MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200179089 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofab466.100

100. Safety Analysis of Live-Attenuated Measles, Mumps, Rubella Vaccine Among Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients Vaccinated Within Two Years of Transplant

2021· article· en· W4200179089 on OpenAlexaff
Xhoi Mitre, Monica Feeley, Amy C Sherman, Stephen R. Walsh, Matthew P. Cheng, Sanjat Kanjilal, Vincent T. Ho, Lindsey R. Baden, Nicolas C. Issa, Michaël Desjardins

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune responses and vaccinations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationMMR vaccineRubellaMeaslesRashMeasles-Mumps-Rubella VaccineAdverse effectAttenuated vaccinePediatricsImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine is a live-attenuated vaccine usually contraindicated within the first two years of hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT). During the 2019 measles outbreak at our center, the benefits of administering MMR vaccine within the first two years after HCT were weighed against the potential risks. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of patients who received MMR vaccination within two years of an autologous or allogeneic HCT. Patients’ demographics, date and type of HCT, underlying hematologic disease, type of immunosuppressive therapy and date of MMR vaccination were extracted from the electronic medical record. Adverse reactions that could be related to the vaccine were collected for up to 42 days post-vaccination and all hospitalizations and deaths following vaccination were reviewed. Results A total of 129 patients (75 autologous and 54 allogeneic HCT) were vaccinated between 300-729 days after HCT (median of 718 days). The median age at vaccination was 61 years old, 57% of the patients were male and 43% were on immunosuppressive therapy, 87% of whom were on maintenance therapy for multiple myeloma after auto-HCT. Seven patients (5%) had adverse reactions within 42 days of vaccination: six had respiratory tract infections (three with associated fever) and one had a rash leading to a brief hospitalization. This was a 37-year-old female who had an allogeneic HCT 542 days prior to MMR vaccination. She presented with a centrifugal maculopapular rash that was confirmed to be caused by the vaccine strain rubella virus (Fig 1). She fully recovered without sequalae. There was no other vaccine-associated illness identified in the cohort, after a median follow-up of 676 days. Conclusion MMR vaccine appears to be well tolerated in selected HCT recipients when given earlier than 2 years after transplant. No attributable severe outcomes or deaths were described. A mild uncomplicated case of vaccine-associated rubella illness was seen after vaccination. In the setting of a measles outbreak, assessment of potential risks and benefits of MMR vaccination given within two years of HCT remains important. Disclosures Stephen R. Walsh, MDCM, Janssen Vaccines (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Regeneron (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sanofi Pasteur (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Matthew Cheng, MD, GEn1E Lifesciences (Advisor or Review Panel member)Kanvas Biosciences (Board Member, Shareholder)nplex biosciences (Advisor or Review Panel member) Sanjat Kanjilal, MD, MPH, GlaskoSmithKline (Advisor or Review Panel member) Nicolas C. Issa, MD, AiCuris (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Astellas (Scientific Research Study Investigator)GSK (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Merck (Scientific Research Study Investigator)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicImmune responses and vaccinationsFrench-language works237,207