1
|
Serological response and immune-related adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev Med Virol 2024; 34:e2495. [PMID: 38017632 DOI: 10.1002/rmv.2495] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2023] [Revised: 09/21/2023] [Accepted: 11/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/30/2023]
Abstract
With the popularity of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine and the development of vaccination strategies, the impact of COVID-19 vaccine on cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is still unclear. In the systematic review and meta-analysis of patients with ICIs, we assessed the serological response of cancer patients receiving COVID-19 vaccine, and explored the risk of immune related adverse events (irAEs). We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library as of 10 June 2023, and included cancer patients who received ICIs and COVID-19 vaccine. The systematic review and meta-analysis include cohort study, cross-sectional study and case report. The outcome included the serological response, Spike-specific T-cell response, irAEs and rare adverse events. When possible, the data were analysed by random effect analysis, and the statistical heterogeneity was assessed by Q-test and I2 statistics. We explored the sources of heterogeneity through L'Abbe plots, Galbraith radial plots, and sensitivity analysis. The publication bias was evaluated by Egger's, Begg's linear regression test and funnel plot, and the impact of publication bias was further analysed by trim and fill method. 27 studies were eligible (19 cohort studies, 1 cross-sectional study and 7 case reports), involving 8331 patients (with 4724 receiving ICIs). Most studies used mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273). Compared with cancer patients receiving chemotherapy, cancer patients receiving ICIs were significantly more likely to have seroconversion (RR = 1.05, 95%CI 1.01-1.10, P = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences in seroconversion rates when comparing cancer patients receiving ICIs with controls without cancer (RR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.89-1.01, P = 0.09) or with cancer patients receiving targeted therapy (RR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.79-1.39, P = 0.75). The incidence of irAEs in patients receiving ICIs before and after COVID-19 vaccination was (21.96%, 95%CI 16.66%-28.94%) and (14.88%, 95%CI 8.65%-25.57%), respectively. The most common irAEs were endocrine abnormalities, skin disorders, etc. The certainty of evidence was low in cancer patients with ICIs, compared with those receiving chemotherapy, and very low versus controls without cancer. Cancer patients treated with ICIs seem to be able to receive COVID-19 vaccine safely without increasing the incidence of irAEs.
Collapse
|
2
|
The immunogenicity and the safety of the adjuvanted glycoprotein E (gE)-based recombinant vaccine against herpes zoster (RZV) in cancer patients during immunotherapy. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2023; 19:2288282. [PMID: 38037900 PMCID: PMC10732600 DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2023.2288282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2023] [Accepted: 11/22/2023] [Indexed: 12/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Herpes zoster (HZ) is caused by the reactivation of latent varicella zoster virus (VZV). Severe immunocompromising conditions, such as solid tumors, have been largely associated with an increased risk for HZ due to waning VZV-specific cellular immunity. With the approval of the adjuvanted glycoprotein E (gE)-based recombinant vaccine (RZV; Shingrix™, GSK) also in immunocompromised subjects, HZ is considered a vaccine-preventable disease changing perspectives in immunocompromised subjects. To date, no clinical trial has evaluated the immunogenicity in the patients with cancer undergoing immunotherapy. In this study, we describe the humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in 38 cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and receiving RZV. We used samples collected at baseline (T0), 3 weeks (T2), and 6 months (T3) after the complete RV vaccination schedule. Our data showed that a significant proportion (40,5%) of RZV recipients mounted a stronger humoral and cell-mediated immune response at 3 weeks (T2) after complete RZV vaccination schedule. Interestingly, both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses were mostly stable over 6 months (T3). Interestingly, the overall IFNγ-producing lymphocytes was mainly associated with CD4 T cell response (p = .0012). In conclusion, data from our pilot study suggest a strong and long-lasting immunogenicity of RZV in ICI-treated patients. Prospective analyses at 1 year after vaccination will be performed in order to evaluate the long-term persistence of humoral and cell-mediated response against RZV.
