Immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 messenger RNA vaccines in patients with cancer

Humoral and cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following vaccination with non-mRNA vaccines in adolescent/young adults with cancer: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine responsiveness in adolescent/young adult (AYA) cancer patients are sparse. The present study assessed humoral and cellular immune responses post-vaccination in this population.

METHODS

In this prospective study, patients aged 12-30 years undergoing cancer therapy ("on therapy") and survivors ("off therapy") were recruited. Anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) protein IgG levels were measured at baseline, four weeks post-first vaccine dose (T1), and six weeks post-second dose (T2). Cellular immunity was assessed using activation-induced markers and intracellular cytokine staining in a patient subset. The primary outcome was to quantify humoral responses in both cohorts at T2 compared to baseline. Clinical predictors of log antibody titres at T2 were identified.

RESULTS

Between April-December 2022, 118 patients were recruited of median age 15.4 years. Among them, 77 (65.2 %) were in the "on therapy" group, and 77 (65.2 %) had received the BBV152 vaccine. At baseline, 108 (91.5 %) patients were seropositive for anti-RBD antibody. The log anti-RBD titre rose from baseline to T2 (p-value = 0.001) in the whole cohort; this rise was significant from baseline-T1 (p-value < 0.001), but not from T1 to T2 (p-value = 0.842). A similar pattern was seen in the "on therapy" cohort. BECOV-2 vaccine was independently associated with higher log anti-RBD titres than BBV152 (regression coefficient: 0.41; 95 % CI: 0.10-0.73; p = 0.011). Cellular immune responses were similar in the "on-" and "off therapy" groups at the three time points.

CONCLUSION

Among AYA cancer patients, a single non-mRNA vaccine dose confers robust hybrid humoral immunity with limited benefit from a second dose.

Comparable CD8+ T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in single-cell transcriptomics of recently allogeneic transplanted patients and healthy individuals

Despite extensive research on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination responses in healthy individuals, there is comparatively little known beyond antibody titers and T-cell responses in the vulnerable cohort of patients after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT). In this study, we assessed the serological response and performed longitudinal multimodal analyses including T-cell functionality and single-cell RNA sequencing combined with T cell receptor (TCR)/B cell receptor (BCR) profiling in the context of BNT162b2 vaccination in ASCT patients. In addition, these data were compared to publicly available data sets of healthy vaccinees. Protective antibody titers were achieved in 40% of patients. We identified a distorted B- and T-cell distribution, a reduced TCR diversity, and increased levels of exhaustion marker expression as possible causes for the poorer vaccine response rates in ASCT patients. Immunoglobulin heavy chain gene rearrangement after vaccination proved to be highly variable in ASCT patients. Changes in TCRα and TCRβ gene rearrangement after vaccination differed from patterns observed in healthy vaccinees. Crucially, ASCT patients elicited comparable proportions of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-induced (VI) CD8+ T-cells, characterized by a distinct gene expression pattern that is associated with SARS-CoV-2 specificity in healthy individuals. Our study underlines the impaired immune system and thus the lower vaccine response rates in ASCT patients. However, since protective vaccine responses and VI CD8+ T-cells can be induced in part of ASCT patients, our data advocate early posttransplant vaccination due to the high risk of infection in this vulnerable group.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination willingness and humoral vaccination response in radiation oncology patients

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 infection has been and, in some parts, still is a threat to oncologic patients, making it crucial to understand perception of vaccination and immunologic responses in this vulnerable patient segment. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in relation to malignant disease characteristics and therapies have so far not been studied consecutively in larger oncologic patient populations. This study captures SARS-CoV-2 vaccination willingness and humoral immune response in a large consecutive oncologic patient collective at the beginning of 2021.

METHODS

1142 patients were consecutively recruited over 5.5 months at a tertiary department for radiation oncology and were assessed for vaccination willingness via a standardized interview. In already vaccinated patients total SARS-CoV-2 S antibody titres against the spike protein (Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S) and were evaluated 35 days or later after the first dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.

RESULTS

Vaccination willingness was high with a rate of 90 %. The most frequent reasons for rejection were: undecided/potential vaccination after therapy, distrust in the vaccine and fear of interaction with comorbidities. Factors associated with lower vaccination willingness were: worse general condition, lower age and female sex. 80 % of the participants had been previously vaccinated, 8 % reported previous infection and 16 % received vaccination during antineoplastic therapy. In 97.5 % of the vaccinated patients Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S was detected. In a univariable analysis parameters associated with non-conversion were: lower performance status, spread to the local lymphatics (N + ), hematologic disease and diffuse metastases. All patients with oligometastatic disease achieved positive Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S titres. For patients with two vaccinations several risk factors were identified, that were associated with low antibody concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination willingness among oncologic patients was high in the first months after its availability, and most patients had already received one or two doses. Over 97 % of vaccinated patients had measurable anti-SARS-CoV-2 S titres. Our data supports early identification of low humoral responders after vaccination and could facilitate the design of future oncologic vaccine trials (clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04918888).

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination response in pediatric oncology patients

BACKGROUND

There remains limited knowledge about the immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in pediatric oncology patients, which is essential to provide counseling and risk adaptation in this vulnerable population. The goal of this study was to understand immunogenicity after vaccination in pediatric oncology patients, and determine if certain clinical factors impacted response.

METHODS

Patients 0-25 years of age with a diagnosis of cancer and actively receiving therapy were enrolled on study. We excluded patients who were completely vaccinated prior to their cancer diagnosis. Blood samples were collected pre-vaccination, as well as 2, 4-6, and 8-12 weeks after vaccination. Healthy children who were fully vaccinated enrolled as controls. Clinical data and complete blood counts around time of vaccination were collected. To study B- and T-cell immunity, we measured neutralizing antibodies by enzyme-linked immunoassay and interferon gamma secretion by enzyme-linked immunospot, respectively.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients enrolled on study, for which 11 were evaluable oncology patients and seven were healthy controls. Adequate B-cell response was seen in 36.4% of patients, and adequate T-cell response in 77.8% of patients. Numbers were too small to detect differences based on malignancy type. There was no differences in immunity based on absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) or intensity of therapy.

CONCLUSION

Pediatric oncology patients have a suboptimal immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Booster doses will be imperative to provide optimal protection against COVID-19; however, blood counts may not be a useful guide to optimize the time of administration.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the first year after hematopoietic cell transplant or chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy: A prospective, multicenter, observational study (BMT CTN 2101)

Background

The optimal timing of vaccination with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines after cellular therapy is incompletely understood.

Objective

To describe humoral and cellular responses after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination initiated <4 months versus 4-12 months after cellular therapy.

Design

Multicenter prospective observational study.

Setting

34 centers in the United States.

Participants

466 allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT; n=231), autologous HCT (n=170), or chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T cell) therapy (n=65) recipients enrolled between April 2021 and June 2022.

Interventions

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination as part of routine care.

Measurements

We obtained blood prior to and after vaccinations at up to five time points and tested for SARS-CoV-2 spike (anti-S) IgG in all participants and neutralizing antibodies for Wuhan D614G, Delta B.1.617.2, and Omicron B.1.1.529 strains, as well as SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell receptors (TCRs), in a subgroup.

Results

Anti-S IgG and neutralizing antibody responses increased with vaccination in HCT recipients irrespective of vaccine initiation timing but were unchanged in CAR-T cell recipients initiating vaccines within 4 months. Anti-S IgG ≥2,500 U/mL was correlated with high neutralizing antibody titers and attained by the last time point in 70%, 69%, and 34% of allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, and CAR-T cell recipients, respectively. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses were attained in 57%, 83%, and 58%, respectively. Humoral and cellular responses did not significantly differ among participants initiating vaccinations <4 months vs 4-12 months after cellular therapy. Pre-cellular therapy SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination were key predictors of post-cellular therapy anti-S IgG levels.

Limitations

The majority of participants were adults and received mRNA vaccines.

Conclusions

These data support starting mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination three to four months after allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, and CAR-T cell therapy.

Funding

National Marrow Donor Program, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation, Novartis, LabCorp, American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, Adaptive Biotechnologies, and the National Institutes of Health.

Response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients on cancer therapy: Analysis in a SARS-CoV-2-naïve population

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients have increased morbidity and mortality from COVID-19, but may respond poorly to vaccination. The Evaluation of COVID-19 Vaccination Efficacy and Rare Events in Solid Tumors (EVEREST) study, comparing seropositivity between cancer patients and healthy controls in a low SARS-CoV-2 community-transmission setting, allows determination of vaccine response with minimal interference from infection.

METHODS

Solid tumor patients from The Canberra Hospital, Canberra, Australia, and healthy controls who received COVID-19 vaccination between March 2021 and January 2022 were included. Blood samples were collected at baseline, pre-second vaccine dose and at 1, 3 (primary endpoint), and 6 months post-second dose. SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike-RBD (S-RBD) and anti-nucleocapsid IgG antibodies were measured.

RESULTS

Ninety-six solid tumor patients and 20 healthy controls were enrolled, with median age 62 years, and 60% were female. Participants received either AZD1222 (65%) or BNT162b2 (35%) COVID-19 vaccines. Seropositivity 3 months post vaccination was 87% (76/87) in patients and 100% (20/20) in controls (p = .12). Seropositivity was observed in 84% of patients on chemotherapy, 80% on immunotherapy, and 96% on targeted therapy (differences not satistically significant). Seropositivity in cancer patients increased from 40% (6/15) after first dose, to 95% (35/37) 1 month after second dose, then dropped to 87% (76/87) 3 months after second dose.

