Safety and Efficacy of the Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavaria Nordic Vaccine Against Mpox in the Real World: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

In May 2022, mpox began to spread worldwide, posing a serious threat to human public health. Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavaria Nordic (MVA-BN) is a live attenuated orthopoxvirus vaccine that has been authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as the vaccine of choice for the prevention of mpox. In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis of all currently published literature on the efficacy and safety of the MVA-BN vaccine in the real world, showing that the MVA-BN vaccine is effective and safe, with efficacy of up to 75% with a single dose and up to 80% with a two-dose vaccine. Meanwhile, we found that subcutaneous injection has lower local and systemic adverse events than intradermal injection, regardless of single- or two-dose vaccination, and subcutaneous injection is better tolerated in children, the elderly, or people with underlying medical conditions. These results have important reference value for clinical practice.

Immunogenicity and safety of live attenuated and recombinant/inactivated varicella zoster vaccines in people living with HIV: A systematic review.

Few papers focus their attention on VZV vaccination effectiveness among people living with HIV (PLWH). Flanking the live attenuated vaccine (VZL) available, a newly recombinant vaccine (RZV) was recently introduced and approved for HZ prevention among adults. PLWH represents a population on which a particular attention should be applied, in order to guarantee the vaccine efficacy and safety. We performed a literature search in USNLM, PubMed, PubMed Central, PMC and Cochrane Library. From all the publications found eligible, data were extracted and processed per population, vaccine type, immunogenicity and ADRs. The review of the 13 included studies shows that both RZV and VZL are immunogenic and have an acceptable safety profile in adults and children living with HIV. However, given the lack of research available about vaccine efficacy in preventing VZV and HZ in PLWH, additional studies need to be performed, in order to achieve a full completeness of data.

Post-marketing surveillance of 10,392 herpes zoster vaccines doses in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Immunisation against herpes zoster is recommended for adults aged ≥ 50 years. Two vaccines, a live attenuated (ZVL, Zostavax®) and an adjuvant recombinant subunit (HZ/su, Shingrix®), are available in Australia. Immunisation guidelines are shifting their recommendations towards HZ/su because of higher efficacy in preventing herpes zoster and associated complications. However, there are limited post-marketing data comparing the safety profiles of these vaccines. METHODS: Data from SmartVax, an active surveillance system for monitoring adverse events following immunisation (AEFIs) utilised by > 450 clinics throughout Australia, were analysed. Data from patients aged ≥ 50 years, who received ZVL or HZ/su, from 1 June 2021 to 31 May 2022, at clinics that utilised SmartVax were included. The proportion of records where patients who reported any, local, and systemic AEFIs after receiving ZVL or HZ/su were compared using multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Data from 10,392 immunisation records (n = 8341 ZVL; n = 2051 HZ/su) were included. The proportion of AEFIs reported was higher with HZ/su (41.9 % [any], 33.8 % [local], 25.2 % [systemic]) than with ZVL (8.7 % [any], 6.2 % [local], 3.5 % [systemic]). After controlling for demographic variables, HZ/su presented a 6-fold increase in the odds (OR 6.44; 95 %CI: 5.57-7.46) of a reported AEFI compared to ZVL. Only 59 (0.6 %) of vaccinations lead to medical attention being sought due to an AEFI. CONCLUSIONS: While rates of AEFIs was higher with HZ/su than ZVL, most AEFIs were mild and did not require medical attention. Our findings support the change in vaccine recommendations and the use of HZ/su in immunisation programs.

Live vaccinations in dermatology for immunosuppressed patients: a narrative review.

Given the higher susceptibility to infectious disease in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapies for inflammatory dermatologic conditions, immunization is important in this population. While live vaccines protect against life-threatening diseases, they can be harmful in immunosuppressed patients given the risk of replication of the attenuated pathogen and adverse reactions. The utilization of live vaccines in immunosuppressed patients depends on multiple factors such as the vaccine and therapy regimen. To provide an overview of evidence-based recommendations for the use of live vaccines in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapies for dermatological conditions. A literature search of the PubMed database was performed using keywords live vaccine, live-attenuated vaccine, dermatology, immunosuppressed, and immunocompromised, and specific immunosuppressive therapies: corticosteroids, glucocorticoids, methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil, biologics. Relevant articles written in English were included. Using these keywords, 125 articles were reviewed, of which 28 were ultimately selected. Recommendations for live vaccines can be determined on a case-by-case basis. Measles, mumps, rubella, varicella (MMRV) vaccines may be safely administered to patients on low-dose immunosuppressive agents while the yellow fever vaccine is typically contraindicated. It may be safe to administer live MMRV boosters to children on immunosuppressive therapies and the live herpes zoster vaccine to patients on biologics. Given poor adherence to immunization guidelines in immunosuppressed patients, dermatologists have a critical role in educating patients and general practitioners regarding live vaccines. By reviewing a patient's vaccination history and following immunization guidelines prior to initiating immunosuppressive therapies, physicians can mitigate morbidity and mortality from vaccine-preventable diseases.