Collapse
|
3
|
COVID-19 in cancer patients: The impact of vaccination on outcomes early in the pandemic. Cancer Med 2023; 12:22006-22022. [PMID: 38063366 PMCID: PMC10757141 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.6781] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2023] [Revised: 11/09/2023] [Accepted: 11/22/2023] [Indexed: 12/31/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND With the rapid evolution of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, the development of effective and safe vaccines was of utmost importance to protect vulnerable individuals, including cancer patients. Studies comparing the clinical outcomes of cancer patients with or without vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have not demonstrated clear benefit. We aimed to determine the protective effects of COVID-19 vaccination by comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated cancer patients after the initial phase of vaccine roll-out and to identify risk factors associated with hospitalization, severe COVID-19, and 30-day COVID-19 attributable mortality. METHODS We performed a retrospective cohort study of cancer patients with COVID-19 diagnosed by polymerase chain reaction on nasal swabs between January 1, 2021 and July 30, 2021. Outcomes of interest included hospitalization, severe COVID-19, and 30-day COVID-19 attributable mortality. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with clinical outcomes, using vaccination status as a variable of interest in all models. RESULTS Key risk factors, such as age ≥ 60 years; comorbidities including diabetes mellitus, heart failure, and lung diseases; and specific cancer types (leukemia and lymphoma) were independently associated with hospital admission for COVID-19, severe COVID-19, and 30-day COVID-19 attributable mortality in cancer patients regardless of their vaccination status. Vaccinated patients were protected against severe COVID-19 but with no impact on hospitalization or mortality due to COVID-19. CONCLUSION Our study highlights a significant benefit of COVID-19 vaccination for cancer patients-specifically its protection against severe COVID-19.
Collapse
|
4
|
Responses of patients with cancer to mRNA vaccines depend on the time interval between vaccination and last treatment. J Immunother Cancer 2023; 11:e007387. [PMID: 37730271 PMCID: PMC10510941 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2023-007387] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/29/2023] [Indexed: 09/22/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
5
|
Chinese expert consensus recommendations for the administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors to special cancer patient populations. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2023; 15:17588359231187205. [PMID: 37484525 PMCID: PMC10357053 DOI: 10.1177/17588359231187205] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2022] [Accepted: 06/21/2023] [Indexed: 07/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting programmed cell death 1, programmed cell death ligand 1, and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 have shown significantly durable clinical benefits and tolerable toxicities and have improved the survival of patients with various types of cancer. Since 2018, the National Medical Products Administration of China has approved 17 ICIs as the standard treatment for certain advanced or metastatic solid tumors. As ICIs represent a broad-spectrum antitumor strategy, the populations eligible for cancer immunotherapy are rapidly expanding. However, the clinical applications of ICIs in cancer patient populations with special issues, a term that refers to complex subgroups of patients with comorbidities, special clinical conditions, or concomitant medications who are routinely excluded from prospective clinical trials of ICIs or are underrepresented in these trials, represent a great real-world challenge. Although the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) has provided recommendations for screening before the use of ICIs in special populations, the recommendations for full-course management remain insufficient. The CSCO Expert Committee on Immunotherapy organized leading medical oncology and multidisciplinary experts to develop a consensus that will serve as an important reference for clinicians to guide the proper application of ICIs in special patient populations. This article is a translation of a study first published in Chinese in The Chinese Clinical Oncology (ISSN 1009-0460, CN 32-1577/R) in May 2022 (27(5):442-454). The publisher of the original paper has provided written confirmation of permission to publish this translation in Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology.
Collapse
|
6
|
COVID-19 Vaccination Safety Profiles in Patients With Solid Tumour Cancers: A Systematic Review. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2023; 35:e421-e433. [PMID: 37019693 PMCID: PMC10014476 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2023.03.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2022] [Revised: 02/09/2023] [Accepted: 03/09/2023] [Indexed: 03/17/2023]
Abstract
Vaccination has become an essential means of protection for solid tumour patients against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this systematic review, we sought to identify common safety profiles of the COVID-19 vaccine in patients with solid tumours. A search of Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane was conducted for studies in English full-text that reported side-effect data experienced by patients with cancer who were at least 12 years old with solid tumours or a recent history of solid tumours after receiving either one or multiple doses of the COVID-19 vaccination. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle Ottawa Scale criteria. Acceptable study types were retrospective and prospective cohorts, retrospective and prospective observational studies, observational analyses and case series; systematic reviews, meta-analyses and case reports were excluded. Among local/injection site symptoms, the most commonly reported were injection site pain and ipsilateral axillary/clavicular lymphadenopathy, whereas the most commonly reported systemic effects were fatigue/malaise, musculoskeletal symptoms and headache. Most side-effects reported were characterised as mild to moderate. A thorough evaluation of the randomised controlled trials for each featured vaccine led to the conclusion that in the USA and abroad, the safety profile seen in patients with solid tumours is comparable with that seen in the general public.