CONCLUSION

Most patients and all controls became seropositive after two vaccine doses. Antibody concentrations and seropositivity showed a decrease between 1 and 3 months post vaccination, highlighting need for booster vaccinations. SARS-CoV-2 infection amplifies S-RBD antibody responses; however, cannot be adequately identified using nucleocapsid serology. This underlines the value of our COVID-naïve population in studying vaccine immunogenicity.

Coronavirus disease 2019 and lung cancer: where are we?

Oncology patients are more susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection due to hospital contact and an immunological system that can be compromised by antineoplastic therapy and supportive treatments. Certain similarities have been described in the physiopathology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and lung cancer (LC) that may explain the higher probability of these patients of developing a more serious disease with more frequent hospitalizations and even death, especially with the addition of smoking, cardiovascular and respiratory comorbidities, old age and corticosteroids use. Pre-existing lesions and cancer therapies change the normal architecture of the lungs, so diagnostic scales such as COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) are of vital importance for a correct diagnosis and patient homogenization, with a high inter-observer correlation. Moreover, anticancer treatments have required an adaptation to reduce the number of visits to the hospital [hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT), larger intervals between chemotherapy cycles, delay in follow-up tests, among others]. In a way, this has also caused a delay in the diagnosis of new cancers. On the other hand, vaccination has had a positive impact on the mortality of these patients, who maintain a similar seroprevalence to the rest of the population, with a similar impact in mortality.

Immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in lung cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

Patients with lung cancer are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe complications from COVID-19, but information on the efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in these patients is scarce. We aimed at evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in this population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The prospective, nationwide SOLID substudy, enrolled adults with lung cancer who were fully vaccinated against COVID-19. Serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels were quantitatively assessed two weeks and six months after receipt of the last dose using a chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay. Multivariate odds ratios for the association between demographic and clinical factors and seronegativity after vaccination were estimated.

RESULTS

1973 lung cancer patients were enrolled. Most patients had stage IV disease (66%) and were receiving active cancer treatment (82.7%). No significant differences were found in the probability of being seronegative for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies after full vaccination between patients who were receiving active cancer treatment and those who were not (p = 0.396). The administration of immunotherapy or oral targeted therapy and immunization with mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine were factors independently associated with increased odds of being seropositive after vaccination. From all patients, 1405 received the second dose of vaccine and high levels of antibody titers were observed in 93.6% of patients two weeks after second dose. At six months, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that performance status ≥ 2 was independently associated with a higher probability of being seronegative after full vaccination with an OR 4.15. On the other hand, received chemotherapy or oral target therapy and vaccination with mRNA-1273 were a factor independently associated with lower odds of being seronegative after full vaccination with an OR 0.52, 0.37 and 0.34, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung cancer patients can safely achieve a strong immune response against SARS-CoV-2 after full vaccination, regardless of the cancer treatment received.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04407143.

Twelve-Month Follow-up of the Immune Response After COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Genitourinary Cancers: A Prospective Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Vaccinations against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have had a transformative impact on morbidity and mortality. However, the long-term impact of vaccination on patients with genitourinary cancers is currently unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study aimed to assess seroconversion rates in patients with genitourinary cancers receiving COVID-19 vaccination. Patients with prostate cancer, renal cell carcinoma, or urothelial cancer who had not been vaccinated for COVID-19 were included. Blood samples were obtained at baseline and after 2, 6, and 12 months of one dose of an FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccine. Antibody titer analysis was performed using the SCoV-2 Detect IgG ELISA assay, and the results were reported as immune status ratio (ISR). A paired t-test was used for comparison of ISR values between timepoints. In addition, T-cell receptor (TCR) sequencing was performed to assess for differences in TCR repertoire 2 months after vaccination.

RESULTS

Out of 133 patients enrolled, 98 baseline blood samples were collected. At 2-, 6-, and 12-month time points 98, 70, and 50 samples were collected, respectively. Median age was 67 (IQR, 62-75), with the majority of patients diagnosed with prostate (55.1%) or renal cell carcinoma (41.8%). Compared to baseline (0.24 [95% CI, 0.19-0.31]) a significant increase in the geometric mean ISR values was observed at the 2-month timepoint (5.59 [4.76-6.55]) (P < .001). However, at the 6-month timepoint, a significant decrease in the ISR values was observed (4.66 [95% CI, 4.04-5.38]; P < .0001). Notably, at the 12-month timepoint, the addition of a booster dose resulted in an absolute increase in the ISR values compared to those who did not receive a booster dose (P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Only a minority of patients with genitourinary cancers did not ultimately achieve satisfactory seroconversion after receiving commercial COVID-19 vaccination. Cancer type or treatment rendered did not appear to affect the immune response mounted after vaccination.

COVID-19 vaccination is associated with enhanced efficacy of anti-PD-(L)1 immunotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients: a real-world study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine has played a major role in ending the pandemic. However, little is known about the influence of COVID-19 vaccine on the efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study is to explore whether COVID-19 vaccine impacts the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in NSCLC patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the survival data of ICI-treated 104 patients with stage III-IV NSCLC, who either received COVID-19 vaccination (n = 25) or no vaccination (n = 79). The potential risk factors, in particular roles of COVID-19 vaccination in the efficacy of ICIs in these patients, were evaluated.

RESULTS

Our results showed significantly improved ORR (28.0% vs. 11.39%, p = 0.05) and DCR (88.0% vs. 54.43%, p = 0.005) in the COVID-19 vaccinated group compared with the non-vaccinated group. Regarding the long-term survival benefits, COVID-19 vaccine showed profound influence both on the PFS (HR = 0.16, p = 0.021) and OS (HR = 0.168, p = 0.019) in patients with NSCLC under ICIs treatment. The PFS (p < 0.001) or OS (p < 0.001) was significantly improved in the COVID-19 vaccinated group, compared with the non-vaccinated group. Moreover, CD4 T cell (p = 0.047) level was higher in the COVID-19 vaccinated group than in the non-vaccinated group.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccination enhances anti-PD-1 immunotherapy efficacy in patients with stage III-IV NSCLC, suggesting that COVID-19 vaccination may provide additional benefit to NSCLC patients.

Longitudinal data on humoral response and neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and subvariants BA.4/5 and BQ.1.1 after COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients

PURPOSE

The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant of concern (VOC) and subvariants like BQ.1.1 demonstrate immune evasive potential. Little is known about the efficacy of booster vaccinations regarding this VOC and subvariants in cancer patients. This study is among the first to provide data on neutralizing antibodies (nAb) against BQ.1.1.

METHODS

Cancer patients at our center were prospectively enrolled between 01/2021 and 02/2022. Medical data and blood samples were collected at enrollment and before and after every SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, at 3 and 6 months.

RESULTS

We analyzed 408 samples from 148 patients (41% female), mainly with solid tumors (85%) on active therapy (92%; 80% chemotherapy). SARS-CoV-2 IgG and nAb titers decreased over time, however, significantly increased following third vaccination (p < 0.0001). NAb (ND50) against Omicron BA.1 was minimal prior and increased significantly after the third vaccination (p < 0.0001). ND50 titers against BQ.1.1 after the third vaccination were significantly lower than against BA.1 and BA.4/5 (p < 0.0001) and undetectable in half of the patients (48%). Factors associated with impaired immune response were hematologic malignancies, B cell depleting therapy and higher age. Choice of vaccine, sex and treatment with chemo-/immunotherapy did not influence antibody response. Patients with breakthrough infections had significantly lower nAb titers after both 6 months (p < 0.001) and the third vaccination (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

We present the first data on nAb against BQ.1.1 following the third vaccination in cancer patients. Our results highlight the threat that new emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants pose to cancer patients and support efforts to apply repeated vaccines. Since a considerable number of patients did not display an adequate immune response, continuing to exhibit caution remains reasonable.

Responses of patients with cancer to mRNA vaccines depend on the time interval between vaccination and last treatment

BACKGROUND

Personalized mRNA vaccines are promising new therapeutic options for patients with cancer. Because mRNA vaccines are not yet approved for first-line therapy, the vaccines are presently applied to individuals that received prior therapies that can have immunocompromising effects. There is a need to address how prior treatments impact mRNA vaccine outcomes.

METHOD

Therefore, we analyzed the response to BioNTech/Pfizer's anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine in 237 oncology outpatients, which cover a broad spectrum of hematologic malignancies and solid tumors and a variety of treatments. Patients were stratified by the time interval between the last treatment and first vaccination and by the presence or absence of florid tumors and IgG titers and T cell responses were analyzed 14 days after the second vaccination.

