Vaccine response following anti-CD20 therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 905 patients

Seroconversion following COVID-19 vaccination: can we optimize protective response in CD20-treated individuals?

Although there is an ever-increasing number of disease-modifying treatments for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS), few appear to influence coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity. There is concern about the use of anti-CD20-depleting monoclonal antibodies, due to the apparent increased risk of severe disease following severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus two (SARS-CoV-2) infection and inhibition of protective anti-COVID-19 vaccine responses. These antibodies are given as maintenance infusions/injections and cause persistent depletion of CD20+ B cells, notably memory B-cell populations that may be instrumental in the control of relapsing MS. However, they also continuously deplete immature and mature/naïve B cells that form the precursors for infection-protective antibody responses, thus blunting vaccine responses. Seroconversion and maintained SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody levels provide protection from COVID-19. However, it is evident that poor seroconversion occurs in the majority of individuals following initial and booster COVID-19 vaccinations, based on standard 6 monthly dosing intervals. Seroconversion may be optimized in the anti-CD20-treated population by vaccinating prior to treatment onset or using extended/delayed interval dosing (3-6 month extension to dosing interval) in those established on therapy, with B-cell monitoring until (1-3%) B-cell repopulation occurs prior to vaccination. Some people will take more than a year to replete and therefore protection may depend on either the vaccine-induced T-cell responses that typically occur or may require prophylactic, or rapid post-infection therapeutic, antibody or small-molecule antiviral treatment to optimize protection against COVID-19. Further studies are warranted to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of such approaches and whether or not immunity wanes prematurely as has been observed in the other populations.

Considerations on Immunization and Immunosuppression of Patients With Autoimmune Blistering Diseases During COVID-19 Pandemic in Brazil: Case Report

Autoimmune blistering diseases comprise a rare group of potentially life-threatening dermatoses. Management of autoimmune disorders poses a challenge in terms of achieving disease control and preventing adverse events. Treatment often requires an individualized approach considering disease severity, age, comorbidities, and infectious risk especially in the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Knowledge regarding SARS-CoV-2 infection is still evolving and no specific antiviral therapy is available yet. We report four patients with active disease that required adjustment of treatment during the pandemic to discuss the use of immunosuppressants and immunobiologics, weighing potential risks and benefits of each therapy modality and vaccination status.

Antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with lymphoma

Patients with lymphoma are at increased risk for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2); therefore, evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination efficacy is essential. We conducted a prospective observational study to monitor the antibody response in 500 patients with lymphoma after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Antibody levels increased in a stepwise manner after the first and second dose of the vaccine. After completion of the two-dose series, anti-S antibody was negative in 109 patients (21.8%), and below clinically protective levels (anti-S ≥ 264 U/mL) in 236 patients (47.2%). The median anti-S titers at 0-6 months, 7-12 months, 13-24 months, and 24 months after treatment completion were 0.4 U/mL, 3.8 U/mL, 270 U/mL, and 650 U/mL, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that receiving the vaccine < 6 months since completing treatment, white blood cell count < 5050/μL, percentage of CD19 + cells < 10%, CD4 + cells < 27%, immunoglobulin (Ig) A < 195 mg/dL, IgM < 50 mg/dL, serum soluble interleukin 2 receptor > 600 U/mL, and presence of lymphoma cells in the peripheral blood were significantly correlated with anti-S < 264 U/mL. Lymphoma patients had variably impaired antibody response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. We identified various factors to predict COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in lymphoma patients that may help tailoring possible vaccine boosters.

Booster COVID-19 Vaccines for Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disease Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety

BACKGROUND

Seroconversion and longevity of vaccine-induced immune response is blunted in immune-mediated inflammatory disease (IMID) patients owing to immunosuppressive regimens. COVID-19 booster vaccines after a primary series have been proposed with inconclusive evidence on efficacy to date.

METHODS

This PROSPERO-registered systematic review (CRD42022302534) was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, CORD-19, WHO ICTRP, and medRxiv were searched up to 28 February 2022 for eligible studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools.