Collapse
|
7
|
Comparative Assessment of the Kinetics of Cellular and Humoral Immune Responses to COVID-19 Vaccination in Cancer Patients. Viruses 2023; 15:1439. [PMID: 37515127 PMCID: PMC10383486 DOI: 10.3390/v15071439] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2023] [Revised: 06/19/2023] [Accepted: 06/21/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The kinetics of immune responses to various SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in cancer patients were investigated. METHODS In total, 57 cancer patients who received BNT162b2-RNA or BBIBP-CorV vaccines were enrolled. Cellular and humoral immunity were assessed at three-time points, before the first vaccine dose and 14-21 days after the first and second doses. Chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay was used to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG response, and QuantiFERON® SARS-CoV-2 kit assessed T-cell response. RESULTS Data showed that cancer patients' CD4+ and CD8+ T cell-median IFN-γ secretion of SARS-CoV-2 antigens increased after the first and second vaccine doses (p = 0.027 and p = 0.042). BNT162b2 vaccinees had significantly higher IFN-γ levels to CD4+ and CD8+ T cell epitopes than BBIBP-CorV vaccinees (p = 0.028). There was a positive correlation between IgG antibody titer and T cell response regardless of vaccine type (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS This study is one of the first to investigate cellular and humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 immunization in cancer patients on active therapy after each vaccine dose. COVID-19 immunizations helped cancer patients develop an effective immune response. Understanding the cellular and humoral immune response to COVID-19 in cancer patients undergoing active treatment is necessary to improve vaccines and avoid future SARS pandemics.
Collapse
|
8
|
Determinants of COVID-19 Disease Severity-Lessons from Primary and Secondary Immune Disorders including Cancer. Int J Mol Sci 2023; 24:ijms24108746. [PMID: 37240091 DOI: 10.3390/ijms24108746] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2023] [Revised: 05/12/2023] [Accepted: 05/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023] Open
Abstract
At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with primary and secondary immune disorders-including patients suffering from cancer-were generally regarded as a high-risk population in terms of COVID-19 disease severity and mortality. By now, scientific evidence indicates that there is substantial heterogeneity regarding the vulnerability towards COVID-19 in patients with immune disorders. In this review, we aimed to summarize the current knowledge about the effect of coexistent immune disorders on COVID-19 disease severity and vaccination response. In this context, we also regarded cancer as a secondary immune disorder. While patients with hematological malignancies displayed lower seroconversion rates after vaccination in some studies, a majority of cancer patients' risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease were either inherent (such as metastatic or progressive disease) or comparable to the general population (age, male gender and comorbidities such as kidney or liver disease). A deeper understanding is needed to better define patient subgroups at a higher risk for severe COVID-19 disease courses. At the same time, immune disorders as functional disease models offer further insights into the role of specific immune cells and cytokines when orchestrating the immune response towards SARS-CoV-2 infection. Longitudinal serological studies are urgently needed to determine the extent and the duration of SARS-CoV-2 immunity in the general population, as well as immune-compromised and oncological patients.
Collapse
|
9
|
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. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15082266. [PMID: 37190194 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15082266] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2023] [Revised: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 04/05/2023] [Indexed: 05/17/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
10
|
Persistence of Immune Response Elicited by Three Doses of mRNA Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in a Cohort of Patients with Solid Tumors: A One-Year Follow-Up. Int J Mol Sci 2023; 24:ijms24076731. [PMID: 37047704 PMCID: PMC10095115 DOI: 10.3390/ijms24076731] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2023] [Revised: 03/29/2023] [Accepted: 04/03/2023] [Indexed: 04/08/2023] Open
Abstract
The role and durability of the immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against severe acute respiratory virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), in cancer patients one year after receiving the third dose have to be elucidated. We have prospectively evaluated the long-term immunogenicity of the third dose of the SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in 55 patients undergoing active treatment. Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titers against Omicron variants and total anti-trimeric S IgG levels were measured one year after the third dose. Heparinized whole-blood samples were used for the assessment of the SARS-CoV-2 interferon-γ release assay (IGRA). Thirty-seven patients (67.3%) showed positive total anti-trimeric S IgG one year after the third dose. Looking at the T-cell response against the spike protein, the frequency of responder patients did not decrease significantly between six and twelve months after the third dose. Finally, less than 20% of cancer patients showed an undetectable NT Ab titer against BA.1 and BA.5 variants of concern (VOCs). Underlying therapies seem to not affect the magnitude or frequency of the immune response. Our work underlines the persistence of humoral and cellular immune responses against BNT162b2 in a cohort of cancer patients one year after receiving the third dose, regardless of the type of underlying therapy.
