Seasonal influenza virus vaccination should be considered in all pediatric patients with rheumatic diseases. Few studies have addressed influenza vaccination safety and efficacy in this group. We aim to prospectively evaluate immunogenicity and safety of the trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine including A/H1N1, A/H3N2 and B strains in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) receiving biological therapy. Thirty-five children diagnosed with JIA and 6 healthy siblings were included. Serum samples were collected prior to, 4-8 weeks and one year after vaccination. Microneutralization assays were used to determine neutralizing antibody titers. The type and duration of therapy were analyzed to determine its effect on vaccine response. Clinical data of the participants were collected throughout the study including severe adverse events (SAE) and adverse events following immunization (AEFI). Twenty-five patients (74.3%) received biological treatment for JIA; anti TNF-α was prescribed in 15, anti IL-1 receptor in 4 and anti IL-6 receptor therapy in 6 children. The seroprotection rate 4-8 weeks after vaccination in the JIA group was 96% for influenza A/(H1N1)pdm and influenza A/H3N2, and 88% for influenza B. No differences were found in GMT, seroprotection and seroconversion rates for the three influenza strains between the control group and patients receiving biological therapy. Furthermore, long-term seroprotection at 12 months after vaccination was similar in patients receiving either biological or non-biological treatments. No SAEs were observed. In this study, influenza vaccination was safe and immunogenic in children with JIA receiving biological therapy.
Summary: Knowledge of donor and recipient (D/R) cytomegalovirus (CMV) serostatus is critical for risk stratification of CMV infection and disease in transplant recipients, particularly in the solid organ transplantation (SOT) setting. Despite its broad availability and the success of it use, the risk stratification based on the D/R serostatus is not free of limitations since there are a nondepreciable number of patients that are not accurately categorized by this approach. In fact, up to 20% of seropositive SOT recipients, classically considered at intermediate risk, develop episodes of CMV infection and disease after transplantation. Here, we provide an overview of additional donor and recipient factors that may have utility in identifying patients at risk for post‐transplant CMV infection. Specifically, we summarize our current understanding regarding the potential use of use CMV‐specific T‐cell‐mediated immunity, neutralizing antibodies and host genetics that may influence the risk of CMV infection and disease. We provide an overview of the benefits and limitations associated with using these immunological factors in risk stratification and propose specific variables that could be analyzed at the pretransplant evaluation to improve the identification of patients with increased individual susceptibility.
1 June 2019 in Clinical Microbiology and Infection
During the last decade, many studies have demonstrated the role of CMV specific T-cell immune response on controlling CMV replication and dissemination. In fact, it is well established that transplanted patients lacking CMV-specific T-cell immunity have an increased occurrence of CMV replication episodes and CMV-related complications. In this context, the use of adoptive transfer of CMV-specific T-cells has been widely investigated and applied to Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant patients and may be useful as a therapeutic alternative, to reconstitute the CMV specific T-cell response and to control CMV viremia in patients receiving a transplantation. However, only few authors have explored the use of T-cell adoptive transfer in SOT recipients. We propose a novel review in which we provide an overview of the impact of using CMV-specific T-cell adoptive transfer on the control of CMV infection in SOT recipients, the different approaches to stimulate, isolate and expand CMV-specific T-cells developed over the years and a discussion of the possible use of CMV adoptive cellular therapy in this SOT population. Given the timeliness and importance of this topic, we believe that such an analysis will provide important insights into CMV infection and its treatment/prevention.