Evaluation of antibody response to BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in patients affected by immune-mediated inflammatory diseases up to 5 months after vaccination

Safety of COVID-19 Vaccine in Patients with Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases

Objectives

The main purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of COVID-19 vaccine side effects in patients with rheumatic diseases and to examine any potential associations with medications, disease type, or comorbidities.

Methods

A multicentre cross-sectional study from rheumatology units in different hospitals in Iraq was carried out between 8th of August 2021 and 4th of August 2022. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they have a rheumatic disease and have taken one or more doses of any COVID-19 vaccine.

Results

A total of 661 (57.8% female, mean age 46.51± 12.97 years) patients with rheumatic illnesses who received the "COVID-19" vaccination were included in this study. Rheumatoid arthritis was the most frequent diagnostic group. The Pfizer vaccine was given to the majority of patients (74.6%), followed by Sinopharm (16.2%), and AstraZeneca (9.2%). Side effects were detected in 661(100%) and 528 (100%) patients following the first and second vaccination doses, respectively; among which the most frequent were injection site pain in 57.8% following the first dose and 47.6% after the second dose, followed by fatigue and fever. According to multivariate logistic regression models, age (B=-0.204, p = 0.000), had a significantly inverse correlation coefficient with the experience of greater side effects. Rheumatic disease flares reported in 9.9%, 10.3%, and 8.2% of patients who received the Pfizer, Sinopharm, and AstraZeneca vaccines, respectively.

Conclusion

The "COVID-19" vaccination has a reassuring safety profile with no greater risk of adverse events in any specific illness or pharmacological therapy.

Humoral responses to wild type and ancient BA.1 SARS-CoV-2 variant after heterologous priming vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 booster dose

Several countries have recommended a booster dose of Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine for subjects under the age of 60, who have already received the first dose of ChAdOx1. This is due to several ChAdOx1 vaccine-associated adverse vascular events and thrombocytopenia. Neutralization assay and quantitative IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike antibody (anti-S-IgG) were conducted to investigate the long-term responses to vaccine treatment in a cohort of Sardinian participants, who have received heterologous Prime-Boost Vaccination via ChAdOx1 vector vaccine and a booster dose via BNT162b2. The obtained results were compared with those of a cohort of healthcare workers (HCW) who received homologous BNT162b2 (BNT/BNT/BNT) vaccination. One month (T2) and five months after the second and before the third dose (T3), anti-spike antibody or neutralizing titers in the subjects vaccinated with ChAdOx1-S/BNT162b2 were significantly higher than those who experienced the ChAdOx1-S/ChAdOx1-S or BNT162b2/BNT162b2 schedule. These results suggest that a ChAdOx1-S/BNT162b2 regimen provides a more robust antibody response than either of the homologous regimens. However, the anti-spike antibodies or neutralizing titers after the third injection (mRNA vaccine) of ChAdOx1-S as a second dose and BNT162b2 were not statistically different. Homologous and heterologous vaccination provided a strong antibody response. Neutralizing activities were also described against the Omicron BA.1 variant in a sub-group (40) representative of the three vaccination regimens among our cohort.

Hybrid immunity and protection against infection during the Omicron wave in Malta

By December 2021, administration of the third dose of COVID-19 vaccinations coincided with the spread of the Omicron variant in Europe. Questions had been raised on protection against infection conferred by previous vaccination and/or infection. Our study population included 252,433 participants from the COVID-19 vaccination registry in Malta. Data were then matched with the national testing database. We collected vaccination status, vaccine brand, vaccination date, infection history, and age. Using logistic regression, we examined different combinations of vaccine dose, prior infection status and time, and the odds of infection during the period when the Omicron variant was the dominant variant in Malta. Participants infected with Sars-Cov-2 prior to the Omicron wave had a significantly lower odds of being infected with the Omicron variant. Additionally, the more recent the infection and the more recent the vaccination, the lower the odds of infection. Receiving a third dose within 20 weeks of the start of the Omicron wave in Malta offered similar odds of infection as receiving a second dose within the same period. Time since vaccination was a strong determinant against infection, as was previous infection status and the number of doses taken. This finding reinforces the importance of future booster dose provision especially to vulnerable populations.

