Objective Immunization is an essential component of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) care. Nevertheless, vaccine coverage in RA is suboptimal. Contextual, individual, and vaccine-related factors influence vaccine acceptance. However, barriers and facilitators of vaccination in RA are not well defined. The aim of this study was to assess perspectives of RA patients and health care professionals (HCPs) involved in RA care of barriers and facilitators regarding influenza and pneumococcal vaccines. Methods Eight focus groups (4 with RA patients and 4 with HCPs), and eight semi-structured open-ended individual interviews with vaccine hesitant RA patients were conducted. Data were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and imported to the MAXQDA software. Analysis using the framework of vaccine hesitancy proposed by the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on Immunization was conducted. Results RA patients and HCPs reported common and specific barriers and facilitators to influenza vaccination that included contextual, individual and/or group, and vaccine and/or vaccination specific factors. A key contextual influence on vaccination was patients’ perception of the media, pharmaceutical industry, authorities, scientists, and the medical community at large. Among the individual-related influences, experiences with vaccination, knowledge/awareness, and beliefs about health and disease prevention were considered to impact vaccine-acceptance. Vaccine-related factors including concerns of vaccine side effects such as RA flares, safety of new formulations, mechanism of action, access to vaccines and costs associated with vaccination were identified as actionable barriers. Conclusion Acknowledging RA patients' perceived barriers to influenza and pneumococcal vaccination and implementing specific strategies to address them might increase vaccination coverage in this population.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective Patients with rheumatic disease (RD) have an increased risk of influenza and its complications. Despite inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) recommendations, IIV uptake in patients with RD is suboptimal, a problem of increasing importance in the COVID‐19 era. We estimated the frequency of IIV hesitancy and associated factors among Canadian patients with RD. Methods A cross‐sectional vaccine hesitancy survey was completed by rheumatology clinic patients (November 2019 to January 2020). Patients rated their likelihood of receiving the influenza vaccine (scale of 0‐10). We categorized these as follows: likely to refuse (scale of 0‐2), uncertain (scale of 3‐7), or likely to accept (scale of 8‐10). Multivariate logistical regression was used to evaluate factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. Results A total of 282 patients (63.5% of those approached) completed the survey, with 165 (58.5%) being likely to accept, 67 (23.8%) being likely to refuse, and 50 (17.7%) uncertain. Uncertain patients were younger and more likely to be employed than those in the other two groups. No previous influenza vaccination (odds ratio [OR] 36.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.3‐252.9), belief that vaccination should not be mandatory (OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.0‐0.7), unwillingness to take time off work to be vaccinated (OR 6.8, 95% CI 1.5‐30.6), and distrust in pharmaceutical companies (OR 41.0, 95% CI 5.6‐301.5) predicted likeliness to refuse. Reluctance to pay for vaccination (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.1‐7.5) and no previous influenza vaccination (OR 18.9, 95% CI 3.3‐109.7) predicted uncertainty. Conclusion More than 40% of rheumatology patients are either likely to refuse or uncertain about receiving IIV. This contributes to suboptimal vaccine coverage in this population. Interventions addressing these concerns are needed, particularly in the COVID‐19 era.

The potential increased risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) post-influenza vaccine is a concern in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of studies reporting the effects of influenza vaccination in patients with cancer during ICI treatment. We searched five electronic databases until 01/2022. Two authors independently selected studies, appraised their quality, and collected data. The primary outcome was the determination of pooled irAE rates. Secondary outcomes included determination of immunogenicity and influenza infection rates and cancer-related outcomes. Nineteen studies (26 publications, n = 4705) were included; 89.5% were observational. Vaccinated patients reported slighter lower rates of irAEs compared to unvaccinated patients (32% versus 41%, respectively). Seroprotection for influenza type A was 78%–79%, and for type B was 75%. Influenza and irAE-related death rates were similar between groups. The pooled proportion of participants reporting a laboratory-confirmed infection was 2% (95% CI 0% to 6%), and influenza-like illness was 14% (95% CI 2% to 32%). No differences were reported on the rates of laboratory-confirmed infection between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. Longer progression-free and overall survival was also observed in vaccinated compared with unvaccinated patients. Current evidence suggests that influenza vaccination is safe in patients receiving ICIs, does not increase the risk of irAEs, and may improve survival.