Immune response to vaccines in children with celiac disease

Table 1 Immune response to vaccinations in youths with celiac disease

Ref.	Year	Country	Study design	Patients population and sample size	Vaccine	Non responders	HLA
Park et al[11]	2007	Japan	Prospective	26 (mean age ± SD, 9.2 ± 4.6 yr) untreated CD vs 18 (10.4 ± 3.8) controls	HBV	53.90%	NA
						vs
						11.1%, P < 0.05
					RUBELLA	0%
						vs
						0%
					TETANUS	3.90%
						vs
						0%, P = 1.0
					HIB	33%
						vs
						44.4%, P = 0.53
Nemes et al[12]	2008	Finland	Prospective	22 (mean age, 8.8 yr) treated CD prospectively immunized; 27 (16.7 yr) untreated CD; 79 (16.7 yr) treated CD vs 113 (16.1 yr) controls	HBV	0.50%	Group 1 (22 treated CD):
						74.00%	HLA DQ2
						38.60% vs 24.8%, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P = 0.102	Group 2 (53/106 treated and untreated CD):
							51: HLA DQ2
							2: HLA DQ8
Leonardi et al[16]	2009	Italy	Retrospective	60 (mean age, 9.32 yr) treated CD vs 60 (10.1 yr) controls	HBV	50%	15/60:
						vs	13 HLA-DQ2
						11.6%, P < 0.0001	2 HLA-DQ8
Ertem et al[13]	2010	Turkey	Retrospective	40 vaccinated (mean age ± SD, 12.4 ± 5.4 yr) treated CD vs 54 (9.8 ± 3.6 yr) controls	HBV	32.50%	37.5% CD
						vs	23.8% controls:
						14.8%, P < 0.05	HLA DRB1*03
			Prospective	28 prospectively vaccinated treated CD		3.60%	21% CD
							2.4% controls:
							HLA DRB1*07
							55% CD
							14.6% controls:
							HLA DQB1*02
							30% CD
							47.6% controls:
							HLA DQB1*03
Ertekin et al[15]	2011	Turkey	Retrospective	52 (mean age ± SD, 10.7 ± 4 yr) CD; vs 20 (10.7 ± 4 yr) controls	HBV	38.50%	NA
						vs
						10%, P < 0.05
Balamtekın et al[14]	2011	Turkey	Retrospective	64 (mean age ± SD, 4.69 ± 2.31 yr) treated and untreated CD vs 49 (mean age 5.45 ± 2.92 yr) controls	HBV	21.90%	NA
						vs
						4.1%, P = 0.001
Urganci and Kalyoncu[18]	2013	Turkey	Prospective	30 (mean age ± SD, 6.15 ± 4.1 yr) treated and untreated CD vs 50 ( 8.13 ± 1.7 yr) controls	HBV	30%	NA
						vs
						10%, P = 0.03
Leonardi et al[17]	2011	Italy	Retrospective	66 (mean age ± SD, 8.34 ± 3.47 yr) CD, vs 50 (7.58 ± 3.51 yr) controls	HBV	53%	NA
						vs
						16%, P < 0.0001
					POLIO	100%
						vs
						100%, P = NS
					DIPHTHERIA	100%
						vs
						100%, P = NS
					TETANUS	100%
						vs
						100%, P = NS
					MEASLE	72%
						vs
						82%, P < 0.0001
					PAROTITIS	81%
						vs
						92%, P = NS
					RUBELLA	81%
						vs
						80%, P = NS
					PERTUSSIS	54%
						vs
						54%, P = NS
Leonardi et al[19]	2015	Italy	Prospective	30 (mean age, 6 yr) CD/DMT1 vs 100 (13.6 yr) DMT1 vs 60 (8.6 yr) CD	HBV	53.3% vs	NA
						38.2% vs
						50%, P > 0.02
Sari et al[20]	2011	Turkey	Prospective	33 (mean age ± SD, 8.4 ± 3.6 yr) CD vs 62 (8.9 ± 3.6 yr) controls	HAV	21.2% (after 1 mo)	62.1% CD
						3% (after 7 mo)	21.8% controls:
						vs	HLA-DQ2
						22.6% (after 1 mo)	34.8% CD
						1.6% (after 7 mo)	9.7% controls:
							HLA-DR3
							13.6% CD
							4.8% controls
							HLA-DR7
Schäppi et al[21]	2012	Switzerland	Prospective	14 (mean age 12.9 yr) treated CD vs 14 (12.9 yr) controls	Influenza	0	50% CD:
					A/H1N1/09	vs	HLA DQ2
						0	heterozygous
							50% CD:
							HLA DQ2
							homozygous
Filippelli et al[24]	2016	Italy	Prospective	51 CD children at diagnosis	HBV	30.60%	23.50%
							HLA DQ2
							Omozygous
							13.70%
							HLA DQ2/DQ8

HBV: Hepatitis B virus; CD: Celiac disease; HLA: Human leukocyte antigen; NA: Non available; DMT1: Diabetes mellitus type 1; NS: Not statistically significant; HAV: Hepatitis A virus; SD: Standard deviation.