Intradermal vs intramuscular vaccine against hepatitis B infection in dialysis patients

A meta-analysis of randomized trials

F. Fabrizi, V. Dixit, P. Messa, Paul Martin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Chronic dialysis patients are at risk of contracting hepatitis B virus infection and have a diminished immune response to hepatitis B virus vaccine. Recent reports support intradermal administration of hepatitis B virus vaccine in patients on regular dialysis but the efficacy and safety of this approach remain unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled clinical trials to compare seroprotection achieved by intradermal vs intramuscular hepatitis B vaccine, in patients on maintenance dialysis. Meta-analysis of data from 718 adults (14 trials) on long-term dialysis demonstrated that intramuscular hepatitis B vaccination was less likely to achieve seroprotection than intradermal vaccination, the pooled odds ratio was 0.454 (95% CI, 0.3; 0.67), P = 0.001. The test of study heterogeneity was not significant. This difference did not persist during follow-up (6-60 months after completing vaccine schedule), the pooled odds ratio being 0.718 (95% CI, 0.36; 1.47), NS. Some evidence of significant heterogeneity including publication bias was present but stratified analysis in various subgroups showed that this issue did not meaningfully change our results. Intradermal hepatitis B vaccine was safe and well tolerated. We conclude that intradermal hepatitis B vaccine induces a superior response rate compared to intramuscular route at completion of vaccine cycle, despite a lower vaccine dose. No significant advantage was found over longer follow-up. It remains unclear whether the higher seroprotection rate achieved with intradermal route translates into a lower frequency of de novo hepatitis B among patients on maintenance dialysis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)730-737
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Viral Hepatitis
Volume18
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2011

Fingerprint

Hepatitis B Vaccines
Meta-Analysis
Dialysis
Hepatitis B virus
Infection
Vaccines
Hepatitis B
Vaccination
Odds Ratio
Maintenance
Publication Bias
Virus Diseases
Appointments and Schedules
Randomized Controlled Trials
Safety

Keywords

  • dialysis
  • intradermal hepatitis B virus vaccine
  • meta-analysis
  • randomized trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Hepatology
  • Infectious Diseases
  • Virology

Cite this

Intradermal vs intramuscular vaccine against hepatitis B infection in dialysis patients : A meta-analysis of randomized trials. / Fabrizi, F.; Dixit, V.; Messa, P.; Martin, Paul.

In: Journal of Viral Hepatitis, Vol. 18, No. 10, 01.10.2011, p. 730-737.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2a824913afc345b9a90cb3ce0add3498,
title = "Intradermal vs intramuscular vaccine against hepatitis B infection in dialysis patients: A meta-analysis of randomized trials",
abstract = "Chronic dialysis patients are at risk of contracting hepatitis B virus infection and have a diminished immune response to hepatitis B virus vaccine. Recent reports support intradermal administration of hepatitis B virus vaccine in patients on regular dialysis but the efficacy and safety of this approach remain unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled clinical trials to compare seroprotection achieved by intradermal vs intramuscular hepatitis B vaccine, in patients on maintenance dialysis. Meta-analysis of data from 718 adults (14 trials) on long-term dialysis demonstrated that intramuscular hepatitis B vaccination was less likely to achieve seroprotection than intradermal vaccination, the pooled odds ratio was 0.454 (95{\%} CI, 0.3; 0.67), P = 0.001. The test of study heterogeneity was not significant. This difference did not persist during follow-up (6-60 months after completing vaccine schedule), the pooled odds ratio being 0.718 (95{\%} CI, 0.36; 1.47), NS. Some evidence of significant heterogeneity including publication bias was present but stratified analysis in various subgroups showed that this issue did not meaningfully change our results. Intradermal hepatitis B vaccine was safe and well tolerated. We conclude that intradermal hepatitis B vaccine induces a superior response rate compared to intramuscular route at completion of vaccine cycle, despite a lower vaccine dose. No significant advantage was found over longer follow-up. It remains unclear whether the higher seroprotection rate achieved with intradermal route translates into a lower frequency of de novo hepatitis B among patients on maintenance dialysis.",
keywords = "dialysis, intradermal hepatitis B virus vaccine, meta-analysis, randomized trials",
author = "F. Fabrizi and V. Dixit and P. Messa and Paul Martin",
year = "2011",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1365-2893.2010.01354.x",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "730--737",
journal = "Journal of Viral Hepatitis",
issn = "1352-0504",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Intradermal vs intramuscular vaccine against hepatitis B infection in dialysis patients

