Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination in adults undergoing immunosuppressive treatment for inflammatory diseases - a longitudinal study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy are at increased risk of infection. Community-acquired pneumonia and invasive pneumococcal disease account for substantial morbidity and mortality in this population and may be prevented by vaccination. Ideally, immunization to pneumococcal antigens should take place before the start of immunosuppressive treatment. Often, however, the treatment cannot be delayed. Little is known about the efficacy of pneumococcal vaccines during immunosuppressive treatment. The objectives of this study were to determine the percentage of vaccine-naïve, immunosuppressed adults with inflammatory diseases seroprotected against Streptococcus pneumoniae and to assess factors associated with the immunogenicity, clinical impact and safety of 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV) in seronegative subjects. METHODS: This observational study included patients 18 years of age and older who were receiving prednisone ≥20 mg/day or other immunosuppressive drugs. Exclusion criteria were PPV administration in the previous 5 years, intravenous immunoglobulins and pregnancy. Serum immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody levels against six pneumococcal serotypes were measured. Seropositivity was defined as IgG of 0.5 μg/ml or greater for at least four of six serotypes. Seronegative patients received PPV, and seropositive patients were included as a comparison group. Vaccine response and tolerance were assessed after 4-8 weeks. Disease activity was evaluated on the basis of the Physician Global Assessment scores. Serology was repeated after 1 year, and information on any kind of infection needing medical attention was collected. Outcomes were the proportion of seropositivity and infections between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. RESULTS: Of 201 included patients, 35 received high-dose corticosteroids and 181 were given immunosuppressive drugs. Baseline seronegativity in 60 (30 %) patients was associated with corticotherapy and lower total IgG. After PPV, disease activity remained unchanged or decreased in 81 % of patients, and 87 % became seropositive. After 1 year, 67 % of vaccinated compared with 90 % of observed patients were seropositive (p < 0.001), whereas the rate of infections did not differ between groups. Those still taking prednisone ≥10 mg/day tended to have poorer serological responses and had significantly more infections. CONCLUSIONS: PPV was safe and moderately effective based on serological response. Seropositivity to pneumococcal antigens significantly reduced the risk of infections. Sustained high-dose corticosteroids were associated with poor vaccine response and more infections

Relevance of laboratory testing for the diagnosis of primary immunodeficiencies: a review of case-based examples of selected immunodeficiencies

The field of primary immunodeficiencies (PIDs) is one of several in the area of clinical immunology that has not been static, but rather has shown exponential growth due to enhanced physician, scientist and patient education and awareness, leading to identification of new diseases, new molecular diagnoses of existing clinical phenotypes, broadening of the spectrum of clinical and phenotypic presentations associated with a single or related gene defects, increased bioinformatics resources, and utilization of advanced diagnostic technology and methodology for disease diagnosis and management resulting in improved outcomes and survival. There are currently over 200 PIDs with at least 170 associated genetic defects identified, with several of these being reported in recent years. The enormous clinical and immunological heterogeneity in the PIDs makes diagnosis challenging, but there is no doubt that early and accurate diagnosis facilitates prompt intervention leading to decreased morbidity and mortality. Diagnosis of PIDs often requires correlation of data obtained from clinical and radiological findings with laboratory immunological analyses and genetic testing. The field of laboratory diagnostic immunology is also rapidly burgeoning, both in terms of novel technologies and applications, and knowledge of human immunology. Over the years, the classification of PIDs has been primarily based on the immunological defect(s) ("immunophenotype") with the relatively recent addition of genotype, though there are clinical classifications as well. There can be substantial overlap in terms of the broad immunophenotype and clinical features between PIDs, and therefore, it is relevant to refine, at a cellular and molecular level, unique immunological defects that allow for a specific and accurate diagnosis. The diagnostic testing armamentarium for PID includes flow cytometry - phenotyping and functional, cellular and molecular assays, protein analysis, and mutation identification by gene sequencing. The complexity and diversity of the laboratory diagnosis of PIDs necessitates many of the above-mentioned tests being performed in highly specialized reference laboratories. Despite these restrictions, there remains an urgent need for improved standardization and optimization of phenotypic and functional flow cytometry and protein-specific assays. A key component in the interpretation of immunological assays is the comparison of patient data to that obtained in a statistically-robust manner from age and gender-matched healthy donors. This review highlights a few of the laboratory assays available for the diagnostic work-up of broad categories of PIDs, based on immunophenotyping, followed by examples of disease-specific testing