Tetravalent Influenza Vaccine Is Not Associated With Neuroaxonal Damage in Multiple Sclerosis Patients
- PMID: 34512642
- PMCID: PMC8428149
- DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.718895
Tetravalent Influenza Vaccine Is Not Associated With Neuroaxonal Damage in Multiple Sclerosis Patients
Abstract
Background: Efficacy of vaccines and disease activity linked to immunization are major concerns among people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS).
Objective: To assess antibody responses to seasonal influenza antigens and vaccine-associated neuroaxonal damage utilizing serum neurofilament light chain (sNfL) in pwMS receiving dimethyl fumarate (DMF).
Methods: In this prospective study, the 2020/2021 seasonal tetravalent influenza vaccine was administered to 20 pwMS treated with DMF and 15 healthy controls (HCs). The primary endpoints were responder rate of strain-specific antibody production (seroconversion or significant (4-fold) increase in influenza-antibody titers for ≥2/4 strains) at 30 days post-vaccination and changes in sNfL levels.
Results: All patients treated with DMF fulfilled the responder criteria for immunization compared with 53% of the controls. However, higher proportions of HCs already had influenza-antibody titers ≥1:40 at baseline (53% vs. 41%, p = 0.174). sNfL levels were comparable among both groups at baseline and did not increase 34 days after vaccination. In addition, no clinical or radiological disease reactivation was found.
Conclusion: DMF-treated patients mount an adequate humoral immune response to influenza vaccines. Within the limits of the small cohort investigated, our data suggest that influenza immunization is not associated with clinical or subclinical disease reactivation.
Keywords: COVID-19; NfL; antibody response; immunization; influenza; titers; vaccination.
Copyright © 2021 Moser, Seiberl, Feige, Bieler, Radlberger, O’Sullivan, Pilz, Harrer, Schwenker, Haschke-Becher, Machegger, Grimm, Redlberger-Fritz, Buchmann, Khalil, Kvas, Trinka and Wipfler.
Conflict of interest statement
Author EK was employed by company Hermesoft. TM received travel support and honoraria for presentations or participation on advisory boards from Biogen Idec, Celgene, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Merck, and Teva. ET has received consultation fees and/or speakers honoraria from Arvelle, Argenix, Angellini, Bial, Biogen Idec, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eisai, Epilog, GL Pharma, GW Pharmaceuticals, Ever Pharma, Hikma, LivaNova, Marinus, Medtronics, Newbridge, Novartis, Sanofi, Genzyme, and UCB Pharma. MK has received speaker honoraria from Bayer, Novartis, Merck, Biogen Idec, and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and serves on scientific advisory boards for Biogen Idec, Merck Serono, Roche, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Gilead. He received research grants from Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Biogen, and Novartis. AB was trained within the frame of the PhD Program Molecular Medicine of the Medical University of Graz. JF received travel support and honoraria for presentations from Biogen, Merck, Roche, and Sanofi. MS received travel support from Biogen, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Roche, Teva, and Novartis. PW has received consultation fees and/or speakers honoraria from Bayer, Biogen Idec, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. He received research grants from Biogen Idec and Merck. EK has received consultation fees from Astra Zeneca, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Genzyme-Sanofi, Gilead, Glock, Merck, Novartis Pharma, Pfizer, Roche, Servier, and Vertex. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Figures



References
-
- World Health Organization (WHO) . Report of the SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy. Vaccine Hesitancy (2014) 33:4161–64. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.036 - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical