Longterm Efficacy of an Antipneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine among Patients with Autoimmune Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the longterm humoral response of an antipneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-associated spondyloarthropathy (SpA), and the effect of demographic and clinical factors and treatment on the longterm efficacy of the vaccine. METHODS: A total of 145 consecutive patients treated with biologics [tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) or interleukin 6 (IL-6) receptor inhibitors] or methotrexate (MTX) participated in this study. Fifteen were excluded because of absent information regarding their vaccination status (n = 9) or because of technical problems in obtaining their serum sample (n = 6). They were diagnosed with RA (n = 63, 48.5%), PsA (n = 29, 22.3%), AS (n = 28, 21.5%), or IBD-associated SpA (n = 3, 2.3%). Their mean age was 54.6 years, and 61.5% were women. Data were collected on the timing of vaccination, demographic and clinical characteristics, and treatment, and patients' serum antipneumococcal antibody levels were tested. RESULTS: Two-thirds of the patients (67.7%) had received PPSV23 45 months (mean) earlier. Treatment included TNF-α inhibitors (73.9%), IL-6 receptor inhibitors (13.1%), or MTX without a biological treatment (13%). The uptake of vaccination was significantly higher in the older population (> 65 yrs). Vaccinated patients had significantly higher antibody levels compared with vaccine-naive patients. The antibody levels had been preserved after 10 years. MTX use, but not biologics, was associated with significantly lower antibody levels. CONCLUSION: The longterm efficacy of the PPSV23 vaccination seems to be preserved among patients with RA, PsA, AS, and IBD-associated SpA for at least 10 years. Efficacy is slightly impaired by MTX, but it is not affected by biologics. These findings suggest that revaccination after 5 years might not be needed for all, and testing the antibody titers should be considered to identify those who may benefit from revaccination.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".