Vaccination of patients with Encephalomyelitis disseminata

Quast, U; Herder, Christina; Zwisler, O

doi:10.1016/0264-410x(91)90104-e

Cited by 16 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the case of relapse during the control period, these scales were also administered at the time of clinical worsening and then repeated once recovery was achieved. Based on the literature, analyses were performed under the assumption that a relapse due to vaccination would occur within 2 months after vaccination [1,[20][21][22][23][24].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk of disease relapse, safety and tolerability of SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination in patients with chronic inflammatory neuropathies

Doneddu

Briani

Cocito³

et al. 2023

Euro J of Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and purpose: The aim was to evaluate the risk of relapse after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination, and its safety and tolerability, in patients with chronic inflammatory neuropathies. Methods:In this multicenter, cohort and case-crossover study, the risk of relapse associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was assessed by comparing the frequency of relapse in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) and multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) patients who underwent or did not undergo vaccination. Frequency of relapse in the 3 months prior to and after vaccination, and safety and tolerability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, were also assessed.Results: In all, 336 patients were included (278 CIDP, 58 MMN). Three hundred and seven (91%) patients underwent SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Twenty-nine patients (9%) did not undergo vaccination. Mild and transient relapses were observed in 16 (5%) patients ( 13CIDP, 3 MMN) after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and in none of the patients who did not undergo vaccination (relative risk [RR] 3.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-52.25).There was no increase in the specific risk of relapse associated with type of vaccine or diagnosis. Comparison with the 3-month control period preceding vaccination revealed an increased risk of relapse after vaccination (RR 4.00, 95% CI 1.35-11.82), which was restricted to CIDP patients (RR 3.25, 95% CI 1.07-9.84). The safety profile of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was characterized by short-term, mild-to-moderate local and systemic adverse events. Conclusions:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in CIDP and MMN patients does not seem to be associated with an increased risk of relapse at the primary end-point, although a slightly increased risk in CIDP patients was found compared to the 3 months before vaccination.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk of disease relapse, safety and tolerability of SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination in patients with chronic inflammatory neuropathies

Doneddu

Briani

Cocito³

et al. 2023

Euro J of Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Until 2000, various studies had been carried out. Some of these case/control or cohort studies (Myers et al,1977;Quast et al,1991) did not give statistically significant results linking hepatitis B vaccination to the onset of demyelinizatory difficulties.…”

Section: Scientific Proof Via Expert Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 96%

Recognition by French courts of compensation for post-vaccination multiple sclerosis: the consequences with regard to expert practice

Rougé-Maillart

Guillaume

Jousset³

et al. 2007

Med Sci Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past few years, despite scientific uncertainties, French courts have awarded compensation to sufferers of multiple sclerosis (MS) which occurred following vaccination against hepatitis B. These legal decisions have aroused fierce criticism in the medical world. Both a judgment given on 25 May 2004 by the Court of Cassation and a new publication in the journal Neurology have encouraged us to look once more at this controversial issue. French judges began compensating patients with MS at the end of the 1990s. One of the first judgments was given in 2001 by the Court of Appeal of Versailles when a pharmaceutical laboratory was held liable for the onset of MS following vaccination against hepatitis B. On appeal, the Court of Cassation overturned the judgment in September 2003, finding that the Court of Appeal judges had based their decision on a hypothetical causal link. However, the only reason why the Court of Appeal judgment was quashed was the contradictory evidence on which the judges had based their presumptions. Several of the judgments given since that date seem to confirm this hypothesis. On 25 May 2004, the 2nd civil law chamber recognized that MS which occurs following a vaccination against hepatitis B (a vaccination carried out for work-related purposes) could be considered as an accident at work, without questioning the possible causal link between the illness and the vaccine. This jurisprudence in the matter of hepatitis B vaccination shows the need for great care in expert practice. Effectively, when confronted with drug related imputability, the expert usually bases his reasoning on three points: the causal role of the generating factor, the chronology and other causes of damage. In terms of MS, all these factors are modified. More than ever, an expert must, in terms of imputability, be objective, prudent and clear in his conclusions.

show abstract

“…10 In contrast, five cases of exacerbation of definite or possible MS have been reported after Sabin polio vaccine (Class IV evidence). 13,14 Thus, there is insufficient published evidence to support or to reject an increased risk of MS exacerbation after live attenuated poliovirus vaccination (Level U Recommendation).…”

Section: Does Vaccination Increase the Risk Of Exacerbations Of Ms Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Immunization and MS [RETIRED]

Rutschmann¹,

McCrory²,

Matchar³

2002

Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Objective:To review the risk of MS exacerbations after infectious episodes potentially preventable by vaccination, and the risks and benefits of immunizing patients with MS. Methods: The authors searched MEDLINE (1966 to January 2001; U.S. National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD), HealthSTAR, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) database (Cinahl Information Systems, Glendale, CA) for English-language articles. Each study was summarized and rated for quality of evidence. Then feasible data were pooled and analyzed in metaanalysis. Results: The risk of contracting common infectious diseases in patients with MS is not well established. There is strong evidence for an increased risk of MS exacerbations during weeks around an infectious episode. There is strong evidence against an increased risk of MS exacerbation after influenza immunization. There is no evidence that hepatitis B, varicella, tetanus, or Bacille Calmette-Guerin vaccines increase the risk of MS exacerbations. Insufficient evidence was found for other vaccines. Conclusions: Evidence supports 1) strategies to minimize the risk of acquiring infectious diseases that may trigger exacerbations of MS; and 2) the safety of using influenza, hepatitis B, varicella, tetanus, and Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccines in patients with MS. NEUROLOGY 2002;59:1837-1843 Although the direct or the indirect pathogenic role of numerous infectious agents is debated, 1,2 there is evidence that MS exacerbations occur around infectious episodes, which could potentially be prevented by vaccination. 3,4 However, there are concerns about the safety of immunization in patients with MS, particularly about the risk of relapses after vaccination. To address these concerns, the MS Council for Clinical Practice Guidelines commissioned a systematic review to obtain background for guidelines on immunization and convened an expert panel to establish guidelines. This systematic review has three objectives. First, we aim to provide the information on the need to vaccinate patients with MS by evaluating the risk of MS exacerbation after potentially preventable infections. Second, we review the available evidence on safety and efficacy of vaccines in patients with MS. Finally, we provide an overview of the guidelines for vaccinating patients with MS. Two topic questions were formulated to address the need to vaccinate patients with MS: 1) Are vaccine-preventable infectious diseases more frequent in patients with MS than in the general population? 2) Do vaccine-preventable infectious diseases increase the risk of MS exacerbations?Two other topic questions addressed the risks and the benefits of immunizing patients with MS: 3) Does vaccination increase the risk of exacerbations of MS, and is there a difference in this risk between live attenuated and inactivated vaccines? 4) Are vaccines as effective in patients with MS as in the general population?Search strategy and inclusion process. We reviewed English language MEDLINE (from 1966 to

show abstract

Vaccination of patients with Encephalomyelitis disseminata

Cited by 16 publications

References 10 publications

Risk of disease relapse, safety and tolerability of SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination in patients with chronic inflammatory neuropathies

Risk of disease relapse, safety and tolerability of SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination in patients with chronic inflammatory neuropathies

Recognition by French courts of compensation for post-vaccination multiple sclerosis: the consequences with regard to expert practice

Immunization and MS [RETIRED]

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About