead to impaired antibody responses. We studied the antibody response to an inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine in 59 renal transplant recipients with life-sustaining kidney function: 21 were on cyclosporine and prednisone, 38 on azathioprine and prednisone. Healthy volunteers (n = 29) and patients on hemodialysis (n = 28) served as controls. Despite comparable renal allograft function, cyclosporine-treated patients had a significantly lower immune response against influenza A viruses than azathioprine-treated patients, whether mean antibody levels, fourfold titer rise, or seroconversion to protective titers was analyzed. No significant differences in antibody responses were found between healthy controls and patients on azathioprine. The patients on hemodialysis showed an impaired response to vaccination. However, in contrast to the cyclosporine-treated patients, booster immunization proved valuable in this group.     

Seasonal Maintenance of Influenza Vaccine-Induced Antibody Response in Kidney Transplant Recipients

Background/Aims: Although annual influenza vaccination is recommended for kidney transplant recipients, efficacy as reflected by serum antibody titers has not been well studied beyond 1 month in kidney transplant recipients. Methods: We performed a single-center prospective cohort study of 51 kidney transplant recipients and 102 healthy controls receiving the 2006-2007 influenza vaccine. Anti-hemagglutinin antibody titers to A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B were measured before and 1 month after vaccination, and again at the end of influenza season. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants maintaining seroprotection (antibody titer ≥1:32) for the duration of the influenza season after influenza vaccination. Results: Median follow-up time was 175 and 155 days in the transplant and control groups, respectively. For types A/H1N1 and B, a similar high proportion of the transplant and control groups (88.5 and 81.6% vs. 83.7 and 74.2% for A/H1N1 and B, respectively) maintained seroprotection. For type A/H3N2, significantly less of the transplant group (66.7%) versus the control group (90%) maintained a protective influenza vaccine response (odds ratio 0.21, 95% confidence interval 0.07-0.64). This difference disappeared in adjusted analyses. Actual geometric mean titers decreased significantly within both groups (p < 0.001) but this did not differ between groups. Conclusions: Once they have developed protective vaccine-induced antibody responses to influenza vaccine, kidney transplant recipients are able to maintain adequate protective levels of antibody compared with healthy controls.     

Immunogenicity and Safety of an Intradermal Boosting Strategy for Vaccination Against Influenza in Lung Transplant Recipients

The immunogenicity of influenza vaccine is suboptimal in lung transplant recipients. Use of a booster dose and vaccine delivery by the intradermal rather than intramuscular route may improve response. We prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of a 2-dose boosting strategy of influenza vaccine. Sixty lung transplant recipients received a standard intramuscular injection of the 2006-2007 inactivated influenza vaccine, followed 4 weeks later by an intradermal booster of the same vaccine. Immunogenicity was assessed by measurement of geometric mean titer of antibodies after both the intramuscular injection and the intradermal booster. Vaccine response was defined as 4-fold or higher increase of antibody titers to at least one vaccine antigen. Thirty-eight out of 60 patients (63%) had a response after intramuscular vaccination. Geometric mean titers increased for all three vaccine antigens following the first dose (p < 0.001). However, no significant increases in titer were observed after the booster dose for all three antigens. Among nonresponders, 3/22 (13.6%) additional patients responded after the intradermal booster (p = 0.14). The use of basiliximab was associated with a positive response (p = 0.024). After a single standard dose of influenza vaccine, a booster dose given by intradermal injection did not significantly improve vaccine immunogenicity in lung transplant recipients.     

Safety and efficacy of hepatitis A vaccination in liver transplantation recipients

OBJECTIVE: Vaccination against hepatitis A (HAV) has been shown to be safe and effective in healthy subjects and in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD). The safety and efficacy of HAV vaccines in liver transplant (OLT) recipients have not been established. The objective of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of inactivated hepatitis A vaccine in OLT recipients. METHODS: Thirty-seven HAV seronegative OLT recipients were enrolled. Patients received two doses of vaccine 6 months apart. Postvaccination IgG anti-HAV were determined at 1, 6, and 7 months after the first vaccine dose. Side effects were monitored for 3 days after each vaccination shot. An unvaccinated control group (45 patients) was followed for evidence of seroconversion. Seroconversion rate was also compared with those reported in healthy patients and in patients with chronic liver disease. RESULTS: Testing was available for all the cases at 1 month, and for 26 and 23 patients at 6 and 7 months, respectively. Only 3 of 37 patients (8%) had seroconversion at 1 month. At 6- and 7-month time points, 5 of 26 (19%) and 6 of the 23 (26%) patients had seroconversion, respectively. Vaccine responders had higher total white blood cell count and lymphocyte count and were further out from transplant compared with nonresponders. None of the unvaccinated patients had seroconversion over the follow-up time. Seroconversion rates in OLT recipients were significantly lower than that reported in healthy individuals (P=0.001) or in pre-OLT patients with CLD (P=0.001). All patients tolerated the vaccine well. CONCLUSIONS: HAV vaccination is safe in OLT recipient. Efficacy of HAV vaccination in OLT recipients, as measured by a commercially available enzyme immunoassay, is low and alternative strategies should be developed to improve response rate.     

