Serological responses against seasonal influenza viruses in patients with multiple myeloma treated or untreated with daratumumab after two doses of tetravalent vaccine.
daratumumab
influenza
multiple myeloma
vaccine
Journal
International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases
ISSN: 1878-3511
Titre abrégé: Int J Infect Dis
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 9610933
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 May 2024
23 May 2024
Historique:
received:
18
04
2024
revised:
17
05
2024
accepted:
20
05
2024
medline:
26
5
2024
pubmed:
26
5
2024
entrez:
25
5
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Daratumumab-treated myeloma patients may face increased seasonal influenza risk due to weakened post-vaccination immune responses, especially with daratumumab treatment. We aimed to assess humoral responses to boosted influenza vaccination in daratumumab-treated or -untreated patients. In a single-center study, we evaluated humoral responses (hemagglutination-inhibition assay) one month following a two-injection (4-weeks apart) influenza vaccination (standard dose) in 84 patients with multiple myeloma (40 with daratumumab in the past year). Seroprotection rates (titer ≥1/40) after the second vaccine injection were low across vaccinal subtypes (except for A-H3N2): 71.3% (A-H3N2), 19.7% (A-H1N1pdm09), 9.9% (B-Victoria), 11.3% (B-Yamagata). Only A-H3N2 seroprotection rates significantly increased with the booster in daratumumab-treated patients (30% (12/40) after one injection vs. 55% (22/40) after the boost; p=0.01).After propensity score weighting, daratumumab was not significantly associated with a reduced likelihood of seroprotection against at least one vaccine strain (OR 0.65 [95% CI: 0.22-1.88]). While daratumumab treatment did not lead to a significant reduction in seroprotection rates following influenza vaccination, a booster vaccine injection demonstrated potential benefit for specific strains (A-H3N2) in patients undergoing daratumumab treatment. Nevertheless, the overall low response rates in patients with multiple myeloma necessitates the development of alternative vaccination and prophylaxis strategies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38795841
pii: S1201-9712(24)00179-6
doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2024.107108
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
107108Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of interests The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: F. Lemonnier received research funding from Institut Roche and travel grant from Gilead, G. Melica received honoraria from lectures from Astellas, Pfizer, Gilead, MSD, Janssen. S. Fourati received research grants from Moderna, and consulting fees from Moderna, Astrazeneca, Pfizer, GSK and Cepheid, as well as support for traval from Astellas, Gilead and Pfizer. C. Haioun received research funding and consulting honoraria for lectures from Amgen, Celgen, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, F.Hoffmann-La Roche, Servier, Takeda, Miltenyi. F. Lemonnier received research funding from La Roche Institute and support for attending meetings from Gilead.F. Le Bras received research funding from Takeda and Celgene BMS, and honoraria from Takeda, Kite Gilead and Novartis.K. Belhadj received non-financial research support from AbbVie.