T2 - A meta-analysis of randomized trials

AU - Fabrizi, F.

AU - Dixit, V.

AU - Messa, P.

AU - Martin, Paul

PY - 2011/10/1

Y1 - 2011/10/1

N2 - Chronic dialysis patients are at risk of contracting hepatitis B virus infection and have a diminished immune response to hepatitis B virus vaccine. Recent reports support intradermal administration of hepatitis B virus vaccine in patients on regular dialysis but the efficacy and safety of this approach remain unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled clinical trials to compare seroprotection achieved by intradermal vs intramuscular hepatitis B vaccine, in patients on maintenance dialysis. Meta-analysis of data from 718 adults (14 trials) on long-term dialysis demonstrated that intramuscular hepatitis B vaccination was less likely to achieve seroprotection than intradermal vaccination, the pooled odds ratio was 0.454 (95% CI, 0.3; 0.67), P = 0.001. The test of study heterogeneity was not significant. This difference did not persist during follow-up (6-60 months after completing vaccine schedule), the pooled odds ratio being 0.718 (95% CI, 0.36; 1.47), NS. Some evidence of significant heterogeneity including publication bias was present but stratified analysis in various subgroups showed that this issue did not meaningfully change our results. Intradermal hepatitis B vaccine was safe and well tolerated. We conclude that intradermal hepatitis B vaccine induces a superior response rate compared to intramuscular route at completion of vaccine cycle, despite a lower vaccine dose. No significant advantage was found over longer follow-up. It remains unclear whether the higher seroprotection rate achieved with intradermal route translates into a lower frequency of de novo hepatitis B among patients on maintenance dialysis.

AB - Chronic dialysis patients are at risk of contracting hepatitis B virus infection and have a diminished immune response to hepatitis B virus vaccine. Recent reports support intradermal administration of hepatitis B virus vaccine in patients on regular dialysis but the efficacy and safety of this approach remain unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled clinical trials to compare seroprotection achieved by intradermal vs intramuscular hepatitis B vaccine, in patients on maintenance dialysis. Meta-analysis of data from 718 adults (14 trials) on long-term dialysis demonstrated that intramuscular hepatitis B vaccination was less likely to achieve seroprotection than intradermal vaccination, the pooled odds ratio was 0.454 (95% CI, 0.3; 0.67), P = 0.001. The test of study heterogeneity was not significant. This difference did not persist during follow-up (6-60 months after completing vaccine schedule), the pooled odds ratio being 0.718 (95% CI, 0.36; 1.47), NS. Some evidence of significant heterogeneity including publication bias was present but stratified analysis in various subgroups showed that this issue did not meaningfully change our results. Intradermal hepatitis B vaccine was safe and well tolerated. We conclude that intradermal hepatitis B vaccine induces a superior response rate compared to intramuscular route at completion of vaccine cycle, despite a lower vaccine dose. No significant advantage was found over longer follow-up. It remains unclear whether the higher seroprotection rate achieved with intradermal route translates into a lower frequency of de novo hepatitis B among patients on maintenance dialysis.

KW - dialysis

KW - intradermal hepatitis B virus vaccine

KW - meta-analysis

KW - randomized trials

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052828203&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80052828203&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2893.2010.01354.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2893.2010.01354.x

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 730

EP - 737

JO - Journal of Viral Hepatitis

JF - Journal of Viral Hepatitis

SN - 1352-0504

IS - 10

ER -