RESULTS

From 6647 records, 17 prospective studies were included for systematic review and 12 in meta-analysis of primary series non-responders. The risk of bias was low. Pooling 340 non-responders, a booster dose proved effective with 0.47 seroconverting (95% CI: 0.32-0.63, I2 = 82%). Rituximab therapy was associated with significant impairment, with risks of 0.25 (95% CI: 0.17-0.36, I2 = 50.7%) versus 0.81 (95% CI: 0.72-0.87, I2 = 0.0%) for those without rituximab therapy. A systematic review of antibody levels against COVID-19 showed several-fold increases across studies. Incidence of local and systemic adverse events, including disease flares, were either comparable or slightly increased after the booster dose compared to primary series. No major events such as myocarditis or death were reported.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that booster doses are effective in eliciting seroconversion in non-responders, bolstering immunity to COVID-19. It has also not been associated with major adverse events.

The Immunogenicity and Safety of Three Types of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Adult Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Longitudinal Cohort Study

Patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) were seldom enrolled in the studies of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, and real-world data regarding the immunogenicity of different types of vaccines is limited. We aimed to assess the immunogenicity and safety of three types of vaccines (AZD1222, mRNA-1273, and BNT162b2) in 253 patients with IMID and 30 healthcare workers (HCWs). Plasma levels of IgG-antibody against SARS-CoV-2 targeting the receptor-binding domain of spike protein (anti-S/RBD-IgG) were determined by chemiluminescent immunoassay 3–4 weeks after the first-dose and second-dose vaccination. The positive rate and titers of anti-S/RBD-IgG were significantly higher in mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 than in the AZD1222 vaccine. Immunogenicity was augmented after the second dose of any vaccine type in all IMID patients, suggesting that these patients should complete the vaccination series. Anti-S/RBD-IgG titers after first-dose vaccination were significantly lower in RA patients than pSS patients, but there was no significant difference after second-dose vaccination among five groups of IMID patients. The positive rate and titers of anti-S/RBD-IgG were significantly lower in patients receiving abatacept/rituximab therapy than in those receiving other DMARDs. All three SARS-CoV-2 vaccines showed acceptable safety profiles, and the common AEs were injection site reactions. We identified SLE as a significant predictor of increased autoimmunity and would like to promote awareness of the possibility of autoimmunity following vaccination.

Immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with hematologic malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The objectives of this study were to assess the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with hematologic malignancies. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies of immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination stratified by underlying malignancy and published from January 1, 2021, to August 31, 2021, was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Primary outcome was the rate of seropositivity after 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine with rates of seropositivity after 1 dose, rates of positive neutralizing antibodies, cellular responses, and adverse events as secondary outcomes. Rates were pooled from single-arm studies while rates of seropositivity were compared against the rate in healthy controls for comparator studies using a random effects model and expressed as a pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Forty-four studies (16 mixed group, 28 disease specific) with 7064 patients were included in the analysis (2331 after first dose, 4733 after second dose). Overall seropositivity rates were 62% to 66% after 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine and 37% to 51% after 1 dose. The lowest seropositivity rate was 51% in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and was highest in patients with acute leukemia (93%). After 2 doses, neutralizing antibody response rates were 57% to 60%, and cellular response rates were 40% to 75%. Active treatment, ongoing or recent treatment with targeted and CD-20 monoclonal antibody therapies within 12 months were associated with poor immune responses to COVID-19 vaccine. New approaches to prevention are urgently required to reduce COVID-19 infection morbidity and mortality in high-risk patient groups that respond poorly to COVID-19 vaccination.

COVID-19 in people with rheumatic diseases: risks, outcomes, treatment considerations

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought challenges for people with rheumatic disease in addition to those faced by the general population, including concerns about higher risks of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and poor outcomes of COVID-19. The data that are now available suggest that rheumatic disease is associated with a small additional risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and that outcomes of COVID-19 are primarily influenced by comorbidities and particular disease states or treatments. Despite considerable advances in our knowledge of which therapeutic agents provide benefits in COVID-19, and of what constitutes effective vaccination strategies, the specific considerations that apply to people with rheumatic disease are yet to be definitively addressed. An overview of the most important COVID-19 studies to date that relate to people with rheumatic disease can contribute to our understanding of the clinical-care requirements of this population.