RESULTS

Regardless of the last treatment time point, our data indicate that vaccination responses in patients with checkpoint inhibition were comparable to healthy controls. In contrast, patients after chemotherapy or cortisone therapy did not develop an immune response until 6 months after the last systemic therapy and patients after Cht-immune checkpoint inhibitor and tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy only after 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, our data support that timing of mRNA-based therapy is critical and we suggest that at least a 6-months or 12-months waiting interval should be observed before mRNA vaccination in systemically treated patients.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection, Vaccination and Risk of Death in People with An Oncological Disease in Northeast Italy

People with a history of cancer have a higher risk of death when infected with SARS-CoV-2. COVID-19 vaccines in cancer patients proved safe and effective, even if efficacy may be lower than in the general population. In this population-based study, we compare the risk of dying of cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in 2021, vaccinated or non-vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 and residing in Friuli Venezia Giulia or in the province of Reggio Emilia. An amount of 800 deaths occurred among 6583 patients; the risk of death was more than three times higher among unvaccinated compared to vaccinated ones [HR 3.4; 95% CI 2.9-4.1]. The excess risk of death was stronger in those aged 70-79 years [HR 4.6; 95% CI 3.2-6.8], in patients with diagnosis made <1 year [HR 8.5; 95% CI 7.3-10.5] and in all cancer sites, including hematological malignancies. The study results indicate that vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection is a necessary tool to be included in the complex of oncological therapies aimed at reducing the risk of death.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Cancer and Patients Receiving HSCT or CAR-T Therapy: Immune Response, Real-World Effectiveness, and Implications for the Future

Patients with cancer demonstrate an increased vulnerability for infection and severe disease by SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19. Risk factors for severe COVID-19 include comorbidities, uncontrolled disease, and current line of treatment. Although COVID-19 vaccines have afforded some level of protection against infection and severe disease among patients with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies, decreased immunogenicity and real-world effectiveness have been observed among this population compared with healthy individuals. Characterizing and understanding the immune response to increasing doses or differing schedules of COVID-19 vaccines among patients with cancer is important to inform clinical and public health practices. In this article, we review SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility and immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with solid tumors, hematologic malignancies, and those receiving hematopoietic stem cell transplant or chimeric-antigen receptor T-cell therapy.

SARS-CoV-2 m-RNA Vaccine Response in Immunocompromised Patients: A Monocentric Study Comparing Cancer, People Living with HIV, Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Patients and Lung Transplant Recipients

Immunocompromised patients (ICPs) have a higher risk of developing severe forms of COVID-19 and experience a higher burden of complications and mortality than the general population. However, recent studies have suggested that the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines could be highly variable among different ICPs. Using a collaborative, monocentric, prospective cohort study, we assessed anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody titers following two and three doses of mRNA vaccines in four groups of ICPs (cancer [n = 232]: hematopoietic stem cell transplant [HSCT; n = 126] patients; people living with HIV [PLWH; n = 131]; and lung transplant [LT; n = 39] recipients) treated at Geneva University Hospitals; and healthy individuals (n = 49). After primo-vaccination, the highest anti-S antibody geometric mean titer (IU/mL) was observed in healthy individuals (2417 IU/mL [95% CI: 2327-2500]), the PLWH group (2024 IU/mL [95% CI:1854-2209]) and patients with cancer (840 IU/mL [95% CI: 625-1129]), whereas patients in the HSCT and LT groups had weaker antibody responses (198 IU/mL [95% CI: 108-361] and 7.3 IU/mL [95% CI: 2.5-22]). The booster dose conferred a high antibody response after 1 month in both PLWH (2500 IU/mL) and cancer patients (2386 IU/mL [95% CI: 2182-2500]), a moderate response in HSCT patients (521 IU/mL [95% CI: 306-885]) and a poor response in LT recipients (84 IU/mL [95% CI: 18-389]). Contemporary treatment with immunosuppressive drugs used in transplantation or chemotherapy was associated with a poor response to vaccination. Our findings confirmed the heterogeneity of the humoral response after mRNA vaccines among different ICPs and the need for personalized recommendations for each of these different groups.

Comparison of humoral and cellular immune responses in hematologic diseases following completed vaccination protocol with BBIBP-CorV, or AZD1222, or BNT162b2 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2

Background

Vaccination has proven the potential to control the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide. Although recent evidence suggests a poor humoral response against SARS-CoV-2 in vaccinated hematological disease (HD) patients, data on vaccination in these patients is limited with the comparison of mRNA-based, vector-based or inactivated virus-based vaccines.

Methods

Forty-nine HD patients and 46 healthy controls (HCs) were enrolled who received two-doses complete vaccination with BNT162b2, or AZD1222, or BBIBP-CorV, respectively. The antibodies reactive to the receptor binding domain of spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 were assayed by Siemens ADVIA Centaur assay. The reactive cellular immunity was assayed by flow cytometry. The PBMCs were reactivated with SARS-CoV-2 antigens and the production of activation-induced markers (TNF-α, IFN-γ, CD40L) was measured in CD4+ or CD8+ T-cells ex vivo.

Results

The anti-RBD IgG level was the highest upon BNT162b2 vaccination in HDs (1264 BAU/mL) vs. HCs (1325 BAU/mL) among the studied groups. The BBIBP-CorV vaccination in HDs (339.8 BAU/mL ***p < 0.001) and AZD1222 in HDs (669.9 BAU/mL *p < 0.05) resulted in weaker antibody response vs. BNT162b2 in HCs. The response rate of IgG production of HC vs. HD patients above the diagnostic cut-off value was 100% vs. 72% for the mRNA-based BNT162b2 vaccine; 93% vs. 56% for the vector-based AZD1222, or 69% vs. 33% for the inactivated vaccine BBIBP-CorV, respectively. Cases that underwent the anti-CD20 therapy resulted in significantly weaker (**p < 0.01) anti-RBD IgG level (302 BAU/mL) than without CD20 blocking in the HD group (928 BAU/mL). The response rates of CD4+ TNF-α+, CD4+ IFN-γ+, or CD4+ CD40L+ cases were lower in HDs vs. HCs in all vaccine groups. However, the BBIBP-CorV vaccine resulted the highest CD4+ TNF-α and CD4+ IFN-γ+ T-cell mediated immunity in the HD group.

Conclusion

We have demonstrated a significant weaker overall response to vaccines in the immunologically impaired HD population vs. HCs regardless of vaccine type. Although, the humoral immune activity against SARS-CoV-2 can be highly evoked by mRNA-based BNT162b2 vaccination compared to vector-based AZD1222 vaccine, or inactivated virus vaccine BBIBP-CorV, whereas the CD4+ T-cell mediated cellular activity was highest in HDs vaccinated with BBIBP-CorV.

Advances in Simple, Rapid, and Contamination-Free Instantaneous Nucleic Acid Devices for Pathogen Detection

Pathogenic pathogens invade the human body through various pathways, causing damage to host cells, tissues, and their functions, ultimately leading to the development of diseases and posing a threat to human health. The rapid and accurate detection of pathogenic pathogens in humans is crucial and pressing. Nucleic acid detection offers advantages such as higher sensitivity, accuracy, and specificity compared to antibody and antigen detection methods. However, conventional nucleic acid testing is time-consuming, labor-intensive, and requires sophisticated equipment and specialized medical personnel. Therefore, this review focuses on advanced nucleic acid testing systems that aim to address the issues of testing time, portability, degree of automation, and cross-contamination. These systems include extraction-free rapid nucleic acid testing, fully automated extraction, amplification, and detection, as well as fully enclosed testing and commercial nucleic acid testing equipment. Additionally, the biochemical methods used for extraction, amplification, and detection in nucleic acid testing are briefly described. We hope that this review will inspire further research and the development of more suitable extraction-free reagents and fully automated testing devices for rapid, point-of-care diagnostics.

Safety and tolerability study of sotrovimab (VIR-7831) prophylaxis against COVID-19 infection in immunocompromised individuals with impaired SARS-CoV-2 humoral immunity

BACKGROUND

Multiple vaccines have been approved since August 2021 to prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2; however, 20-40% of immunocompromised people fail to develop SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies after COVID-19 vaccination and remain at high risk of infection and more severe illness than non-immunocompromised hosts. Sotrovimab (VIR-7831) is a monoclonal neutralizing antibody that binds a conserved epitope on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. It is neither renally excreted nor metabolized by P450 enzymes and therefore unlikely to interact with concomitant medications (e.g., immunosuppressive medications). In this open-label feasibility study protocol, we will define the optimal dose and dosing interval of sotrovimab as pre-exposure prophylaxis for immunocompromised individuals as well as its safety and tolerability in this population specifically.

METHODS

We will enroll 93 eligible immunocompromised adults with a negative or low-positive (< 50 U/mL) SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody. In phase 1, the first 10 patients will participate in a lead-in pharmacokinetics (PK) cohort study to determine the optimal dosing interval. Phase 2 will expand this population to 50 participants to examine rates of infusion-related reactions (IRR) with a 30-min 500 mg sotrovimab IV infusion. Phase 3 will be an expansion cohort for further assessment of the safety and tolerability of sotrovimab. In phase 4, the first 10 patients receiving 2000 mg IV of sotrovimab on the second sotrovimab infusion day will comprise a lead-in safety cohort that will inform the duration of observation following administration of the drug. The patients will be followed for safety and COVID-19 events for 36 weeks after the second dose.