Long follow-up of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in healthcare workers (2020-2022): A retrospective longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 serological surveillance

SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG production and protection from severe respiratory illness should be explored in greater depth after COVID-19 booster vaccination. This longitudinal observational retrospective study investigated the anti-spike IgG response elicited by the first, second and booster doses of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in healthcare workers (HCW) at San Martino IRCCS Policlinico Hospital (Genoa) up to the 12th month. Sequential blood sampling was performed at T0 (prior to vaccination), T1 (21 days after the 1st dose of vaccine), T2, T3, T4, T5, T6 (7 days and 1, 3, 6 and 9 months after the 2nd dose, respectively), T7 and T8 (1 and 3 months after a booster dose). A SARS-CoV-2 IgG panel (Bio-Rad, Marnes-la-Coquette, France) was used to determine levels of receptor-binding domain (RBD), spike-1 (S1), spike-2 and nucleocapsid structural proteins of SARS-CoV-2. In the 51 HCWs evaluated, seroprevalence was 96% (49/51) at T1 and 100% (51/51) from T2 to T5 for RBD and S1. At T6, only one HCW was negative. T2 [RBD = 2945 (IQR:1693-5364); S1 = 1574 (IQR:833-3256) U/mL], and T7 [RBD = 8204 (IQR:4129-11,912); S1 = 4124 (IQR:2124-6326) U/mL] were characterized by the highest antibody values. Significant humoral increases in RBD and S1 were documented at T7 and T8 compared to T2 and T4, respectively (p-value < .001). Following vaccination with BNT162b2 and a booster dose in the 9th month, naïve and healthy subjects show high antibody titers up to 12 months and a protective humoral response against COVID-19 disease lasting up to 20 months after the last booster.

Safety of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients with Inborn Errors of Immunity: an Italian Multicentric Study

PURPOSE

Little is known about vaccine safety in inborn errors of immunity (IEI) patients during the current vaccination campaign for COVID-19. To better investigate the reactogenicity and adverse event profile after two, three, and four doses of mRNA vaccines, we conducted an observational, multicentric study on 342 PID patients from four Italian Referral Centres.

METHODS

We conducted a survey on self-reported adverse reactions in IEI patients who received mRNA vaccine by administering a questionnaire after each dose.

RESULTS

Over the whole study period, none of the patients needed hospitalization or had hypersensitivity reactions, including anaphylaxis and delayed injection site reaction. After two vaccination doses, 35.4% of patients showed only local reactogenicity-related symptoms (RrS), 44.4% reported both systemic and local RrS, and 5% reported only systemic RrS. In more than 60% of cases, local or systemic RrS were mild. After the first and second booster doses, patients showed fewer adverse events (AEs) than after the first vaccination course. Patients aged 50 years and older reported adverse events and RrS less frequently. Among AEs requiring treatment, one common variable immune deficiency patient affected by T cell large granular lymphocytic leukemia developed neutropenia and one patient had Bell's paralysis perhaps during herpes zoster reactivation.

CONCLUSION

Although our follow-up period is relatively short, the safety data we reported are reassuring. This data would help to contrast the vaccine hesitancy often manifested by patients with IEI and to better inform their healthcare providers.

Uncovering the information immunology journals transmitted for COVID-19: A bibliometric and visualization analysis

BACKGROUND

Since the global epidemic of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a large number of immunological studies related to COVID-19 have been published in various immunology journals. However, the results from these studies were discrete, and no study summarized the important immunological information about COVID-19 released by these immunology journals. This study aimed to comprehensively summarize the knowledge structure and research hotspots of COVID-19 published in major immunology journals through bibliometrics.