Immunogenicity, Effectiveness, and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines in Rheumatic Patients: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Vaccination is one of the most important measures worldwide to halt the spread of the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the efficacy and safety of these vaccines in rheumatic patients are not well explored. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We performed a literature search of the PubMed and EMBASE databases on 17 November 2021. Forty-seven studies relevant to the immunogenicity, efficacy/effectiveness, and safety of COVID-19 vaccines were selected. Results: Our results demonstrated that COVID-19 vaccination is effective in protecting rheumatic patients from severe illness caused by the virus. Both the humoral and cellular immunogenicity of vaccines were impaired in rheumatic patients, which were greatly enhanced after the second vaccine dose. Receiving anti-CD20 therapy was associated with impaired humoral immunogenicity. Adverse events due to COVID-19 vaccines in rheumatic patients were similar to those in healthy controls, except for an increased incidence of arthralgia. The incidence of disease flares after COVID-19 vaccination was low. Conclusion: Our systematic review indicated the importance of full vaccination in rheumatic patients. Withholding anti-CD20 therapy was found to be potentially beneficial for the immunogenicity. Furthermore, the vaccines were found to be safe in general. Despite significant heterogeneity between studies, we recommend that rheumatic patients receive these vaccines amidst the global pandemic.

Impaired Neutralizing Antibody Activity against B.1.617.2 (Delta) after Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Patients Receiving Anti-CD20 Therapy

Background: To characterize humoral response after standard anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in Rituximab-treated patients and to determine the optimal time point after last Rituximab treatment for appropriate immunization. Methods: Sixty-four patients who received Rituximab within the last seven years prior to the first anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were recruited in a prospective observational study. Anti-S1 IgG, SARS-CoV-2 specific neutralization, and various SARS-CoV-2 target antibodies were determined. A live virus assay was used to assess neutralizing antibody activity against B.1.617.2 (delta). In Rituximab-treated patients, CD19+ peripheral B-cells were quantified using flow cytometry. Results: After second vaccination, all antibodies were significantly reduced compared to healthy controls. Neutralizing antibody activity against B.1.617.2 (delta) was detectable with a median (IQR) ID50 of 0 (0−1:20) compared to 1:320 (1:160−1:320) in healthy controls (for all p < 0.001). Longer time period since last Rituximab administration correlated with higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels and a stronger neutralization of B.1.617.2 (delta). With one exception, only patients with a CD19+ cell proportion ≥ 1% had detectable neutralizing antibodies. Conclusion: Our data indicate that a reconstitution of the B-cell population to >1% seems crucial in developing neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. We suggest that anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination should be administered at least 8−12 months after the last Rituximab treatment for sufficient humoral responses.

Rituximab-treated lymphoma patients develop strong CD8 T-cell responses following COVID-19 vaccination

B‐cell depletion induced by anti‐cluster of differentiation 20 (CD20) monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy of patients with lymphoma is expected to impair humoral responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) vaccination, but effects on CD8 T‐cell responses are unknown. Here, we investigated humoral and CD8 T‐cell responses following two vaccinations in patients with lymphoma undergoing anti‐CD20‐mAb therapy as single agent or in combination with chemotherapy or other anti‐neoplastic agents during the last 9 months prior to inclusion, and in healthy age‐matched blood donors. Antibody measurements showed that seven of 110 patients had antibodies to the receptor‐binding domain of the SARS‐CoV‐2 Spike protein 3–6 weeks after the second dose of vaccination. Peripheral blood CD8 T‐cell responses against prevalent human leucocyte antigen (HLA) class I SARS‐CoV‐2 epitopes were determined by peptide‐HLA multimer analysis. Strong CD8 T‐cell responses were observed in samples from 20/29 patients (69%) and 12/16 (75%) controls, with similar median response magnitudes in the groups and some of the strongest responses observed in patients. We conclude that despite the absence of humoral immune responses in fully SARS‐CoV‐2‐vaccinated, anti‐CD20‐treated patients with lymphoma, their CD8 T‐cell responses reach similar frequencies and magnitudes as for controls. Patients with lymphoma on B‐cell depleting therapies are thus likely to benefit from current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) vaccines, and development of vaccines aimed at eliciting T‐cell responses to non‐Spike epitopes might provide improved protection.

COVID-19 in Patients with Hematologic Malignancies: Clinical Manifestations, Persistence, and Immune Response

BACKGROUND

The clinical presentation of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is the result of intricate interactions between the novel coronavirus and the immune system. In patients with hematologic malignancies (HM), these interactions dramatically change the clinical course and outcomes of COVID-19.

SUMMARY

Patients with HM and COVID-19 are at an increased risk for prolonged viral shedding, more protracted and severe presentation, and death, even when compared to other immunocompromised hosts. HM (e.g., multiple myeloma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia) and anticancer treatments (e.g., anti-CD20 agents) that impair humoral immunity markedly increase the risk of severe COVID-19 as well as protracted viral shedding and possibly longer infectivity. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is an important player in the pathophysiology of severe and fatal COVID-19. Treatments targeting specific cytokines involved in CRS such as interleukin-6 and Janus kinase have proven beneficial in COVID-19 patients but were not assessed specifically in HM patients. Although neutropenia (as well as neutrophilia) was associated with increased COVID-19 mortality, granulocyte colony-stimulating factors were not beneficial in patients with COVID-19 and may have been associated with worse outcomes. Decreased levels of T lymphocytes and especially decreased CD4+ counts, and depletion of CD8+ lymphocytes, are a hallmark of severe COVID-19, and even more so among patients with HM, underlying the important role of T-helper dysfunction in severe COVID-19. In HM patients with intact cellular immunity, robust T-cell responses may compensate for an impaired humoral immune system. Further prospective studies are needed to evaluate the mechanisms of severe COVID-19 among patients with HM and assess the efficacy of new immunomodulating COVID-19 treatments in this population.

KEY MESSAGES

Understanding the immunopathology of COVID-19 has greatly benefited from the previous research in patients with HM. So far, no COVID-19 treatments were properly evaluated in patients with HM. Patients with HM should be included in future RCTs assessing treatments for COVID-19.

CD20-Targeted Therapy Ablates De Novo Antibody Response to Vaccination but Spares Preestablished Immunity

To obtain a deeper understanding of poor responses to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with lymphoma, we assessed blocking antibodies, total anti-spike IgG, and spike-specific memory B cells in the peripheral blood of 126 patients with lymphoma and 20 age-matched healthy controls 1 and 4 months after COVID-19 vaccination. Fifty-five percent of patients developed blocking antibodies postvaccination, compared with 100% of controls. When evaluating patients last treated from days to nearly 18 years prior to vaccination, time since last anti-CD20 was a significant independent predictor of vaccine response. None of 31 patients who had received anti-CD20 treatment within 6 months prior to vaccination developed blocking antibodies. In contrast, patients who initiated anti-CD20 treatment shortly after achieving a vaccine-induced antibody response tended to retain that response during treatment, suggesting a policy of immunizing prior to treatment whenever possible.

SIGNIFICANCE

In a large cohort of patients with B-cell lymphoma, time since anti-CD20 treatment was an independent predictor of neutralizing antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination. Comparing patients who received anti-CD20 treatment before or after vaccination, we demonstrate that vaccinating first can generate an antibody response that endures through anti-CD20-containing treatment. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 85.

Short-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised patients: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the short-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among immunocompromised patients to prevent laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis. We calculated the pooled diagnostic odds ratio [DOR] (95% CI) for COVID-19 infection between immunocompromised patients and healthy people or those with stable chronic medical conditions. VE was estimated as 100% x (1-DOR). We also investigated the rates of developing anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Twenty studies evaluating COVID-19 vaccine response, and four studies evaluating VE were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled DOR for symptomatic COVID-19 infection in immunocompromised patients was 0.296 (95% CI: 0.108-0.811) with an estimated VE of 70.4% (95% CI: 18.9%- 89.2%). When stratified by diagnosis, IgG antibody levels were much higher in the control group compared to immunocompromised patients with solid organ transplant (pOR 232.3; 95% Cl: 66.98-806.03), malignant diseases (pOR 42.0, 95% Cl: 11.68-151.03), and inflammatory rheumatic diseases (pOR 19.06; 95% Cl: 5.00-72.62).

