[Antiviral immunization of immunocompromised adults, literature review]. / Vaccination antivirale des adultes immunodéprimés, revue de la littérature.

PURPOSE: Immunization, by preventing infections, has a major interest for the immunocompromised subjects. The aim of this article is to make a point on data concerning efficacy (in terms of immunogenicity) and safety of viral vaccines available in France and to synthesize existing guidelines for four groups of patients: solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients, HIV infected persons and patients treated by immunosuppressive drugs for a systemic disease. CURRENT KNOWLEDGE AND KEY POINTS: Available data about vaccines immunogenicity and safety for immunocompromised adults are rare. However, those data indicate that, when immunization contraindications and recommendations are applied, vaccines remain well tolerated and most of the time immunogenic, even if the percentage of responders is lower compared to non immunocompromised persons. Still, the specific guidelines that have been elaborated for immunization of immunocompromised adults are imprecise and incomplete, emphasizing a lack of data about this topic. FUTURE PROSPECTS: Clinical studies remain necessary to precise vaccines immunogenicity and safety for immunocompromised adults. In the meantime, a harmonization of immunization practices for immunocompromised adults should be proposed, so as to help practitioners to succeed a better immunization coverage for these patients.

Vaccination in adults with auto-immune disease and/or drug related immune deficiency: results of the GEVACCIM Delphi survey.

INTRODUCTION: There are insufficient data regarding the efficacy and safety of vaccination in patients with auto-immune disease (AID) and/or drug-related immune deficiency (DRID). The objective of this study was to obtain professional agreement on vaccine practices in these patients. METHODS: A Delphi survey was carried out with physicians recognised for their expertise in vaccinology and/or the caring for adult patients with AID and/or DRID. For each proposed vaccination practice, the experts' opinion and level of agreement were evaluated. RESULTS: The proposals relating to patients with AID specified: the absence of risk of AID relapse following vaccination; the possibility of administering live virus vaccines (LVV) to patients not receiving immunosuppressants; the pertinence of determining protective antibody titre before vaccination; the absence of need for specific monitoring following the vaccination. The proposals relating to patients with DRID specified that a 3-6 month delay is needed between the end of these treatments and the vaccination with LVV. There is no contraindication to administering LVV in patients receiving systemic corticosteroids prescribed for less than two weeks, regardless of their dose, or at a daily dose not exceeding 10mg of prednisone, if this involves prolonged treatment. Out of 14 proposals, the level of agreement between the experts was "very good" for eleven, and "good" for the remaining three. CONCLUSION: Proposals for vaccine practices in patients with AID and/or DRID should aid with decision-making in daily medical practice and provide better vaccine coverage for these patients.