METHODS

Publications on COVID-19 in major immunology journals were obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection. CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and R-bibliometrix were comprehensively used for bibliometric and visual analysis.

RESULTS

1,331 and 5,000 publications of 10 journals with high impact factors and 10 journals with the most papers were included, respectively. The USA, China, England, and Italy made the most significant contributions to these papers. University College London, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Harvard Medical School, University California San Diego, and University of Pennsylvania played a central role in international cooperation in the immunology research field of COVID-19. Yuen Kwok Yung was the most important author in terms of the number of publications and citations, and the H-index. CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES and FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY were the most essential immunology journals. These immunology journals mostly focused on the following topics: "Delta/Omicron variants", "cytokine storm", "neutralization/neutralizing antibody", "T cell", "BNT162b2", "mRNA vaccine", "vaccine effectiveness/safety", and "long COVID".

CONCLUSION

This study systematically uncovered a holistic picture of the current research on COVID-19 published in major immunology journals from the perspective of bibliometrics, which will provide a reference for future research in this field.

Immune Response of a Heterologous mRNA-1273 Second-Dose Immunization after a First Dose of ChadOx1 against SARS-CoV-2: A Cross-Sectional Study

Heterologous vaccination regimens could contribute to broadening vaccination coverage. To date, there is little evidence on the effectiveness of a combination of adenoviral COVID-19 vaccines with a second dose of mRNA vaccines. This study aims to evaluate the antibody response to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein 25 weeks after vaccination with mRNA-1273 after a first dose of ChAdOx1. A cross-sectional study was conducted collecting sociodemographic data, clinical characteristics, and serological data from among the general population. Antibody levels were expressed as binding antibody units (BAU) per mL (cutoff = 33.8 BAU/mL). Linear regression models were used to assess the relationship between the subjects’ characteristics and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels. A total of 229 participants were followed up after a median time of 173 days. The overall anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody titer was 729.0 BAU/mL. The multivariable analysis showed that the only factor associated with anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels was the BMI (p = 0.007), with decreases within the healthy range weight and increases in under- or overweight people. Our results support the use of heterologous COVID-19 vaccination regimens, as they can guarantee a sustained immune antibody response. More studies are needed to understand the link between BMI and body composition and the immune response to COVID-19 vaccinations.

The Flare of Rheumatic Disease After SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination: A Review

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues worldwide, vaccination has been considered an effective measure to protect people from the COVID-19 and end the pandemic. However, for patients with rheumatic diseases (RD), concern for the induction of RD flare may combat the enthusiasm for vaccination. In general, current evidence doesn’t support the increased risk of disease flare after COVID-19 vaccination. However, the disease flare of RDs may be triggered by COVID-19 vaccinations, especially for patients with high disease activity. Most of these flares after vaccination are mild and need no treatment escalation. Considering the benefits and risks, RD patients are recommended to receive the COVID-19 vaccination but should be vaccinated when the RDs are in stable states.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Health Care Workers in Italy: A Literature Review and a Report from a Comprehensive Cancer Center

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic still represents a global public health emergency, despite the availability of different types of vaccines that reduced the number of severe cases, the hospitalization rate and mortality. The Italian Vaccine Distribution Plan identified healthcare workers (HCWs) as the top-priority category to receive access to a vaccine and different studies on HCWs have been implemented to clarify the duration and kinetics of antibody response. The aim of this paper is to perform a literature review across a total of 44 studies of the serologic response to COVID-19 vaccines in HCWs in Italy and to report the results obtained in a prospective longitudinal study implemented at the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori (INT) of Milan on 1565 HCWs. At INT we found that 99.81% of the HCWs developed an antibody response one month after the second dose. About six months after the first serology evaluation, 100% of the HCWs were still positive to the antibody, although we observed a significant decrease in its levels. Overall, our literature review results highlight a robust antibody response in most of the HCWs after the second vaccination dose. These figures are also confirmed in our institutional setting seven months after the completion of the cycle of second doses of vaccination.