Post-marketing surveillance of intussusception after Rotarix administration in Afghanistan, 2018-2022.

BACKGROUND: In January 2018, Afghanistan introduced the monovalent oral rotavirus vaccine (Rotarix) nationwide, administered as a 2-dose series at six and ten weeks of age. We describe characteristics of intussusception cases and assess potential intussusception risk associated with Rotarix vaccination in Afghan infants. METHODS: Multi-center prospective active hospital-based surveillance for intussusception was conducted from May 2018 to March 2022 in four sentinel sites in Afghanistan. We applied the Brighton Level 1 criteria for intussusception and verified vaccination status by reviewing vaccine cards. We used the self-controlled case series (SCCS) methodology to compare intussusception incidence in the 1 to 21 days after each dose of Rotarix vaccination against non-risk periods. RESULTS: A total of 468 intussusception cases were identified in infants under 12 months, with 264 cases aged between 28 and 245 days having confirmed vaccination status contributing to the SCCS analysis. Most case-patients (98 %) required surgery for treatment, and over half (59 %) of those who underwent surgery required intestinal resection. Nineteen (7 %) case-patients died. Eighty-six percent of case-patients received the first dose of Rotarix, and 69 % received the second dose before intussusception symptom onset. There was no increased risk of intussusception in the 1-7 days (relative incidence: 0.9, 95 % CI: 0.1, 7.5), 8-21 days (1.3, 95 % CI: 0.4, 4.2), or 1-21 days (1.1, 95 % CI: 0.4, 3.4) following receipt of the first dose or in the 1-7 days (0.2, 95 % CI: 0.3, 1.8), 8-21 days (0.7, 95 % CI: 0.3, 1.5), or 1-21 days (0.6, 95 % CI: 0.3, 1.2) following the second dose. CONCLUSION: Rotarix vaccination was not associated with an increased intussusception risk, supporting its continued use in Afghanistan's immunization program. However, there was a high level of death and resection due to intussusception among Afghan infants.

A case series of live attenuated vaccine administration in dupilumab-treated children with atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Current regulatory labeling recommends avoiding live vaccine use in dupilumab-treated patients. Clinical data are not available to support more specific guidance for live or live attenuated vaccines administration in dupilumab-treated patients. METHODS: Children (6 months-5 years old) with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) enrolled in a phase 2/3 clinical trial of dupilumab (LIBERTY AD PRESCHOOL Part A/B; NCT03346434) and subsequently participated in the LIBERTY AD PED-OLE (NCT02612454). During these studies, protocol deviations occurred in nine children who received measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine with or without varicella vaccine; five with a ≤12-week gap between dupilumab administration and vaccination and four with a >12-week gap after discontinuing dupilumab. RESULTS: Nine children (1 female; 8 male) had severe AD at baseline (8-56 months old). Of the nine children, five had a ≤12-week gap ranged 1-7 weeks between dupilumab administration and vaccination who received MMR vaccine (n = 2) or MMR and varicella vaccines (n = 3); among these, one resumed dupilumab treatment as early as 2 days and four resumed treatment 18-43 days after vaccination. No treatment-emergent adverse events, including serious adverse events and infections, were reported within the 4-week post-vaccination period in any children. CONCLUSIONS: In this case series of dupilumab-treated children with severe AD who received MMR vaccine with or without varicella vaccine, no adverse effects (including vaccine-related infection) were reported within 4 weeks after vaccination. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immune response to live attenuated vaccines in dupilumab-treated patients.

Live, Attenuated, Tetravalent Butantan-Dengue Vaccine in Children and Adults.

