4.3 Review

Vaccinations in patients with multiple sclerosis: A Delphi consensus statement

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
Volume 27, Issue 3, Pages 347-359

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458520952310

Keywords

Consensus statement; Delphi process; immunisations; infection prevention; multiple sclerosis; vaccines

Funding

  1. Biogen
  2. Merck
  3. Novartis
  4. Roche
  5. Sanofi-Genzyme
  6. Teva
  7. GSK
  8. MSD

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recommendations for vaccinations in patients with multiple sclerosis include considering risks and benefits carefully, and there is an urgent need for more research to guide evidence-based decision making.
Background: Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) are at increased risk of infection. Vaccination can mitigate these risks but only if safe and effective in MS patients, including those taking disease-modifying drugs. Methods: A modified Delphi consensus process (October 2017-June 2018) was used to develop clinically relevant recommendations for making decisions about vaccinations in patients with MS. A series of statements and recommendations regarding the efficacy, safety and timing of vaccine administration in patients with MS were generated in April 2018 by a panel of experts based on a review of the published literature performed in October 2017. Results: Recommendations include the need for an 'infectious diseases card' of each patient's infectious and immunisation history at diagnosis in order to exclude and eventually treat latent infections. We suggest the implementation of the locally recommended vaccinations, if possible at MS diagnosis, otherwise with vaccination timing tailored to the planned/current MS treatment, and yearly administration of the seasonal influenza vaccine regardless of the treatment received. Conclusion: Patients with MS should be vaccinated with careful consideration of risks and benefits. However, there is an urgent need for more research into vaccinations in patients with MS to guide evidence-based decision making.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available