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, 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.

Neutralizing Antibodies Responses against SARS-CoV-2 in a Sardinian Cohort Group Up to 9 Months after BNT162b2 Vaccination

Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiological agent of COVID-19, has caused over 460 million cases of infection and over 6 million deaths worldwide. The pandemic has called for science, technology, and innovation to provide solutions and, due to an incredible scientific and financial global effort, several prophylactic and therapeutic apparatuses such as monoclonal antibodies and vaccines were developed in less than one year to address this emergency. After SARS-CoV-2 infection, serum neutralizing antibodies are produced by B cells and studies on virus-neutralizing antibodies’ kinetics are pivotal. The process of protective immunity and the duration of this kind of protection against COVID-19 remain to be clarified. We tested 136 sera from 3 groups of individuals, some of them providing multiple sequential sera (1—healthy, no previous CoV2-infected, vaccinated; 2—healthy, previous CoV2 infected, vaccinated; 3—healed, previous CoV2-infected, not vaccinated) to assess the kinetics of antibodies (Abs) neutralizing activity. We found that SARS-CoV-2 infection elicits moderate neutralizing antibody activity in most individuals; neither age nor gender appear to have any influence on Abs responses. The BNT162b2 vaccine, when administered in two doses, induces high antibodies titre endowed with potent neutralizing activity against bare SARS-CoV-2 in in vitro neutralizing assay. The residual neutralization capability and the kinetic of waning immunity were also evaluated over 9 months after the second dose in a reference group of subjects. Neutralization titre showed a decline in all subjects and the median level of S-protein IgG, over 270 days after the second vaccination dose, was below 10 AU/mL in 53% of serum tested.

Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis Relapse after COVID-19 Vaccination: A Case Report

Background: We here describe the case of a 71-year-old Caucasian woman previously diagnosed with Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis (EGPA) that had been treated with Mepolizumab, an anti-IL5 monoclonal antibody, since 2019 with a good clinical response. Methods: She had a mild COVID-19 in December 2020 and she tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection in only late January 2021. In April 2021 she received the first dose of mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine. Ten days later she developed myalgia, dyspnea and numbness of the limbs due to a relapse of EGPA that occurred during Mepolizumab treatment.

Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis Relapse after COVID-19 Vaccination: A Case Report

BACKGROUND

We here describe the case of a 71-year-old Caucasian woman previously diagnosed with Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis (EGPA) that had been treated with Mepolizumab, an anti-IL5 monoclonal antibody, since 2019 with a good clinical response.

METHODS

She had a mild COVID-19 in December 2020 and she tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection in only late January 2021. In April 2021 she received the first dose of mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine. Ten days later she developed myalgia, dyspnea and numbness of the limbs due to a relapse of EGPA that occurred during Mepolizumab treatment.

Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccines among Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Japan

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is recommended for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines has not been sufficiently evaluated in patients with IBD. We aimed to assess the acceptance and hesitancy of COVID-19 vaccination and related factors among these patients. A retrospective cohort study using a self-reported questionnaire was performed among patients with IBD between 22 June 2021 and 30 August 2021. Of the 187 participants, 10.2% (n = 19) were hesitant to be vaccinated. Patients in the vaccine-hesitant group were younger (p = 0.009) and had a shorter disease duration (p = 0.020). Vedolizumab was prescribed more frequently (p = 0.024) and immunomodulators were less frequently used (p = 0.027) in this group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92-1.00, p = 0.042) and the use of immunomodulators (OR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.01-0.66, p = 0.019) as independent significant factors for vaccine hesitancy. The COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy rate in patients with IBD in Japan was 10% in this study. The Japanese COVID-19 vaccination campaign appears to be successful. The risk of COVID-19 among patients with IBD requires adequate measures to ensure that vaccines are accepted by vaccine-hesitant patients. These findings may be helpful in achieving adequate vaccination rates.