BACKGROUND: Butantan-Dengue Vaccine (Butantan-DV) is an investigational, single-dose, live, attenuated, tetravalent vaccine against dengue disease, but data on its overall efficacy are needed. METHODS: In an ongoing phase 3, double-blind trial in Brazil, we randomly assigned participants to receive Butantan-DV or placebo, with stratification according to age (2 to 6 years, 7 to 17 years, and 18 to 59 years); 5 years of follow-up is planned. The objectives of the trial were to evaluate overall vaccine efficacy against symptomatic, virologically confirmed dengue of any serotype occurring more than 28 days after vaccination (the primary efficacy end point), regardless of serostatus at baseline, and to describe safety up to day 21 (the primary safety end point). Here, vaccine efficacy was assessed on the basis of 2 years of follow-up for each participant, and safety as solicited vaccine-related adverse events reported up to day 21 after injection. Key secondary objectives were to assess vaccine efficacy among participants according to dengue serostatus at baseline and according to the dengue viral serotype; efficacy according to age was also assessed. RESULTS: Over a 3-year enrollment period, 16,235 participants received either Butantan-DV (10,259 participants) or placebo (5976 participants). The overall 2-year vaccine efficacy was 79.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70.0 to 86.3) - 73.6% (95% CI, 57.6 to 83.7) among participants with no evidence of previous dengue exposure and 89.2% (95% CI, 77.6 to 95.6) among those with a history of exposure. Vaccine efficacy was 80.1% (95% CI, 66.0 to 88.4) among participants 2 to 6 years of age, 77.8% (95% CI, 55.6 to 89.6) among those 7 to 17 years of age, and 90.0% (95% CI, 68.2 to 97.5) among those 18 to 59 years of age. Efficacy against DENV-1 was 89.5% (95% CI, 78.7 to 95.0) and against DENV-2 was 69.6% (95% CI, 50.8 to 81.5). DENV-3 and DENV-4 were not detected during the follow-up period. Solicited systemic vaccine- or placebo-related adverse events within 21 days after injection were more common with Butantan-DV than with placebo (58.3% of participants, vs. 45.6%). CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of Butantan-DV prevented symptomatic DENV-1 and DENV-2, regardless of dengue serostatus at baseline, through 2 years of follow-up. (Funded by Instituto Butantan and others; DEN-03-IB ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02406729, and WHO ICTRP number, U1111-1168-8679.).

Evaluation of Intussusception Following Pentavalent Rotavirus Vaccine (RotaTeq) Administration in 5 African Countries.

BACKGROUND: A low-level risk of intussusception following rotavirus vaccination has been observed in some settings and may vary by vaccine type. We examined the association between RotaTeq vaccination and intussusception in low-income settings in a pooled analysis from 5 African countries that introduced RotaTeq into their national immunization program. METHODS: Active surveillance was conducted at 20 hospitals to identify intussusception cases. A standard case report form was completed for each enrolled child, and vaccination status was determined by review of the child's vaccination card. The pseudo-likelihood adaptation of self-controlled case-series method was used to assess the association between RotaTeq administration and intussusception in the 1-7, 8-21, and 1-21 day periods after each vaccine dose in infants aged 28-245 days. RESULTS: Data from 318 infants with confirmed rotavirus vaccination status were analyzed. No clustering of cases occurred in any of the risk windows after any of the vaccine doses. Compared with the background risk of naturally occurring intussusception, no increased risk was observed after dose 1 in the 1-7 day (relative incidence = 2.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.47-8.03) or the 8-21 day window (relative incidence = 0.77; 95%CI = 0.0-2.69). Similarly, no increased risk of intussusception was observed in any risk window after dose 2 or 3. CONCLUSIONS: RotaTeq vaccination was not associated with increased risk of intussusception in this analysis from 5 African countries. This finding mirrors results from similar analyses with other rotavirus vaccines in low-income settings and highlights the need for vaccine-specific and setting-specific risk monitoring.

Post-vaccinal distemper-like disease in two dog litters with confirmed infection of vaccine virus strain.

Modified live canine distemper virus (CDV) vaccines are widely used and considered both safe and effective. Although there are occasional literature reports of suspected vaccine-induced disease, there are none where the vaccine strain has been identified in affected tissues. Here we describe two such cases in different litters. In litter A, five of ten puppies presented with fever, anorexia, vomiting, and diarrhea a few days post-vaccination. Four puppies died or were euthanized, and autopsy revealed atypical necrosis of the lymphoid tissue. In litter B, two of five puppies developed typical neurological signs some months post-vaccination and autopsy revealed encephalitis. In all cases, affected organs tested positive for CDV on immunohistochemistry, and CDV RNA extracted from the lesions confirmed the presence of vaccine strain. Since multiple puppies from each litter were affected, it cannot be excluded without further studies that some undiagnosed inherited immunodeficiency disorder may have been involved.

No increased risk of intussusception after pentavalent rotavirus vaccination in China: a retrospective birth cohort using electronic health records of Ningbo city.

Some post-licensure studies have shown a potential increased risk of intussusception following vaccination with rotavirus vaccines. This is the first study that aimed to assess the incidence and risk of intussusception within 90 days after vaccination with RotaTeq in Chinese infants. A population-based birth cohort from 27th November 2018 to 30th June 2021 included all newborns in Ningbo city. The records of intussusception were identified through the ICD-10 code K56.1 or Chinese keywords "Chang Tao" from all hospital discharge records. Each episode was confirmed in line with the Brighton criteria, and only Brighton level 1 cases were included. The association of RotaTeq vaccination and intussusception was evaluated using the Poisson regression. A total of 108,405 eligible subjects from birth cohort were eligible, with 52.30% males. Among them, 26, 847 (24.77%) infants received at least one dose of RotaTeq, and 95.52% of them were fully vaccinated, with 76, 934 doses in total. After adjudication, none of the cases occurred post first, or second dose, the cumulative number of cases that occurred 1-7, 1-14, 1-21, 1-42, and 1-90 days post third dose was 0, 1, 1, 3, and 7, respectively. Adjusting for age, sex, birth year, birth season and location, the incidence rate ratio of intussusception after RotaTeq vaccination was 0.90 (90% two-sided CI: 0.46, 1.75). Increasing age and male gender were associated with higher risk of intussusception. In summary, no increased risk of IS was observed following 3 months of RotaTeq vaccination in this study.

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Herpes zoster, commonly known as shingles, is a neurocutaneous disease caused by the reactivation of the virus that causes varicella (chickenpox). After resolution of the varicella episode, the virus can remain latent in the sensitive dorsal ganglia of the spine. Years later, with declining immunity, the varicella zoster virus (VZV) can reactivate and cause herpes zoster, an extremely painful condition that can last many weeks or months and significantly compromise the quality of life of the affected person. The natural process of ageing is associated with a reduction in cellular immunity, and this predisposes older adults to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of the VZV activates specific T-cell production avoiding viral reactivation. Two types of herpes zoster vaccines are currently available. One of them is the single-dose live attenuated zoster vaccine (LZV), which contains the same live attenuated virus used in the chickenpox vaccine, but it has over 14-fold more plaque-forming units of the attenuated virus per dose. The other is the recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) which does not contain the live attenuated virus, but rather a small fraction of the virus that cannot replicate but can boost immunogenicity. The recommended schedule for the RZV is two doses two months apart. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2010, and updated in 2012, 2016, and 2019. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults. SEARCH METHODS: For this 2022 update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2022, Issue 10), MEDLINE (1948 to October 2022), Embase (2010 to October 2022), CINAHL (1981 to October 2022), LILACS (1982 to October 2022), and three trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies involving healthy older adults (mean age 60 years or older). We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine (any dose and potency) versus any other type of intervention (e.g. varicella vaccine, antiviral medication), placebo, or no intervention (no vaccine). Outcomes were cumulative incidence of herpes zoster, adverse events (death, serious adverse events, systemic reactions, or local reaction occurring at any time after vaccination), and dropouts. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included two new studies involving 1736 participants in this update. The review now includes a total of 26 studies involving 90,259 healthy older adults with a mean age of 63.7 years. Only three studies assessed the cumulative incidence of herpes zoster in groups that received vaccines versus placebo. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries in Europe and North America and included healthy Caucasians (understood to be white participants) aged 60 years or over with no immunosuppressive comorbidities. Two studies were conducted in Japan and one study was conducted in the Republic of Korea. Sixteen studies used LZV. Ten studies tested an RZV. The overall certainty of the evidence was moderate, which indicates that the intervention probably works. Most data for the primary outcome (cumulative incidence of herpes zoster) and secondary outcomes (adverse events and dropouts) came from studies that had a low risk of bias and included a large number of participants. The cumulative incidence of herpes zoster at up to three years of follow-up was lower in participants who received the LZV (one dose subcutaneously) than in those who received placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56; risk difference (RD) 2%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 50; moderate-certainty evidence) in the largest study, which included 38,546 participants. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21) or deaths (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; moderate-certainty evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher cumulative incidence of one or more adverse events (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.11; RD 23%; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.3) and injection site adverse events (RR 3.73, 95% CI 1.93 to 7.21; RD 28%; NNTH 3.6; moderate-certainty evidence) of mild to moderate intensity. These data came from four studies with 6980 participants aged 60 years or older. Two studies (29,311 participants for safety evaluation and 22,022 participants for efficacy evaluation) compared RZV (two doses intramuscularly, two months apart) versus placebo. Participants who received the new vaccine had a lower cumulative incidence of herpes zoster at 3.2 years follow-up (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.23; RD 3%; NNTB 33; moderate-certainty evidence), probably indicating a favourable profile of the intervention. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups in cumulative incidence of serious adverse events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) or deaths (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; moderate-certainty evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher cumulative incidence of adverse events, any systemic symptom (RR 2.23, 95% CI 2.12 to 2.34; RD 33%; NNTH 3.0), and any local symptom (RR 6.89, 95% CI 6.37 to 7.45; RD 67%; NNTH 1.5). Although most participants reported that their symptoms were of mild to moderate intensity, the risk of dropouts (participants not returning for the second dose, two months after the first dose) was higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39; RD 1%; NNTH 100, moderate-certainty evidence). Only one study reported funding from a non-commercial source (a university research foundation). All other included studies received funding from pharmaceutical companies. We did not conduct subgroup and sensitivity analyses AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LZV (single dose) and RZV (two doses) are probably effective in preventing shingles disease for at least three years. To date, there are no data to recommend revaccination after receiving the basic schedule for each type of vaccine. Both vaccines produce systemic and injection site adverse events of mild to moderate intensity. The conclusions did not change in relation to the previous version of the systematic review.

Immunogenicity and Tolerability of a SARS-CoV-2 TNX-1800, a Live Recombinant Poxvirus Vaccine Candidate, in Syrian Hamsters and New Zealand White Rabbits.

TNX-1800 is a preclinical stage synthetic-derived live attenuated chimeric horsepox virus vaccine engineered to express the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) gene. The objectives of this study were to assess the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of TNX-1800 administration in Syrian golden hamsters and New Zealand white rabbits. Animals were vaccinated at three doses via percutaneous inoculation. The data showed that the single percutaneous administration of three TNX-1800 vaccine dose levels was well tolerated in both hamsters and rabbits. At all dose levels, rabbits were more decerning regarding vaccine site reaction than hamsters. Lastly, no TNX-1800 genomes could be detected at the site of vaccination. Post-vaccination, all animals had anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG specific antibody responses. These data demonstrate that TNX-1800 infection was limited, asymptomatic, and cleared by the end of this study, and a single dose was able to generate immune responses.

Safety and Immunogenicity of Live Viral Vaccines in a Multicenter Cohort of Pediatric Transplant Recipients.

Importance: Live vaccines (measles-mumps-rubella [MMR] and varicella-zoster virus [VZV]) have not been recommended after solid organ transplant due to concern for inciting vaccine strain infection in an immunocompromised host. However, the rates of measles, mumps, and varicella are rising nationally and internationally, leaving susceptible immunocompromised children at risk for life-threating conditions. Objective: To determine the safety and immunogenicity of live vaccines in pediatric liver and kidney transplant recipients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included select pediatric liver and kidney transplant recipients who had not completed their primary MMR and VZV vaccine series and/or who displayed nonprotective serum antibody levels at enrollment between January 1, 2002, and February 28, 2023. Eligibility for live vaccine was determined by individual US pediatric solid organ transplant center protocols. Exposures: Exposure was defined as receipt of a posttransplant live vaccine. Transplant recipients received 1 to 3 doses of MMR vaccine and/or 1 to 3 doses of VZV vaccine. Main Outcome and Measure: Safety data were collected following each vaccination, and antibody levels were obtained at 0 to 3 months and 1 year following vaccination. Comparisons were performed using Mann-Whitney U test, and factors associated with development of postvaccination protective antibodies were explored using univariate analysis. Results: The cohort included 281 children (270 [96%] liver, 9 [3%] kidney, 2 [1%] liver-kidney recipients) from 18 centers. The median time from transplant to enrollment was 6.3 years (IQR, 3.4-11.1 years). The median age at first posttransplant vaccine was 8.9 years (IQR, 4.7-13.8 years). A total of 202 of 275 (73%) children were receiving low-level monotherapy immunosuppression at the time of vaccination. The majority of children developed protective antibodies following vaccination (107 of 149 [72%] varicella, 130 of 152 [86%] measles, 100 of 120 [83%] mumps, and 124 of 125 [99%] rubella). One year post vaccination, the majority of children who initially mounted protective antibodies maintained this protection (34 of 44 [77%] varicella, 45 of 49 [92%] measles, 35 of 42 [83%] mumps, 51 of 54 [94%] rubella). Five children developed clinical varicella, all of which resolved within 1 week. There were no cases of measles or rubella and no episodes of graft rejection within 1 month of vaccination. There was no association between antibody response and immunosuppression level at the time of vaccination. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that live vaccinations may be safe and immunogenic after solid organ transplant in select pediatric recipients and can offer protection against circulating measles, mumps, and varicella.

Herpes Zoster Reactivation After mRNA and Adenovirus-Vectored Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination: Analysis of National Health Insurance Database.

BACKGROUND: Our study aimed to determine the risk of herpes zoster reactivation and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination (mRNA vaccine [BNT162b2] and adenovirus-vectored vaccine [ChAdOx1 nCoV-19]). METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed herpes zoster cases diagnosed between 26 February 2021 and 30 June 2021 and registered in the National Health Insurance Service database. A matched case-control study with a 1:3 matching ratio and a propensity score matching (PSM) study with a 1:1 ratio of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals were performed. RESULTS: In the matched case control analysis, BNT162b2 was associated with an increased risk of herpes zoster reactivation (first dose adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-1.15; second dose aOR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.12-1.23). PSM analysis revealed a statistically significant increase in risk within 18 days following any vaccination (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.16). BNT162b2 was associated with an increased risk at 18 days postvaccination (aHR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.35-2.02) and second dose (aHR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.19). However, the risk did not increase in both analyses of ChAdOx1 vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: mRNA COVID-19 vaccination possibly increases the risk of herpes zoster reactivation, and thus close follow-up for herpes zoster reactivation is required.

Combined measles-mumps-rubella-varicella vaccine and febrile convulsions: the risk considered in the broad context.

INTRODUCTION: Studies on quadrivalent measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (MMRV) vaccines have indicated a twofold increased relative risk of febrile convulsion (FC) after the first dose compared to MMR and V administered at the same medical visit (MMR+V). AREAS COVERED: This narrative review contextualizes FC occurrence after the first MMRV vaccine dose from a clinical perspective and outlines approaches to attenuate FC occurrence post-vaccination. EXPERT OPINION: While the relative FC risk increases after the first dose of MMRV compared to MMR+V vaccine in measles-naïve infants, the attributable risk is low versus the overall FC risk in the pediatric population triggered by other causes, like natural exposure to pathogens or routine vaccination. No increased risk of FC has been reported after MMRV co-administration with other routine vaccines compared to MMRV alone. Based on our findings and considering the MMRV vaccination benefits (fewer injections, higher coverage, better vaccination compliance), the overall benefit-risk profile of MMRV vaccine is considered to remain positive. Potential occurrence of FC in predisposed children (e.g. with personal/family history of FC) may be attenuated if they receive MMR+V instead of MMRV as the first dose. It is also important to monitor vaccinees for fever during the first 2 weeks post-vaccination.