DISCUSSION

In a previous phase III randomized, placebo-controlled pivotal trial, there were no significant differences in the prevalence of adverse events in patients receiving sotrovimab vs. placebo. Thus, we propose an open-label feasibility study protocol of sotrovimab as pre-exposure prophylaxis for immunocompromised individuals to evaluate its PK in immunocompromised individuals with impaired SARS-CoV-2 humoral immunity and define optimal dosing intervals. We also aim to determine COVID-19 infections over the study period and self-reported quality of life measures throughout the study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05210101.

The presence of senescent peripheral T-cells is negatively correlated to COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity in cancer patients under 70 years of age

Purpose

Cancer patients are at risk of severe COVID-19 infection, and vaccination is recommended. Nevertheless, we observe a failure of COVID-19 vaccines in this vulnerable population. We hypothesize that senescent peripheral T-cells alter COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity.

Methods

We performed a monocentric prospective study and enrolled cancer patients and healthy donors before the COVID-19 vaccination. The primary objective was to assess the association of peripheral senescent T-cells (CD28^-CD57⁺KLRG1⁺) with COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity.

Results

Eighty cancer patients have been included, with serological and specific T-cell responses evaluated before and at 3 months post-vaccination. Age ≥ 70 years was the principal clinical factor negatively influencing the serological (p=0.035) and specific SARS-CoV-2 T-cell responses (p=0.047). The presence of senescent T-cells was correlated to lower serological (p=0.049) and specific T-cell responses (p=0.009). Our results sustained the definition of a specific cut-off for senescence immune phenotype (SIP) (≥ 5% of CD4 and ≥ 39.5% of CD8 T-cells), which was correlated to a lower serological response induced by COVID-19 vaccination for CD4 and CD8 SIP^high (p=0.039 and p=0.049 respectively). While CD4 SIP level had no impact on COVID-19 vaccine efficacy in elderly patients, our results unraveled a possible predictive role for CD4 SIP^high T-cell levels in younger cancer patients.

Conclusions

Elderly cancer patients have a poor serological response to vaccination; specific strategies are needed in this population. Also, the presence of a CD4 SIP^high affects the serological response in younger patients and seems to be a potential biomarker of no vaccinal response.

A Three-Dose mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine Regime Produces Both Suitable Immunogenicity and Satisfactory Efficacy in Patients with Solid Cancers

BACKGROUND

The recommended booster third dose of vaccination against COVID-19 in cancer patients seems reasonable to protect them against a severe disease course. A prospective study was designed to assess the immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in this cohort.

METHODS

Patients with solid malignancies on active treatment were followed up after the primary course and booster third dose of vaccination to assess their anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG levels, efficacy in the case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and safety.

RESULTS

Out of 125 patients receiving the primary course of vaccination, 66 patients received a booster third dose of mRNA vaccine, with a 20-fold increase in median anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG levels compared to Ab levels six months post-primary course of vaccination (p < 0.0001). After the booster third dose, anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG levels were comparable to healthy controls (p = 0.113). There was a decline in Ab levels 3 (p = 0.0003) and 6 months (p < 0.0001) post-third booster dose. No patients had either a severe disease course or a lethal outcome in the case of SARS-CoV-2 infection after the third booster dose.

CONCLUSION

The third booster vaccination dose against COVID-19 in solid cancer patients triggers substantial immunogenicity and is safe and effective for preventing a severe COVID-19 disease course.

Pandemic Phase-Adjusted Analysis of COVID-19 Outcomes Reveals Reduced Intrinsic Vulnerability and Substantial Vaccine Protection From Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Patients With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Although representing the majority of newly diagnosed cancers, patients with breast cancer appear less vulnerable to COVID-19 mortality compared with other malignancies. In the absence of patients on active cancer therapy included in vaccination trials, a contemporary real-world evaluation of outcomes during the various pandemic phases, as well as of the impact of vaccination, is needed to better inform clinical practice.

METHODS

We compared COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among patients with breast cancer across prevaccination (February 27, 2020-November 30, 2020), Alpha-Delta (December 1, 2020-December 14, 2021), and Omicron (December 15, 2021-January 31, 2022) phases using OnCovid registry participants (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04393974). Twenty-eight-day case fatality rate (CFR28) and COVID-19 severity were compared in unvaccinated versus double-dosed/boosted patients (vaccinated) with inverse probability of treatment weighting models adjusted for country of origin, age, number of comorbidities, tumor stage, and receipt of systemic anticancer therapy within 1 month of COVID-19 diagnosis.

RESULTS

By the data lock of February 4, 2022, the registry counted 613 eligible patients with breast cancer: 60.1% (n = 312) hormone receptor-positive, 25.2% (n = 131) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, and 14.6% (n = 76) triple-negative. The majority (61%; n = 374) had localized/locally advanced disease. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range, 51-74 years). A total of 193 patients (31.5%) presented ≥ 2 comorbidities and 69% (n = 330) were never smokers. In total, 392 (63.9%), 164 (26.8%), and 57 (9.3%) were diagnosed during the prevaccination, Alpha-Delta, and Omicron phases, respectively. Analysis of CFR28 demonstrates comparable estimates of mortality across the three pandemic phases (13.9%, 12.2%, 5.3%, respectively; P = .182). Nevertheless, a significant improvement in outcome measures of COVID-19 severity across the three pandemic time periods was observed. Importantly, when reported separately, unvaccinated patients from the Alpha-Delta and Omicron phases achieved comparable outcomes to those from the prevaccination phase. Of 566 patients eligible for the vaccination analysis, 72 (12.7%) were fully vaccinated and 494 (87.3%) were unvaccinated. We confirmed with inverse probability of treatment weighting multivariable analysis and following a clustered robust correction for participating center that vaccinated patients achieved improved CFR28 (odds ratio [OR], 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.40), hospitalization (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.69), COVID-19 complications (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.45), and reduced requirement of COVID-19-specific therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.63) and oxygen therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.67) compared with unvaccinated controls.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight a consistent reduction of COVID-19 severity in patients with breast cancer during the Omicron outbreak in Europe. We also demonstrate that even in this population, a complete severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination course is a strong determinant of improved morbidity and mortality from COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the first year after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant: a prospective, multicentre, observational study

Background

The optimal timing for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines within the first year after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) is poorly understood.

Methods

We conducted a prospective, multicentre, observational study of allogeneic HCT recipients who initiated SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations within 12 months of HCT. Participants were enrolled at 22 academic cancer centers across the United States. Participants of any age who were planning to receive a first post-HCT SARS-CoV-2 vaccine within 12 months of HCT were eligible. We obtained blood prior to and after each vaccine dose for up to four vaccine doses, with an end-of-study sample seven to nine months after enrollment. We tested for SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (anti-S) IgG; nucleocapsid protein (anti-N) IgG; neutralizing antibodies for Wuhan D614G, Delta B.1.617.2, and Omicron B.1.1.529 strains; and SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell receptors (TCRs). The primary outcome was a comparison of anti-S IgG titers at the post-V2 time point in participants initiating vaccinations <4 months versus 4-12 months after HCT using a propensity-adjusted analysis. We also evaluated factors associated with high-level anti-S IgG titers (≥2403 U/mL) in logistic regression models.

Findings

Between April 22, 2021 and November 17, 2021, 175 allogeneic HCT recipients were enrolled in the study, of whom all but one received mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. SARS-CoV-2 anti-S IgG titers, neutralizing antibody titers, and TCR breadth and depth did not significantly differ at all tested time points following the second vaccination among those initiating vaccinations <4 months versus 4-12 months after HCT. Anti-S IgG ≥2403 U/mL correlated with neutralizing antibody levels similar to those observed in a prior study of non-immunocompromised individuals, and 57% of participants achieved anti-S IgG ≥2403 U/mL at the end-of-study time point. In models adjusted for SARS-CoV-2 infection pre-enrollment, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination pre-HCT, CD19+ B-cell count, CD4+ T-cell count, and age (as applicable to the model), vaccine initiation timing was not associated with high-level anti-S IgG titers at the post-V2, post-V3, or end-of-study time points. Notably, prior graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD) or use of immunosuppressive medications were not associated with high-level anti-S IgG titers. Grade ≥3 vaccine-associated adverse events were infrequent.

Interpretation

These data support starting mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination three months after HCT, irrespective of concurrent GVHD or use of immunosuppressive medications. This is one of the largest prospective analyses of vaccination for any pathogen within the first year after allogeneic HCT and supports current guidelines for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination starting three months post-HCT. Additionally, there are few studies of mRNA vaccine formulations for other pathogens in HCT recipients, and these data provide encouraging proof-of-concept for the utility of early vaccination targeting additional pathogens with mRNA vaccine platforms.

Funding

National Marrow Donor Program, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation, Novartis, LabCorp, American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, Adaptive Biotechnologies, and the National Institutes of Health.

Clinical efficacy of the first two doses of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in solid cancer patients

INTRODUCTION

Cancer patients are frail individuals, thus the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection is essential. To date, vaccination is the most effective tool to prevent COVID-19. In a previous study, we evaluated the immunogenicity of two doses of mRNA-based vaccines (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) in solid cancer patients. We found that seroconversion rate in cancer patients without a previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was lower than in healthy controls (66.7% vs. 95%, p = 0.0020). The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the vaccination in the same population.

METHODS

This is a single-institution, prospective observational study. Data were collected through a predefined questionnaire through phone call in the period between the second and third vaccine dose. The primary objective was to describe the clinical efficacy of the vaccination, defined as the percentage of vaccinated subjects who did not develop symptomatic COVID-19 within 6 months after the second dose. The secondary objective was to describe the clinical features of patients who developed COVID-19.