Influenza Vaccination Is Efficacious and Safe in Renal Transplant Recipients

Whether influenza vaccination in solid-organ transplant recipients is efficacious remains a controversial issue. Furthermore, theoretical concerns have been raised regarding the safety of vaccination as it might trigger rejection of the allograft. The present prospective trial is aimed at investigating the antibody response and safety of influenza vaccination in renal transplant recipients (RTR).
A total of 165 RTR and 41 healthy volunteers were vaccinated with a standard trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Hemagglutination-inhibiting (HI) antibodies were quantified before and 1 month after vaccination. Seroprotection (SP) and seroresponse (SR) were defined as a titer ≥40 and a 4-fold rise in HI titer, respectively. Similar SR rates were observed in both groups. Postvaccination SP rates in RTR amounted to 92.7%, 78.7% and 82.9% for A/H1N1, A/H3N2 and B, respectively. High baseline SP rates, most probably reflecting frequent preimmunizations, explain partly the high postvaccination SP rates. SR rate was independently and inversely associated with baseline SP rate. Mycophenolate mofetil ( MMF ) usage was associated with a 2.6–5-fold lower SR. Nonetheless, these patients showed good postvaccination SP rates. A booster dose did not enhance SP or SR rates. Influenza vaccination neither affected allograft function nor caused rejection episodes. In conclusion, influenza vaccination is efficacious and safe in renal transplantation.     

Humoral response to natural influenza infection in solid organ transplant recipients

The humoral immune response of transplant recipients to influenza vaccination has been studied in detail. In contrast, the hemagglutinin inhibiting (HI) antibody response evoked by natural influenza infection and its impact on viral kinetics is unknown. In this prospective, multicenter, cohort study of natural influenza infection in transplant recipients, we measured HI antibody titers at presentation and 4 weeks later. Serial nasopharyngeal viral loads were determined using a quantitative influenza A polymerase chain reaction (PCR). We analyzed 196 transplant recipients with influenza infection. In the cohort of organ transplant patients with influenza A (n = 116), seropositivity rates for strain‐specific antibodies were 44.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 31.5‐53.2%) at diagnosis and 64.7% (95% CI 55.4‐72.9%) 4 weeks postinfection. Seroconversion was observed in 32.8% (95% CI 24.7‐41.9%) of the cases. Lung transplant recipients were more likely to seroconvert (P = .002) and vaccine recipients were less likely to seroconvert (P = .024). A subset of patients (n = 30) who were unresponsive to prior vaccination were also unresponsive to natural infection. There was no correlation between viral kinetics and antibody response. This study provides novel data on the seroresponse to influenza infection in transplant patients and its relationship to a number of parameters including a prior vaccination status, virologic measures, and clinical variables.     

Vaccination of the solid organ transplant recipient

Active immunization is the most important way to protect immunocompromised patients from vaccine-preventable infectious diseases. Although live vaccines are contraindicated for most immunocompromised patients, many inactivated or conjugate vaccines are safe and generally recommended. Some vaccines are known to be of suboptimal immunogenicity in transplant recipients. As a consequence, this may be associated with an impaired ability to mount protective immunity. Nevertheless, even partial protection has been shown to confer significant benefit to this vulnerable patient group. To increase efficacy in generating protective immunity, patients should complete the full complement of recommended vaccinations early in the course of disease before transplantation. This review summarizes the general recommendations for vaccinations of adult transplant recipients and candidates including special considerations for household contacts and health care workers.     

Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination and COVID-19 in kidney transplant patients

BackgroundThis study aims to investigate the effect of recent influenza and pneumococcal vaccines' administration on the development of COVID-19 infection in kidney transplant recipients during the pandemic.MethodsThe effect of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines on the clinical course of the disease in COVID-positive (COVID group, n: 105) and COVID-negative (control group, n: 127) recipients has been examined. The control group included patients with negative rRT-PCR test results. At the time of the study, no patient was vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccine. The patients' influenza and/or pneumococcal vaccination rates in 2019 and 2020 were determined. In 2019 and 2020, 32 and 33 people in the COVID-positive group and 61 and 54 people in the COVID-negative group had received influenza and/or pneumococcal vaccines, respectively. The median study follow-up times of the COVID-negative and COVID-positive groups were 13.04 and 8.31 months, respectively.ResultsCompared with the COVID-negative group, the patients in the COVID-positive group were younger and had a longer post-transplant time. In addition, the rate of transplantation from a living donor and the rate of COVID positivity in family members were also higher. The influenza vaccination rates in the COVID negative group were significantly higher than the COVID-positive group in 2020 (23.8% vs 37%, p = 0.031). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the presence of COVID-19 in family members and lack of pneumococcal vaccination in 2020 increased the risk of being positive for COVID-19. There was no significant difference in the hospitalization rates, the need for dialysis and intensive care, the hospital stay, and the graft dysfunction in the COVID-positive patients with and without influenza and pneumococcal vaccines.ConclusionThe observations made throughout this study suggest that influenza and pneumococcal vaccination in transplant patients may reduce the risk of COVID-19 disease and provide additional benefits during the pandemic period.     

Durability of the hepatitis B vaccination in pediatric renal transplant recipients

Since hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccine implementation, HBV infection has significantly decreased. However, adult renal transplant recipients show a higher rate of seroreversion compared to the general population, leading to HBV infection risk. Data are limited in pediatric renal transplant recipients. Retrospective data were collected to determine the seroprotection and durability of HBV vaccination in pediatric renal transplant patients from 2004 to 2014. One hundred subjects were categorized based on pre‐ and post‐transplant hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb). Pretransplant, 85 recipients (85%) had a positive HBsAb compared to 15 (15%) with negative HBsAb. In univariable analyses, other than age (P < .05) no significant differences existed pretransplant by demographics, pretransplantation dialysis, or number of vaccinations. Of the 85 pretransplantation responders, 53 (62%) remained HBsAb positive post‐transplantation, 28 (32%) seroreverted, and 4 developed indeterminate titers. All seroreversions occurred within 5 years post‐transplant. Receipt of a living donor organ had higher risk of reversion (P = .005). No significant differences were found in demographics, pretransplantation dialysis, vaccination number, or acute rejection. Despite vaccination, 15% of pediatric renal transplant candidates were seronegative, and an additional 32% lost seroprotection within 5 years post‐transplantation leaving nearly half of transplant recipients at risk for HBV infection.     

Influenza vaccine antibody responses in lung transplant recipients

CONTEXT: Lung transplant recipients are at high risk of morbidity and mortality from influenza infection because of altered lung physiology and immunosuppression. Annual influenza immunization is recommended, but the ability to mount an antibody response may be limited by immunosuppressant medications. OBJECTIVE: To compare the antibody response rate to influenza vaccine in lung transplant recipients to healthy controls. DESIGN: Open label study. SETTING: Lung transplant clinic and General Clinical Research Center at a university hospital. SUBJECTS: Sixty-eight single and bilateral lung transplant recipients and 35 healthy controls were enrolled in October and November 2002. METHODS: Each individual underwent blood sampling before receiving the 2002-2003 influenza vaccine and 4 weeks later. Influenza antibody concentrations were measured by hemagglutination inhibition assay. Vaccine response rates (antibody concentration >40 hemagglutination units and at least 4-fold increase in antibody concentration) were compared using chi2. The influence of specific immunosuppressants on vaccine response was compared. RESULTS: The influenza vaccine response rate for lung transplant recipients was 29/68 (43%) and 22/35 (63%) for the healthy individuals (P < .05; chi2). Among the recipients, mycophenolate mofetil was associated with poorer influenza vaccine antibody response (> 40 hemagglutination units) (62% vs 91%; P = .01), whereas sirolimus (91% vs 63%; P = .02) was associated with better influenza antibody response compared to those not taking mycophenolate mofetil or sirolimus, respectively. CONCLUSION: Lung transplant recipients had lower influenza vaccine response rates than healthy individuals. Influenza vaccine antibody response is influenced by concomitant administration of mycophenolate mofetil or sirolimus. Future studies should measure protection from influenza infection conferred by immunization and alternative vaccination strategies.