Children under 5 years of age can sometimes have convulsions when they get a fever during illness or after vaccination. These are called febrile convulsions, and, in most cases, they leave no lasting damage, and the child outgrows them. After a combined vaccine against four childhood illnesses (measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella) became available, concerns appeared that measles-naïve children who received a first dose of this vaccine had a higher risk of febrile convulsions than children vaccinated with two separate vaccines (one against measles, mumps, and rubella, and one against varicella) administered during the same medical visit. However, this risk is low: during the first or the second week after the first vaccine dose, 1 additional child out of approximately 2500 children who receive the combined vaccine will have a febrile convulsion compared to those receiving 2 separate vaccines. In comparison, febrile convulsions due to any cause will appear in 1 out of 25 children younger than 5 years, and in 1 out of 43 children with measles. The combined vaccine has certain advantages over separate vaccines: children receive fewer injections and are more likely to be fully vaccinated against all four diseases. Children who had febrile convulsions before, or with a close relative who had febrile convulsions could be at higher risk of febrile convulsions after the first dose of the combined vaccine. Provided the informed consent from their parents or legal guardians, these children must receive separate vaccines, while all other children may receive the combined vaccine.

Investigation of the safety of live attenuated varicella-zoster virus vaccination in patients with relapse-remitting multiple sclerosis treated with natalizumab: A case series and review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: It is generally recommended to avoid live attenuated vaccines in patients treated with high efficacy disease-modifying treatment (DMT). However, a delay in starting DMT in highly active or aggressive multiple sclerosis (MS) might lead to a significant disability. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to report a case series of 16 highly active RRMS patients who received the live-attenuated varicella-zoster virus (VZV) vaccine during treatment with natalizumab. METHODS: This retrospective case series was conducted between September 2015 and February 2022 at the MS Research Center of Sina and Qaem hospital, Tehran, Mashhad, Iran, to identify the outcome of highly active MS patients who received the live-attenuated VZV vaccine on natalizumab. RESULTS: Two males and 14 females were included in this study, with a mean age of 25.5 ± 8.4-year-old. 10 patients were naïve cases of highly active MS, and six were escalated to natalizumab. The patients received two doses of live attenuated VZV vaccine after a mean of 6.72 cycles of natalizumab treatment. Except for the one who experienced mild chickenpox infection, no serious adverse event or disease activity was evident after vaccination. CONCLUSION: While our data do not confirm the safety of the live attenuated VZV vaccine in natalizumab recipients, it highlights the importance of case-by-case decision-making in MS management based on the risk-benefit assessment.

Investigation of Potency and Safety of Live-Attenuated Peste des Petits Ruminant Virus Vaccine in Goats by Detection of Cellular and Humoral Immune Response.

The peste des petits ruminant (PPR) virus is a transboundary virus found in small domestic ruminants that causes high morbidity and mortality in naive herds. PPR can be effectively controlled and eradicated by vaccinating small domestic ruminants with a live-attenuated peste des petits ruminant virus (PPRV) vaccine, which provides long-lasting immunity. We studied the potency and safety of a live-attenuated vaccine in goats by detecting their cellular and humoral immune responses. Six goats were subcutaneously vaccinated with a live-attenuated PPRV vaccine according to the manufacturer's instructions, and two goats were kept in contact. Following vaccination, the goats were monitored daily, and we recorded their body temperature and clinical score. Heparinized blood and serum were collected for a serological analysis, and swab samples and EDTA blood were collected to detect the PPRV genome. The safety of the used PPRV vaccine was confirmed by the absence of PPR-related clinical signs, a negative pen-side test, a low virus genome load as detected with RT-qPCR on the vaccinated goats, and the lack horizontal transmission between the in-contact goats. The strong humoral and cellular immune responses detected in the vaccinated goats showed that the live-attenuated PPRV vaccine has a strong potency in goats. Therefore, live-attenuated vaccines against PPR can be used to control and eradicate PRR.

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.

Cardiac events following JYNNEOS vaccination for prevention of Mpox.

The incidence of cardiac adverse events following JYNNEOS vaccination for prevention of mpox is unknown, however the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices states that people with underlying cardiac risk factors should be counseled about the theoretical risk for myopericarditis following vaccination. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 2,126 patients who were vaccinated with at least 1 dose of JYNNEOS vaccine and searched the Kaiser Permanente Northwest databases, including the electronic health record, to evaluate for cardiac adverse events of special interest (AESI). After physician adjudication, there were 10 confirmed cardiac AESI for an incidence of 3.1 per 1000 doses (exact 95% CI, 1.5 to 5.7), however none of these events could be directly attributed to vaccination. This retrospective cohort study of JYNNEOS vaccination for prevention of mpox identified 10 cardiac events that all had alternative explanations; and no hospitalizations or serious adverse outcomes were attributed to vaccination.