4.6 Article

Impact of Immunosuppression on Recall Immune Responses to Influenza Vaccination in Stable Renal Transplant Recipients

Journal

TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 97, Issue 8, Pages 846-853

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.TP.0000438024.10375.2d

Keywords

Influenza vaccine; Plasma cells; B cells; T cells; Kidney transplantation; Immunosuppression

Funding

  1. NIH [P01AI097113, R01AI083452, R01AI072630]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. The recommendation by the American Society of Transplantation for annual trivalent inactivated influenza vaccination greater than 3 to 6 months post-kidney transplantation provides a unique opportunity to test the in vivo impact of immunosuppression on recall T- and B-cell responses to influenza vaccination. Methods. This study took advantage of recent breakthroughs in the single-cell quantification of human peripheral blood B-cell responses to prospectively evaluate both B- and T-cell responses to the seasonal (2010 and 2011) influenza vaccine in 23 stable renal transplant recipients and 22 healthy controls. Results and Conclusion. The results demonstrate that the early B-cell response to influenza vaccination, quantified by the frequency of influenza-specific antibody-secreting cells (ASC) in peripheral blood, was significantly reduced in stable transplant recipients compared to healthy controls. The magnitude of the seroresponse and the rate of sero-conversion were also blunted. The influenza-specific interferon-gamma (IFNF) T-cell response was significantly reduced in transplant recipients; however, there was no correlation between the magnitude of the influenza-specific IgG ASC and IFNF responses. The induction of memory T- and B-cell responses to influenza vaccination supports the recommendation to vaccinate while the blunted responses demonstrate the efficacy of immunosuppression in controlling memory responses individual transplant recipients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available