RESULTS

From January to June 2021, 195 cancer patients were enrolled. Considering that 7 (3.59%) patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 5 developed symptomatic disease, the clinical efficacy of the vaccination was 97.4%. COVID-19 disease in most patients was mild and managed at home; only one hospitalization was recorded and no patient required hospitalization in the intensive care unit.

DISCUSSION

Our study suggests that increasing vaccination coverage, including booster doses, could improve the prevention of infection, hospitalization, serious illness, and death in the frail population of cancer patients.

Adult Patients with Cancer Have Impaired Humoral Responses to Complete and Booster COVID-19 Vaccination, Especially Those with Hematologic Cancer on Active Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The exclusion of patients with cancer in clinical trials evaluating COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and safety, in combination with the high rate of severe infections, highlights the need for optimizing vaccination strategies. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published available data from prospective and retrospective cohort studies that included patients with either solid or hematological malignancies according to the PRISMA Guidelines. A literature search was performed in the following databases: Medline (Pubmed), Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov, EMBASE, CENTRAL and Google Scholar. Overall, 70 studies were included for the first and second vaccine dose and 60 studies for the third dose. The Effect Size (ES) of the seroconversion rate after the first dose was 0.41 (95%CI: 0.33-0.50) for hematological malignancies and 0.56 (95%CI: 0.47-0.64) for solid tumors. The seroconversion rates after the second dose were 0.62 (95%CI: 0.57-0.67) for hematological malignancies and 0.88 (95%CI: 0.82-0.93) for solid tumors. After the third dose, the ES for seroconversion was estimated at 0.63 (95%CI: 0.54-0.72) for hematological cancer and 0.88 (95%CI: 0.75-0.97) for solid tumors. A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate potential factors affecting immune response. Production of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was found to be more affected in patients with hematological malignancies, which was attributed to the type of malignancy and treatment with monoclonal antibodies according to the subgroup analyses. Overall, this study highlights that patients with cancer present suboptimal humoral responses after COVID-19 vaccination. Several factors including timing of vaccination in relevance with active therapy, type of therapy, and type of cancer should be considered throughout the immunization process.

Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Cancer Patients: A Prospective Study

Introduction Cancer patients on active treatment are at increased risk of developing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), making effective immunization of the utmost importance. However, the effectiveness of vaccination in this population is still unclear. This study aims to evaluate the response against COVID-19 in a cohort of patients with active cancer under immunosuppressive therapy. Methods This was a prospective, cross-sectional, single-center study that included patients with cancer under immunosuppressive therapy vaccinated against COVID-19 between April and September 2021. Exclusion criteria were: previous known severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, single-dose vaccine or incomplete vaccination scheme. Immunoglobulin G (IgG) anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels were assessed using 35.2 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL as the positive cut-off. Assessments were performed 14-31 days after the first and second dose and three months after the second dose. Results A total of 103 patients were included. The median age was 60 years. Most patients were being treated for gastrointestinal cancer (n=38, 36.9%), breast cancer (n=33, 32%) or head and neck cancer (n=18, 17.5%). At evaluation, 72 patients (69.9%) were being treated with palliative intent. The majority were being treated with chemotherapy (CT) alone (57.3%). At the first assessment, levels of circulating SARS-CoV-2 IgG consistent with seroconversion were present in 49 patients (47.6%). At the time of the second assessment, 91% (n=100) achieved seroconversion. Three months after the second dose, 83% (n=70) maintained levels of circulating SARS-CoV-2 IgG consistent with seroconversion. In this study, no SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in the study population. Conclusions Our findings suggest that this group of patients had a satisfactory COVID-19 immunization response. Although promising, this study should be replicated on a wider scale in order to validate these findings.

Immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in patients with hematologic malignancies

Purpose

The present study aimed to study the immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in patients with hematologic malignancies.

Materials and Methods

This prospective cohort study of hematology patients aimed to evaluate their antibody levels against the receptor-binding domain of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 spike protein and seroconversion rates following two doses of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine. Between June and July 2021, we enrolled 61 patients and included 44 patients in our analysis. Antibody levels were assessed 8 and 4 weeks after the first and second injections, respectively, and compared with those of a healthy group.

Results

Eight weeks after the first dose, the geometric mean antibody level was 1.02 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL in the patient group and 37.91 BAU/mL in the healthy volunteer group (p<0.01). Four weeks after the second dose, the geometric mean antibody level was 9.44 BAU/mL in patients and 641.6 BAU/mL in healthy volunteers (p<0.01). The seroconversion rates 8 weeks after the first dose were 27.27% and 98.86% in the patient and healthy volunteer groups, respectively (p<0.001). The seroconversion rate 4 weeks after the second dose was 47.73% in patients and 100% in healthy volunteers. Factors leading to lower seroconversion rates were rituximab therapy (p=0.002), steroid therapy (p<0.001), and ongoing chemotherapy (p=0.048). Factors that decreased antibody levels were hematologic cancer (p<0.001), ongoing chemotherapy (p=0.004), rituximab (p<0.001), steroid use (p<0.001), and absolute lymphocyte count <1,000/mm³ (p=0.009).

Conclusion

Immune responses were impaired in individuals with hematologic malignancies, particularly patients undergoing ongoing therapy and B-cell-depleting therapy. Additional vaccinations should be considered for these patients, and further investigated.

Discordant Humoral and T-Cell Response to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine and the Risk of Breakthrough Infections in Women with Breast Cancer, Receiving Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4 and 6 Inhibitors

Few data are available about the immune response to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with breast cancer receiving cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i). We conducted a prospective, single-center study of patients with breast cancer treated with CDK4/6i who received mRNA-1273 vaccination, as well as a comparative group of healthcare workers. The primary endpoint was to compare the rate and magnitude of humoral and T-cell response after full vaccination. A better neutralizing antibody and anti-S IgG level was observed after vaccination in the subgroup of women receiving CDK4/6i, but a trend toward a reduced CD4 and CD8 T-cell response in the CDK4/6i group was not statistically significant. There were no differences in the rate of COVID-19 after vaccination (19% vs. 12%), but breakthrough infections were observed in those with lower levels of anti-S IgG and neutralizing antibodies after the first dose. A lower rate of CD4 T-cell response was also found in those individuals with breakthrough infections, although a non-significant and similar level of CD8 T-cell response was also observed, regardless of breakthrough infections. The rate of adverse events was higher in patients treated with CDK4/6i, without serious adverse events. In conclusion, there was a robust humoral response, but a blunted T-cell response to mRNA vaccine in women receiving CDK4/6i, suggesting a reduced trend of the adaptative immune response.

Determinants of humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in solid cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Solid cancer patients following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are likely to have a lower seroconversion rate than healthy adults. Seroconversion between those with and without cancer is likely to vary moderately or to be restricted to specific subgroups. Therefore, we sought to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify risk factors for diminished humoral immune responses in solid cancer patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were used to search literature through May 1, 2022. Prospective or retrospective studies comparing responders with non-responders against SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein receptor-binding domain (RBD) following COVID-19 vaccination were included. Pooled Odds Ratios (pORs) with 95% CIs for binary variables and differences in means (with SDs) for continuous variables were calculated to determine the pooled effect estimates of risk factors for poor antibody response.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies enrolling 3593 patients were included in the analysis. Seroconversion was seen in 84% of the pooled study population. Male gender, age >65 years, and recent chemotherapy were all factors in a poor immune response. Patients under follow-up, those who received immunotherapy or targeted therapy, were more likely to be seropositive. Cancer subtypes, vaccine types, and timing of antibody testing from the 2nd dose of vaccine did not correlate with seroconversion.

CONCLUSION

Cytotoxic therapy for solid cancer may portend poor immune response following 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccines suggesting a need for booster doses in these patients. Immunotherapy and targeted therapy are likely to be associated with seropositive status, and thus can be considered as an alternative to cytotoxic agents in cases where both therapies are equally efficacious.

A comparative study of the COVID-19 vaccine efficacy among cancer patients: mRNA versus non-mRNA

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients have an increased risk of a severe COVID-19 infection with higher mortality rate. This study aimed to analyze the levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG and NAB among cancer patients who were vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines, either with BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222/ChAdOx1nCoV-19, or Coronavac/BBIBP-CorV vaccines.

METHOD

A cross-sectional study was conducted among subjects with either solid or hematological cancers who had received two doses of either mRNA or non-mRNA vaccines within 6 months. The levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG and NAb were analyzed using the Mindray Immunoassay Analyzer CL-900i. Statistical analysis was conducted using mean comparison and regression analysis.

RESULT

The mRNA-1273 vaccine had the highest median levels of S-RBD IgG and NAb, followed by BNT162b, ChAdOx1nCoV-19, and BBIBP-CorV/Coronavac. The levels of S-RBD IgG and NAb in subjects vaccinated with mRNA vaccines were significantly higher than those of non-mRNA vaccines when grouped based on their characteristics, including age, type of cancer, chemotherapy regimen, and comorbidity (p<0.05). Furthermore, the S-RBD IgG and NAb levels between the subjects vaccinated with non-mRNA vaccines and the subjects vaccinated with mRNA vaccines were significantly different (p<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the same types of vaccines. This study demonstrated a very strong correlation between the level of S-RBD IgG and the level of NAb (R = 0.962; p<0.001). The level of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG was consistently higher compared to the level of NAb.

CONCLUSIONS

Generally, mRNA vaccines produced significantly higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG and NAb levels than non-mRNA vaccines in cancer subjects.

Response to COVID-19 vaccination post CAR T therapy in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and multiple myeloma

COVID-19 adversely affects individuals with cancer. Several studies have found that seroconversion rates among patients with hematologic malignancies are suboptimal when compared to patients without cancer. Patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and multiple myeloma (MM) are immunocompromised due to impaired humoral and cellular immunity in addition to prescribed immunosuppressive therapy. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy is now widely used for NHL and MM, but little is known about seroconversion rates after COVID-19 vaccination among these populations. We evaluated SARS-CoV-2 spike-binding IgG antibody levels following COVID-19 vaccination among NHL and MM CAR T therapy recipients. Out of 104 CAR T infusions, 19 patients developed known COVID-19 infection post-CAR T. We tested 17 patients that received CAR T for antibody spike titers post COVID-19 vaccination, only 29 % (n = 5) were able to mount a clinically relevant antibody response (>250 IU/mL).

Effectiveness and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Malignant Disease

A novel virus named SARS-CoV-2 has caused a worldwide pandemic, resulting in a disastrous impact to the public health since 2019. The disease is much more lethal among patients with malignant disease. Vaccination plays an important role in the prevention of infection and subsequent severe COVID-19. However, the efficacy and safety of vaccines for cancer patients needs further investigation. Encouragingly, there have been important findings deduced from research so far. In this review, an overview of the immunogenicity, effectiveness, and safeness of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cancer to date is to be shown. We also highlight important questions to consider and directions that could be followed in future research.

Ruxolitinib treatment in myelofibrosis and polycythemia vera causes suboptimal humoral immune response following standard and booster vaccination with BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine

Patients affected by myelofibrosis (MF) or polycythemia vera (PV) and treated with ruxolitinib are at high risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019. Now a vaccine against the virus SARS-CoV-2, which is responsible for this disease, is available. However, sensitivity to vaccines is usually lower in these patients. Moreover, fragile patients were not included in large trials investigating the efficacy of vaccines. Thus, little is known about the efficacy of this approach in this group of patients. In this prospective single-center study, we evaluated 43 patients (30 MF patients and 13 with PV) receiving ruxolitinib as a treatment for their myeloproliferative disease. We measured anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid IgG against SARS-CoV2 15-30 days after the second and the third BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine booster dose. Patients receiving ruxolitinib showed an impaired antibody response to complete vaccination (2 doses), as 32.5% of patients did not develop any response. After the third booster dose with Comirnaty, results slightly improved, as 80% of these patients produced antibodies above the threshold positivity. However, the quantity of produced antibodies was well below that reached than those reported for healthy individuals. PV patients elicited a better response than patients affected by MF. Thus, different strategies should be considered for this high-risk group of patients.

SARS-CoV-2-Specific T Cell Responses in Immunocompromised Individuals with Cancer, HIV or Solid Organ Transplants

Adaptive immune responses play an important role in the clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. While evaluations of the virus-specific defense often focus on the humoral response, cellular immunity is crucial for the successful control of infection, with the early development of cytotoxic T cells being linked to efficient viral clearance. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 induces both CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses and permits protection from severe COVID-19, including infection with the currently circulating variants of concern. Nevertheless, in immunocompromised individuals, first data imply significantly impaired SARS-CoV-2-specific immune responses after both natural infection and vaccination. Hence, these high-risk groups require particular consideration, not only in routine clinical practice, but also in the development of future vaccination strategies. In order to assist physicians in the guidance of immunocompromised patients, concerning the management of infection or the benefit of (booster) vaccinations, this review aims to provide a concise overview of the current knowledge about SARS-CoV-2-specific cellular immune responses in the vulnerable cohorts of cancer patients, people living with HIV (PLWH), and solid organ transplant recipients (SOT). Recent findings regarding the virus-specific cellular immunity in these differently immunocompromised populations might influence clinical decision-making in the future.

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and risk of hospital admission and death among infected cancer patients: A population-based study in northern Italy

BACKGROUND

The risks of hospital admission for COVID-19-related conditions and all-cause death of SARS-CoV-2 infected cancer patients were investigated according to vaccination status.

METHODS

A population-based cohort study was carried out on 9754 infected cancer patients enrolled from January 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022. Subdistribution hazard ratio (SHRs) or hazard ratios (HRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for sex, age, comorbidity index, and time since cancer incidence, were computed to assess the risk of COVID-19 hospital admission or death of unvaccinated vs. patients with at least one dose of vaccine (i.e., vaccinated).

RESULTS

2485 unvaccinated patients (25.5 %) were at a 2.57 elevated risk of hospital admission (95 % CI: 2.13-2.87) and at a 3.50 elevated risk of death (95 % CI: 3.19-3.85), as compared to vaccinated patients. Significantly elevated hospitalizations and death risks emerged for both sexes, across all age groups and time elapsed since cancer diagnosis. For unvaccinated patients, SHRs for hospitalization were particularly elevated in those with solid tumors (SHR = 2.69 vs. 1.66 in patients with hematologic tumors) while HRs for the risk of death were homogeneously distributed. As compared to boosted patients, SHRs for hospitalization and HRs for death increased with decreasing number of doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings stress the importance of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to reduce hospital admission and death risk in cancer patients.

Clinical efficacy and long-term immunogenicity of an early triple dose regimen of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in cancer patients

Introduction: Three doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines have been recommended for cancer patients to reduce the risk of severe disease. Anti-neoplastic treatment, such as chemotherapy, may affect long-term vaccine immunogenicity. Method: Patients with solid or haematological cancer were recruited from 2 hospitals between July 2021 and March 2022. Humoral response was evaluated using GenScript cPASS surrogate virus neutralisation assays. Clinical outcomes were obtained from medical records and national mandatory-reporting databases. Results: A total of 273 patients were recruited, with 40 having haematological malignancies and the rest solid tumours. Among the participants, 204 (74.7%) were receiving active cancer therapy, including 98 (35.9%) undergoing systemic chemotherapy and the rest targeted therapy or immunotherapy. All patients were seronegative at baseline. Seroconversion rates after receiving 1, 2 and 3 doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination were 35.2%, 79.4% and 92.4%, respectively. After 3 doses, patients on active treatment for haematological malignancies had lower antibodies (57.3%±46.2) when compared to patients on immunotherapy (94.1%±9.56, P<0.05) and chemotherapy (92.8%±18.1, P<0.05). SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in 77 (28.2%) patients, of which 18 were severe. No patient receiving a third dose within 90 days of the second dose experienced severe infection. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the benefit of early administration of the third dose among cancer patients. Keywords: Cancer, oncology, SARS-CoV-2, third dose, vaccination

Longitudinal efficacy and toxicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in cancer patients treated with immunotherapy

Despite more than 2 years having elapsed since the onset of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, a level of hesitation around increased SARS-CoV-2 vaccine toxicity in cancer patients receiving immunotherapy (IO) remains. This hesitation stems from the idea that IO agents could elicit an overwhelming immune stimulation post vaccination and therefore increase the risk of vaccine-related toxicity. The aim of our study was to explore serological responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients treated with IO and describe the level of immune stimulation using parameters such as blood cytokines, autoantibody levels and immune related adverse events (irAEs) post vaccination. Fifty-one evaluable patients were enrolled in this longitudinal study. Absolute levels and neutralization potential of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were not significantly different in the IO group compared to non-IO. Chemotherapy adversely affected seroconversion when compared to IO and/or targeted treatment. Following vaccination, the prevalence of grade ≥2 irAEs in patients treated with IO was not higher than the usual reported IO toxicity. We report, for the first time, that anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, elicited the generation of five autoantibodies. The significantly increased autoantibodies were IgM autoantibodies against beta-2 glycoprotein (p = 0.02), myeloperoxidase (p = 0.03), nucleosome (p = 0.041), SPLUNC2 (p < 0.001) and IgG autoantibody against Myosin Heavy Chain 6 (MYH6) (p < 0.001). Overall, comprehensive analysis of a small cohort showed that co-administration of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and IO is not associated with increased irAEs. Nevertheless, the detection of autoantibodies post anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination warrants further investigation (NCT03702309).

Mechanistic model for booster doses effectiveness in healthy, cancer, and immunosuppressed patients infected with SARS-CoV-2

SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are effective at limiting disease severity, but effectiveness is lower among patients with cancer or immunosuppression. Effectiveness wanes with time and varies by vaccine type. Moreover, previously prescribed vaccines were based on the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 spike-protein that emerging variants may evade. Here, we describe a mechanistic mathematical model for vaccination-induced immunity. We validate it with available clinical data and use it to simulate the effectiveness of vaccines against viral variants with lower antigenicity, increased virulence, or enhanced cell binding for various vaccine platforms. The analysis includes the omicron variant as well as hypothetical future variants with even greater immune evasion of vaccine-induced antibodies and addresses the potential benefits of the new bivalent vaccines. We further account for concurrent cancer or underlying immunosuppression. The model confirms enhanced immunogenicity following booster vaccination in immunosuppressed patients but predicts ongoing booster requirements for these individuals to maintain protection. We further studied the impact of variants on immunosuppressed individuals as a function of the interval between multiple booster doses. Our model suggests possible strategies for future vaccinations and suggests tailored strategies for high-risk groups.

Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer-Related Care in the United States: An Overview

COVID-19 impacted several health services, including cancer-related care. Its implications were significant due to the lapse in hospital resources, compounded by the delays stemming from the economic effects on patients' jobs and medical coverage. Furthermore, reports suggesting an increased risk for morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 in patients with cancer and those on active cancer treatment caused additional fear and potential delays in seeking medical services. This review provides an overview of the pandemic's impact on cancer care in the United States and suggests measures for tackling similar situations in the future.

Potent high-avidity neutralizing antibodies and T cell responses after COVID-19 vaccination in individuals with B cell lymphoma and multiple myeloma

Individuals with hematologic malignancies are at increased risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet profound analyses of COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity are scarce. Here we present an observational study with expanded methodological analysis of a longitudinal, primarily BNT162b2 mRNA-vaccinated cohort of 60 infection-naive individuals with B cell lymphomas and multiple myeloma. We show that many of these individuals, despite markedly lower anti-spike IgG titers, rapidly develop potent infection neutralization capacities against several severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants of concern (VoCs). The observed increased neutralization capacity per anti-spike antibody unit was paralleled by an early step increase in antibody avidity between the second and third vaccination. All individuals with hematologic malignancies, including those depleted of B cells and individuals with multiple myeloma, exhibited a robust T cell response to peptides derived from the spike protein of VoCs Delta and Omicron (BA.1). Consistently, breakthrough infections were mainly of mild to moderate severity. We conclude that COVID-19 vaccination can induce broad antiviral immunity including ultrapotent neutralizing antibodies with high avidity in different hematologic malignancies.

Characterization of post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 T cell subtypes in patients with different hematologic malignancies and treatments

Background

To evaluate the benefits of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in cancer patients it is relevant to understand the adaptive immune response elicited after vaccination. Patients affected by hematologic malignancies are frequently immune-compromised and show a decreased seroconversion rate compared to other cancer patients or controls. Therefore, vaccine-induced cellular immune responses in these patients might have an important protective role and need a detailed evaluation.

Methods

Certain T cell subtypes (CD4, CD8, Tfh, γδT), including cell functionality as indicated by cytokine secretion (IFN, TNF) and expression of activation markers (CD69, CD154) were assessed via multi-parameter flow cytometry in hematologic malignancy patients (N=12) and healthy controls (N=12) after a second SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose. The PBMC of post-vaccination samples were stimulated with a spike-peptide pool (S-Peptides) of SARS-CoV-2, with CD3/CD28, with a pool of peptides from the cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus and influenza A virus (CEF-Peptides) or left unstimulated. Furthermore, the concentration of spike-specific antibodies has been analyzed in patients.

Results

Our results indicate that hematologic malignancy patients developed a robust cellular immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination comparable to that of healthy controls, and for certain T cell subtypes even higher. The most reactive T cells to SARS-CoV-2 spike peptides belonged to the CD4 and Tfh cell compartment, being median (IQR), 3.39 (1.41-5.92) and 2.12 (0.55-4.14) as a percentage of IFN- and TNF-producing Tfh cells in patients. In this regard, the immunomodulatory treatment of patients before the vaccination period seems important as it was strongly associated with a higher percentage of activated CD4 and Tfh cells. SARS-CoV-2- and CEF-specific T cell responses significantly correlated with each other. Compared to lymphoma patients, myeloma patients had an increased percentage of SARS-CoV-2-specific Tfh cells. T-SNE analysis revealed higher frequencies of γδT cells in patients compared to controls, especially in myeloma patients. In general, after vaccination, SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were also detectable in patients without seroconversion.

Conclusion

Hematologic malignancy patients are capable of developing a SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4 and Tfh cellular immune response after vaccination, and certain immunomodulatory therapies in the period before vaccination might increase the antigen-specific immune response. A proper response to recall antigens (e.g., CEF-Peptides) reflects immune cellular functionality and might be predictive for generating a newly induced antigen-specific immune response as is expected after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

Safety of mRNA-COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients With Thoracic Cancers

BACKGROUND

Pivotal trials of COVID-19 vaccines did not include cancer patients with questions remaining in this population. Particularly in patients with thoracic malignancies receiving anticancer treatments, the safety of these vaccines has so far been little investigated.

METHODS

This is a prospective trial of patients with thoracic cancer receiving anticancer treatments and COVID-19 vaccines at the Division of Thoracic Oncology of European Institute of Oncology between February and September 2021.

RESULTS

A total 207 patients affected by thoracic cancers (199 lung cancers and 8 mesotheliomas) had received Covid-19 vaccines (206 mRNA vaccines and 1 virus-vectored vaccine). The majority of patients had at least one comorbidity (76.3%). They were concomitantly treating with targeted therapy (TT) (45.9%), immunotherapy (IO) (22.7%), and chemotherapy (CT) (14%). A total of 64 AEs (15.6%) were observed after administration of Sars-Cov-2 vaccine. The majority of AEs were grade 1 [G1] (6.3%) and G2 (8.8%), only two events were G3 (0.5%). The median follow-up was 9 months (range 1-22 months), during this follow-up 21 patients (10.1%) had a positive nasal swab, most of the patients were asymptomatic (67%) and the symptomatic ones (33%) had mild symptoms and fewer complications and hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 m-RNA vaccines appear to be safe in the cohort of patients with thoracic malignances in active treatment, including those receiving immunotherapy. Considering the high morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 in patients with lung cancer receiving active treatments, our study supports the current vaccine prioritization, third and/or fourth dose, of all cancer patients with active treatment.

Role of [18F] FDG PET-CT in detection of COVID-19 vaccine-associated hypermetabolic lymphadenopathy (VAHL) in lymphoma patients: with serologic testing correlation

Background

COVID-19 vaccination of the population has a great importance, especially in oncological patients. The high incidence of vaccine-associated hypermetabolic lymphadenopathy (VAHL) makes a difficulty in the diagnosis of PET-CT of oncological patients. They should be vaccinated in the side opposite to the expected malignant LNs to avoid unnecessary biopsy and change in therapy. The aim of this study was to assess the role of PET-CT in detection of VAHL after the 2nd dose of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in lymphoma patients and compare the incidence of VAHL among lymphoma patients treated with B cell depletion therapy during the 6 months prior to vaccination and those treated > 6 months before vaccination.

Results

This study comprised 120 lymphoma patients, referred for FDG PET/CT 1–3 weeks after the 2nd dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Hypermetabolic LNs were identified in 55%. The incidence of VAHL in lymphoma patients treated with anti-CD20 antibody rituximab during the 6 months prior to vaccination (9%) was significantly lower compared with other lymphoma patients treated with anti-CD20 antibody rituximab > 6 months before vaccination (91%). The incidence and grades of VAHL are significantly high within the 1st week after the 2nd dose of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in patients younger than 60 years of age. Only 7 of 37 patients with negative serology had VAHL on PET-CT, whereas 10 of 26 patients with decreased anti-spike titers and 49 of 57 patients with increased anti-spike titers had VAHL on PET-CT.

Conclusions

VAHL makes challenges in the interpretation of FDG PET/CT in oncology patients. Accurate data collection, regarding the time and site of COVID vaccination, is important to help radiologists in identifying the cause of abnormal nodal FDG uptake. We suggest to schedule FDG PET-CT for lymphoma patients at least 3 weeks after the 2nd dose of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

Immunogenicity and risks associated with impaired immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and booster in hematologic malignancy patients: an updated meta-analysis

Patients with hematologic malignancies (HM) have demonstrated impaired immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Factors associated with poor immunogenicity remain largely undetermined. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and medRxiv databases to identify studies that reported humoral or cellular immune responses (CIR) following complete SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The primary aim was to estimate the seroconversion rate (SR) following complete SARS-CoV-2 vaccination across various subtypes of HM diseases and treatments. The secondary aims were to determine the rates of development of neutralizing antibodies (NAb) and CIR following complete vaccination and SR following booster doses. A total of 170 studies were included for qualitative and quantitative analysis of primary and secondary outcomes. A meta-analysis of 150 studies including 20,922 HM patients revealed a pooled SR following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination of 67.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.8-70.4%; I² = 94%). Meta-regression analysis showed that patients with lymphoid malignancies, but not myeloid malignancies, had lower seroconversion rates than those with solid cancers (R² = 0.52, P < 0.0001). Patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CART), B-cell targeted therapies or JAK inhibitors were associated with poor seroconversion (R² = 0.39, P < 0.0001). The pooled NAb and CIR rates were 52.8% (95% CI; 45.8-59.7%, I² = 87%) and 66.6% (95% CI, 57.1-74.9%; I² = 86%), respectively. Approximately 20.9% (95% CI, 11.4-35.1%, I² = 90%) of HM patients failed to elicit humoral and cellular immunity. Among non-seroconverted patients after primary vaccination, only 40.5% (95% CI, 33.0-48.4%; I² = 87%) mounted seroconversion after the booster. In conclusion, HM patients, especially those with lymphoid malignancies and/or receiving CART, B-cell targeted therapies, or JAK inhibitors, showed poor SR after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. A minority of patients attained seroconversion after booster vaccination. Strategies to improve immune response in these severely immunosuppressed patients are needed.