Collapse
|
11
|
Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Frontline Pembrolizumab-Based Treatment for Advanced Lung Cancer. J Clin Med 2023; 12:jcm12041611. [PMID: 36836146 PMCID: PMC9960275 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12041611] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2022] [Revised: 02/08/2023] [Accepted: 02/11/2023] [Indexed: 02/22/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pembrolizumab monotherapy or pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy has become an important frontline treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To date, it remains unclear how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted the treatment outcome. METHODS A quasi-experimental study was conducted based on a real-world database, comparing pandemic with pre-pandemic patient cohorts. The pandemic cohort consisted of patients who initiated treatment from March to July 2020, with follow-up through March 2021. The pre-pandemic cohort consisted of those initiating treatment between March and July 2019.The outcome was overall real-world survival. Multivariable Cox-proportional hazard models were constructed. RESULTS Analyses included data from 2090 patients: 998 in the pandemic cohort and 1092 in the pre-pandemic cohort. Baseline characteristics were comparable, with 33% of patients having PD-L1 expression level ≥50% and 29% of patients receiving pembrolizumab monotherapy. Among those treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy (N = 613), there was a differential impact of the pandemic on survival by PD-L1 expression levels (p-interaction = 0.02). For those with PD-L1 level < 50%, survival was better in the pandemic cohort than the pre-pandemic cohort: hazard ratio (HR) 0.64 (95% CI: 0.43-0.97, p = 0.03). However, for those with PD-L1 level ≥ 50%, survival was not better in the pandemic cohort: HR 1.17 (95% CI: 0.85-1.61, p = 0.34). We found no statistically significant impact of the pandemic on survival among patients treated with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an increase in survival among patients with lower PD-L1 expression who were treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy. This finding suggests an increased efficacy of immunotherapy due to viral exposure in this population.
Collapse
|
12
|
COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Immunother Cancer 2023; 11:e006246. [PMID: 36746512 PMCID: PMC9905786 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2022-006246] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/23/2022] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) can cause off-target inflammatory and immune-related adverse events (irAE). Conceivably, COVID-19 vaccination could trigger an inflammatory and immune response that could induce or aggravate irAE. METHODS The objective of this systematic review is to appraise the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer treated with ICI. The literature search was performed in PubMed and Embase in English from December 2019 to February 2022. The review included clinical trials, observational cohort studies, case series, and case reports reporting on the clinical efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines on patients with cancer treated with ICI. Outcomes of interest included seroconversion, SARS-CoV-2 infection rate, severe COVID-19, COVID-19 mortality rate. Incidence of ICI irAEs was also ascertained as well as vaccine adverse events. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the pooled effect sizes of the outcomes when possible, using random effects models. RESULTS Overall, 19 studies were included for the analysis (n=10 865 with 2477 receiving ICI). We analyzed 15 cohort studies, 1 cross-sectional study, and 3 case reports. There were no statistically significant differences in seroconversion rates after the second dose of the vaccine when comparing patients with cancer receiving ICI with patients without cancer (risk ratio, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.03) or with patients with cancer without active treatment (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.04). There was a higher probability of seroconversion in patients with cancer treated with ICI compared with patients with cancer treated with chemotherapy (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.18). In a single study in patients receiving ICI, no differences were observed in risk of irAE between those receiving inactivated vaccine and those unvaccinated (pneumonitis RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.3; rash RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.62; arthralgia RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.75). There were no studies for other types of vaccines comparing vaccinated vs not vaccinated in patients treated with ICI. The most common vaccine-related adverse events were local pain or fatigue. Overall, the quality of evidence was rated as very low. CONCLUSION COVID-19 vaccination appears to be effective and safe in patients with cancer receiving ICI.
Collapse
|
13
|
Cancer Patients and the COVID-19 Vaccines: Considerations and Challenges. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14225630. [PMID: 36428722 PMCID: PMC9688380 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14225630] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2022] [Revised: 10/19/2022] [Accepted: 10/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Few guidelines exist for COVID-19 vaccination amongst cancer patients, fostering uncertainty regarding the immunogenicity, safety, and effects of cancer therapies on vaccination, which this review aims to address. A literature review was conducted to include the latest articles covering the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with solid and hematologic cancers receiving various treatments. Lower seropositivity following vaccination was associated with malignancy (compared to the general population), and hematologic malignancy (compared to solid cancers). Patients receiving active cancer therapy (unspecified), chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and immunosuppressants generally demonstrated lower seropositivity compared to healthy controls; though checkpoint inhibition, endocrine therapy, and cyclin dependent kinase inhibition did not appear to affect seropositivity. Vaccination appeared safe and well-tolerated in patients with current or past cancer and those undergoing treatment. Adverse events were comparable to the general population, but inflammatory lymphadenopathy following vaccination was commonly reported and may be mistaken for malignant etiology. Additionally, radiation recall phenomenon was sporadically reported in patients who had received radiotherapy. Overall, while seropositivity rates were decreased, cancer patients showed capacity to generate safe and effective immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination, thus vaccination should be encouraged and hesitancy should be addressed in this population.
