Immunogenicity and safety of intradermal influenza vaccination in renal transplant patients who were non-responders to conventional influenza vaccination

Morélon, Emmanuel; Noble, Claire Pouteil; Daoud, S.; Cahen, R; Goujon‐Henry, C.; Weber, Françoise; Laurent, Philippe; Kaiserlian, Dominique; Nicolas, Jean‐François

doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.08.015

Cited by 55 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[21][22][23] In addition, 15 g of intradermal vaccine showed similar responses to intramuscular vaccine in a cohort of kidney transplant recipients who were non-responders to a previous intramuscular vaccine. 24 In contrast to studies performed in immunocompetent patients, we did not observe a higher rate of local adverse events in the intradermal group. This is in keeping with a previous study from our group using a boosting intradermal dose of influenza vaccine, where local reactions were seen in only 13% of lung transplant recipients.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Low-dose intradermal versus intramuscular trivalent inactivated seasonal influenza vaccine in lung transplant recipients

Manuel

Humar

Berutto

et al. 2011

The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Low-dose intradermal versus intramuscular trivalent inactivated seasonal influenza vaccine in lung transplant recipients

Manuel

Humar

Berutto

et al. 2011

The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Recently, Morelon and colleagues have reported that intradermal inXuenza vaccination has an enhanced immunogenicity and probably leads to an increased protection against inXuenza in RT recipients who did not respond to conventional intramuscular vaccine application [34]. To prevent these vulnerable patients from inXuenza infection, annual inXuenza vaccination is strongly recommended in healthcare professionals and contact persons including young children who have often to be considered immunologically naïve [35].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Serological response to influenza A H1N1 vaccine (Pandemrix®) and seasonal influenza vaccine 2009/2010 in renal transplant recipients and in hemodialysis patients

Ott

Sauerbrei

Lange

et al. 2012

Med Microbiol Immunol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, antibody response to seasonal influenza vaccination and to the adjuvanted one-shot influenza A H1N1 vaccine (Pandemrix(®)) was investigated in 57 hemodialysis (HD) patients and 48 renal transplant (RT) recipients. Specific antibodies were measured by hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test using a pandemic H1N1 strain and a seasonal H3N2 virus. HI titers of ≥1:40 were considered as protective. Hemodialysis patients showed seroprotection against pandemic H1N1 in 35.1%, against seasonal influenza in 36.8% and against both in 14.0%. In comparison, renal transplant recipients developed protective antibody titers against the pandemic H1N1 virus in 47.9%, against the seasonal H3N2 strain in 31.3% and against both in 18.8%. HD patients and renal transplant recipients younger than 60 years developed protective antibody response to the pandemic influenza H1N1 vaccine in 50.0% of the HD patients and 55.2% of the RT recipients and against seasonal influenza in 45.0/20.7% (HD/RT) of the cases. Patients aged ≥60 years showed seroprotection against pandemic influenza in 27.0/36.8% (HD/RT) and against seasonal influenza in 32.4/47.4% (HD/RT). Side effects were reported in only four patients. In hemodialysis patients and renal transplant recipients, vaccination against pandemic H1N1 and seasonal influenza is well tolerated. However, more than a half of these patients did not develop seroprotective antibody levels. Thus, new vaccines and altered vaccination regimes are likely necessary to achieve relevant antibody levels in these patient groups.

show abstract

“…[113][114][115] Nevertheless, in a study performed in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, who received either 0.2 ml (6 μg of HA per virus strain) split into two site ID injections or a single 0.5 ml, full dose, IM injection, antibody responses of the ID arm were lower than those of IM group, even if each strain of the ID vaccination met the CHMP requirements. 116 In conclusion, based upon the reported clinical experience, ID vaccines need to be considered safe and immunogenic, being a valid alternative to other currently available products for the active immune-prevention of seasonal influenza in both adults and elderly individuals.…”

Section: O N O T D I S T R I B U T Ementioning

confidence: 99%

Adjuvants and alternative routes of administration towards the development of the ideal influenza vaccine

Durando¹,

Iudici²,

Alicino³

et al. 2011

Human Vaccines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immunogenicity and safety of intradermal influenza vaccination in renal transplant patients who were non-responders to conventional influenza vaccination

Cited by 55 publications

References 20 publications

Low-dose intradermal versus intramuscular trivalent inactivated seasonal influenza vaccine in lung transplant recipients

Low-dose intradermal versus intramuscular trivalent inactivated seasonal influenza vaccine in lung transplant recipients

Serological response to influenza A H1N1 vaccine (Pandemrix®) and seasonal influenza vaccine 2009/2010 in renal transplant recipients and in hemodialysis patients

Adjuvants and alternative routes of administration towards the development of the ideal influenza vaccine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About