Evidence of exhausted lymphocytes after the third anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose in cancer patients

Introduction

Evidence is scant regarding the long-term humoral and cellular responses Q7 triggered by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA vaccines in cancer patients after repeated booster doses. The possibility of T-cell exhaustion following these booster doses in this population has not yet been fully studied and remains uncertain.

Methods

In this single-center prospective observational study, we explored the specific humoral and cellular response to S1 antigen in 36 patients with solid malignancies at baseline, and after the second and third doses of the mRNA-1273 vaccine.

Results

A dual behavior was observed: 24 (66.7%) patients showed partial specific IFN-γ response after the second dose that was further enhanced after the third dose; and 11 (30.5%) already showed an optimal response after the second dose and experienced a marked fall-off of specific IFN-γ production after the third (4 patients negativization), which might suggest T cell exhaustion due to repetitive priming to the same antigen. One (2.8%) patient had persistently negative responses after all three doses. Seroconversion occurred in all patients after the second dose. We then studied circulating exhausted CD8+ T-cells in 4 patients from each of the two response patterns, those with increase and those with decrease in cellular response after the third booster. The patients with decreased cellular response after the booster had a higher expression of PD1⁺CD8⁺ and CD57⁺PD1⁺CD8⁺ exhausted T cells compared with those with an increased cellular response both in vivo and in vitro. The proportion of PD1⁺CD8⁺ and CD57⁺PD1⁺CD8⁺ exhausted T cells inversely correlated with IFN-γ production.

Discussion

Our preliminary data show that the two-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccine regimen was beneficial in all cancer patients of our study. An additional booster seems to be beneficial in suboptimal vaccine seroconverters, in contrast to maximal responders that might develop exhaustion. Our data should be interpreted with caution given the small sample size and highlight the urgent need to validate our results in other independent and larger cohorts. Altogether, our data support the relevance of immunological functional studies to personalize preventive and treatment decisions in cancer patients.

The Interplay of Lung Cancer, COVID-19, and Vaccines

Patients with cancer are more susceptible to a higher risk of coronavirus infection and its severe complications than the general population. In addition, these patients were not included in the pivotal clinical trials for COVID-19 vaccines. Therefore, considerable uncertainty remains regarding the management of cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic and the safety of COVID-19 vaccinations in cancer patients. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge generated from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic on the vulnerability of cancer patients to the coronavirus disease, as well as the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in this population. We also discuss the available data on the effects of anticancer treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors on the immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 in cancer patients. Special attention in this review will be given to patients with lung cancer, as such patients are at an increased risk for severe effects from COVID-19.

Immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with cancer

Transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and its corresponding disease (COVID-19) has been shown to impose a higher burden on cancer patients than on the general population. Approved vaccines for use include new technology mRNA vaccines such as BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna), and nonreplicating viral vector vaccines such as Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson) and AZD1222 (AstraZeneca). Impaired or delayed humoral and diminished T-cell responses are evident in patients with cancer, especially in patients with haematological cancers or those under active chemotherapy. Herein we review the current data on vaccine immunogenicity in cancer patients, including recommendations for current practice and future research.

Immunogenicity evaluation of ChAdox1 nCov-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in solid cancer patients in Chulabhorn Hospital

INTRODUCTION

Cancer patients are more vulnerable to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) owing to their compromised immune status. However, data regarding COVID-19 vaccine safety and immune response in cancer patients are scarce.

METHOD

This prospective, age- and sex-matched, single-center cohort study included 61 cancer patients and 122 healthy control participants. Seropositivity was defined as anti-S IgG titer >0.8 units/ml. Primary end point was seroconversion rate of immunoglobulin (Ig)G antibodies against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike (S) protein (anti-S IgG) in cancer patients vs. healthy control participants following the second dose of COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222).

RESULTS

After the second-dose vaccination, there was no difference in seropositivity rate between groups (57 [93.44%] patients with cancer vs. 121 [99.18%] control participants; geometric mean ratio [GMR]: 0.39; 95%CI: 0.01-10.46; p-value = 0.571). In contrast, after the first-dose vaccination, the seropositivity rate was significantly lower in the cancer patients than in the control participants (50/61 [81.97%] vs. 121/122 [99.18%]; GMR: 0.07; 95%CI: 0.01-0.71; p = 0.025). The median anti-S IgG titer after the first-and second dose vaccination were not significantly different between groups. Female sex was significantly associated with a higher anti-S IgG titer. 5FU- and taxane-based chemotherapy regimens were associated with a lower IgG titer. Side effects of vaccination were tolerable.

CONCLUSIONS

The anti-S IgG seropositivity rate after completing the second vaccine dose did not differ between the cancer patients and control participants. However, the anti-S IgG seropositivity rate after the first-dose vaccination was lower in cancer patients.

COVID-19 in Patients with Hematologic Diseases

The COVID-19 outbreak had a strong impact on people's lives all over the world. Patients with hematologic diseases have been heavily affected by the pandemic, because their immune system may be compromised due to anti-cancer or immunosuppressive therapies and because diagnosis and treatment of their baseline conditions were delayed during lockdowns. Hematologic malignancies emerged very soon as risk factors for severe COVID-19 infection, increasing the mortality rate. SARS-CoV2 can also induce or exacerbate immune-mediated cytopenias, such as autoimmune hemolytic anemias, complement-mediated anemias, and immune thrombocytopenia. Active immunization with vaccines has been shown to be the best prophylaxis of severe COVID-19 in hematologic patients. However, the immune response to vaccines may be significantly impaired, especially in those receiving anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies or immunosuppressive agents. Recently, antiviral drugs and monoclonal antibodies have become available for pre-exposure and post-exposure prevention of severe COVID-19. As adverse events after vaccines are extremely rare, the cost-benefit ratio is largely in favor of vaccination, even in patients who might be non-responders; in the hematological setting, all patients should be considered at high risk of developing complications due to SARS-CoV2 infection and should be offered all the therapies aimed to prevent them.

Antibody response after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in adults with hematological malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have shown remarkable efficacy and thus constitute an important preventive option against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially in fragile patients. We aimed to systematically analyze the outcomes of patients with hematological malignancies who received vaccination and to identify specific groups with differences in outcomes. The primary end point was antibody response after full vaccination (2 doses of mRNA or one dose of vector- based vaccines). We identified 49 studies comprising 11,086 individuals. Overall risk of bias was low. The pooled response for hematological malignancies was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 59-69; I²=93%) versus 96% (95% CI: 92-97; I²=44%) for solid cancer and 98% (95% CI: 96-99; I²=55%) for healthy controls (P<0.001). Outcome was different across hematological malignancies (P<0.001). The pooled response was 50% (95% CI: 43-57; I²=84%) for chronic lymphocytic leukemia, 76% (95% CI: 67-83; I²=92%) for multiple myeloma, 83% (95% CI: 69-91; I²=85%) for myeloproliferative neoplasms, 91% (95% CI: 82-96; I²=12%) for Hodgkin lymphoma, and 58% (95% CI: 44-70; I²=84%) for aggressive and 61% (95% CI: 48-72; I²=85%) for indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The pooled response for allogeneic and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation was 82% and 83%, respectively. Being in remission and prior COVID-19 showed significantly higher responses. Low pooled response was identified for active treatment (35%), anti-CD20 therapy ≤1 year (15%), Bruton kinase inhibition (23%), venetoclax (26%), ruxolitinib (42%), and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (42%). Studies on timing, value of boosters, and long-term efficacy are needed. This study is registered with PROSPERO (clinicaltrials gov. Identifier: CRD42021279051).

Safety of anti-SARS-CoV-2 messenger RNA vaccine in lung cancer patients undergoing anticancer chemotherapy: A multicenter, prospective, observational, patient-reported outcome study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 incidence is high in patients with cancer. The fatality rate was high for the Delta variant, necessitating infection prevention by vaccination. This study evaluated the safety of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with advanced lung cancer receiving anticancer therapy.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients receiving anticancer drugs for advanced lung cancer and planning SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Early side effects within 7 days of vaccination were evaluated using patient-reported outcome (PRO) surveys. Chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used.

RESULTS

Post-vaccination PROs were collected from 406 patients (252 were males). The mean age was 72 years. Treatment at the time of initial vaccination included chemotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), a combination of chemotherapy and ICI, targeted therapy including tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and others in 115, 93, 45, 147, and six cases, respectively. The vaccines administered were BNT162b2 and mRNA273 in 361 and three cases, respectively and unknown in 42 cases. A total of 16.1% of patients developed fever (38°C) after the second mRNA vaccination (95% confidence interval: 12.6%-20.1%). This rate is comparable to data previously reported in 120 patients and slightly higher than that of healthy participants of the BNT162b2 study. Patients receiving treatment with cytotoxic anticancer agents were more likely to have high fever. Multivariate analysis showed no correlation between fever frequency and patient background. No serious initial adverse events due to vaccination were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination is safe; however, post-vaccination fever is more common in patients undergoing lung cancer treatment than in healthy individuals.