CONCLUSIONS

We found COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were effective against symptomatic COVID-19 among the immunocompromised patients but had lower VE compared to the controls. Further research is needed to understand the discordance between antibody production and protection against symptomatic COVID-19 infection.

When Viruses Meet Fungi: Tackling the Enemies in Hematology

The association of invasive fungal infections (IFI) and viral infections has been described in patients with hematologic malignancies (HM), in particular in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Regrettably, the diagnosis is often challenging, making the treatment inappropriate in some circumstances. The present review takes into consideration the viral infections commonly associated with IFI. Clinical presentation of IFI and viral infections, risk factors, and impact on the outcome of HM patients are discussed throughout the paper.

Humoral and cellular immune responses on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with anti-CD20 therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 1342 patients

BACKGROUND

Immune responses on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients receiving anti-CD20 therapies are impaired but vary considerably. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine induced humoral and cell-mediated immune response in patients previously treated with anti-CD20 antibodies.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Medrxiv and SSRN using variations of search terms 'anti-CD20', 'vaccine' and 'COVID' and included original studies up to 21 August 2021. We excluded studies with missing data on humoral or cell-mediated immune response, unspecified methodology of response testing, unspecified timeframes between vaccination and blood sampling or low number of participants (≤3). We excluded individual patients with prior COVID-19 or incomplete vaccine courses. Primary endpoints were humoral and cell-mediated immune response rates. Subgroup analyses included time since anti-CD20 therapy, B cell depletion and indication for anti-CD20 therapy. We used random-effects models of proportions.

FINDINGS

Ninety studies were assessed. Inclusion criteria were met by 23 studies comprising 1342 patients. Overall rate of humoral response was 0.40 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.47). Overall rate of cell-mediated immune responses was 0.71 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.87). A time interval >6 months since last anti-CD20 therapy was associated with higher humoral response rates with 0.63 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.72) versus <6 months 0.2 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.43); p=0<01. Similarly, patients with circulating B cells more frequently showed humoral responses. Anti-CD20-treated kidney transplant recipients showed lower humoral response rates than patients with haematological malignancies or autoimmune disease.

INTERPRETATION

Patients on anti-CD20 therapies can develop humoral and cell-mediated immune responses after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, but subgroups such as kidney transplant recipients or those with very recent therapy and depleted B cell are at high risk for non-seroconversion and should be individually assessed for personalised SARS-CoV-2 vaccination strategies. Potential limitations are small patient numbers and heterogeneity of studies included.

FUNDING

This study was funded by Bern University Hospital.

Humoral Immune Response in Hematooncological Patients and Health Care Workers Who Received SARS-CoV-2 Vaccinations

Importance

To our knowledge, little is known about antibody development after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in immunocompromised individuals, such as patients with cancer.

Objective

To determine whether hematooncological patients develop anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after vaccination.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study included 2 independent cohorts of patients who were treated for hematological and solid malignant tumors between October 2020 and May 2021, comprising 901 samples from 595 patients and 58 health care workers (HCWs). Serum samples were collected from patients who were treated at an academic center and a community hospital in a rural area and a control group of HCWs, all of whom received SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Total anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (anti-NC) and antispike protein (anti-S) antibodies were measured retrospectively.

Results

In total, 595 patients (320 women [53.8%] and 275 men [46.2%]; median [range] age, 67 [19-96] years) and 58 HCWs (40 women [69.0%] and 18 men [31.0%]; median [range] age, 42 [24-60] years) were included. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was documented in 43 of 595 (7.2%), while anti-NC antibodies that suggested previous infections were observed in 49 of 573 evaluable patients (8.6%). In both cohorts, anti-S antibody levels were higher in fully vaccinated patients compared with patients who received 1 dose. After the first vaccination, patients with hematological cancer who received B cell-targeting agents had lower anti-S levels (median, 1.6 AU/mL; range: 0-17 244 AU/mL) than patients who received other therapies (median, 191.6 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000; P < .001) or patients with solid tumors (median, 246.4 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000 AU/mL; P < .001). Anti-S levels after the first vaccination differed according to ongoing antineoplastic treatment modalities, with the lowest median levels in patients who received chemotherapy alone (157.7 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000 AU/mL) or in combination with immunotherapy (118.7 AU/mL; range, 14.1-38 727 AU/mL) and the highest levels in patients with no ongoing antineoplastic treatment (median, 634.3 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000 AU/mL; P = .01). Antibody levels after full immunization were higher in HCWs (median, 2500 U/mL; range, 485-2500 U/mL) than in patients with cancer (median, 117.0 U/mL; range, 0-2500 U/mL; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of patients with hematooncological diseases and a control group of HCWs, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after vaccination could be detected in patients with cancer. Lower antibody levels compared with HCWs and differences in seroconversion in specific subgroups underscore the need for further studies on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with hematooncological disease.

Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies inhibit seropositive response to Covid-19 vaccination in Non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients within six months after treatment

The Covid-19 pandemic has caused millions of deaths worldwide. Although vaccines have been developed, patients on immunosuppressive therapy are less likely to respond. This study was aimed at investigating the efficacy of a Covid-19 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma treated with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies. Only 1 of 28 lymphoma patients (3.6%) developed a seropositive response, compared with 100% (28/28) of the healthy volunteers. The low levels of CD19⁺ lymphocytes among the lymphoma patients suggest that anti-CD20 treatment prevents the seropositive response to the vaccine. An additional vaccination might be indicated in these patients once B cells are repopulated.

Reasons and consequences of COVID-19 vaccine failure in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia

People with hematologic malignancies are at a high risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. The response to vaccination is highly limited in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Less than half of the patients develop antibody response, suggesting that they remain at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection even after the vaccination. Reasons for inadequate response to COVID-19 vaccination in chronic lymphocytic leukemia are multifactorial and attributed to disease-related immune dysregulation and patient- and therapy-related factors. The negative predictors of response to vaccination include hypogammaglobulinemia, advanced age, current active treatment, and past treatment anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies. Despite using booster doses and heterologous immunization to improve humoral and cellular immunity, some patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia will fail to respond. Active treatment at the time of vaccination and a recent history of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies use are the strongest predictors of the non-response. Current data support informing patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and other hematologic malignancies about the risk of infection regardless of vaccination. These individuals and members of their households should continue extreme preventive actions despite relaxed local regulations. Other emerging non-vaccine preventive strategies include passive and post-exposure prevention with monoclonal antibodies.

Serological SARS-CoV-2 antibody response, potential predictive markers and safety of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in haematological and oncological patients

Haemato‐oncological patients are at risk in case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) infection. Currently, vaccination is the best‐evaluated preventive strategy. In the present study, we aimed to assess serological response, predictive markers, and safety of BNT162b2 in haemato‐oncological patients. A total of 259 haemato‐oncological patients were vaccinated with two 30 µg doses of BNT162b2 administered 21 days apart. Serological response was assessed by ELECSYS^® Anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2‐S immunoassay before vaccination, and at 3 and 7 weeks after the first dose (T1, T2). Safety assessment was performed. At T2 spike protein receptor binding domain (S/RBD) antibodies were detected in 71·4% of haematological and in 94·5% of oncological patients (P < 0·001). Haematological patients receiving systemic treatment had a 14·2‐fold increased risk of non‐responding (95% confidence interval 3·2–63·3, P = 0·001). Subgroups of patients with lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukaemia were at highest risk of serological non‐response. Low immunoglobulin G (IgG) level, lymphocyte‐ and natural killer (NK)‐cell counts were significantly associated with poor serological response (P < 0·05). Vaccination was well tolerated with only 2·7% of patients reporting severe side‐effects. Patients with side‐effects developed a higher S/RBD‐antibody titre compared to patients without side‐effects (P = 0·038). Haematological patients under treatment were at highest risk of serological non‐response. Low lymphocytes, NK cells and IgG levels were found to be associated with serological non‐response. Serological response in oncological patients was encouraging. The use of BNT162b2 is safe in haemato‐oncological patients.