Collapse
|
14
|
Immunogenicity and Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in Patients with Melanoma Treated with Immunotherapy. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14153791. [PMID: 35954454 PMCID: PMC9367332 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14153791] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2022] [Revised: 07/25/2022] [Accepted: 07/31/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary The efficacy and safety of the BNT126b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 has not been thoroughly studied in cancer patients treated with immunotherapy. This research aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of the vaccine in patients with melanoma under immunotherapy; at the same time, through the immunophenotyping of T cells and myeloid cells of the peripheral blood, it will be possible to look for changes in the subpopulations of such cells after vaccinations. The results of the study help establish the efficacy and safety of the vaccine in this population, especially since a theoretical concern exists about the vaccine triggering irAEs. Abstract The BNT162b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 has a proven efficacy and a favorable safety profile. In cancer patients under immunotherapy in the form of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), the efficacy of the vaccine has not been thoroughly studied, while a theoretical concern has also been raised about triggering immune-related adverse events (irAEs) by the vaccine. We conducted a prospective, non-interventional study on the immunogenicity and safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine in patients with advanced or metastatic melanoma treated with ICIs. Blood samples were obtained 0–4 days before the first dose and 12–21 days after the second dose of the vaccine for the quantification of the SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody using an ELISA and immunophenotyping of the T and myeloid cell subpopulations. The active recording of AEs for a two-month period was conducted. Forty patients were included in the study. All but one (97.3%) achieved seroconversion after two doses of the vaccine and no correlations of the antibody titers with any of the studied parameters (age, gender, stage and duration of the disease, type of ICI, previous treatment, etc.) were found. Moreover, no differences in the subpopulations of the T cells (including the T-regulatory cells) or the myeloid cells were found pre- and post-vaccination. All AEs were low-grade, while one case of arthritis exacerbation was noted. The seroconversion rate in the studied population was high and was comparable to that of healthy subjects, while no major safety issues were raised during the safety follow-up. Finally, no derangements in the subpopulations of T cells or myeloid cells were noted. This is the first study focusing on the immunogenicity, safety, and effect of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines on the blood-cell immunophenotype status of patients with melanoma treated with ICIs.
Collapse
|
15
|
Humoral and Cellular Response before and after the Fourth BNT162b2 Vaccine Dose in patients with solid tumors on active treatment. Ann Oncol 2022; 33:1207-1208. [PMID: 35926815 PMCID: PMC9341169 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.07.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2022] [Revised: 07/10/2022] [Accepted: 07/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
|
16
|
Six-month humoral and cellular immune response to the third dose of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in the patients with solid tumors: a longitudinal cohort study with a focus on the variants of concern. ESMO Open 2022; 7:100574. [PMID: 36029652 PMCID: PMC9353611 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100574] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2022] [Revised: 07/18/2022] [Accepted: 08/02/2022] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The role and the durability of the immunogenicity of the third dose of vaccine against COVID-19 variants of concern in cancer patients have to be elucidated. Patients and methods We have prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity of the third dose of the SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine in triggering both humoral and cell-mediated immune response in patients with solid tumors undergoing active treatment 6 months after the booster. Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titers and total anti-spike immunoglobulin G concentrations were measured in serum. Heparinized whole blood samples were used for the SARS-CoV-2 interferon-γ release assay (IGRA). Results Six months after the third dose only two patients (2.4%) showed negative spike-specific immunoglobulin G antibody levels (<33.8 BAU/ml). The median level of SARS-CoV-2 NT Abs decreased and only 39/83 (47%) subjects showed maximum levels of NT Abs. T-cellular positive response was observed in 38/61 (62.3%) patients; the highest median level of response was observed 21 days after the third dose (354 mIU/ml, interquartile range 83.3-846.3 mIU/ml). The lowest median level of NT Ab response was observed against the Omicron variant (1 : 10, interquartile range 1 : 10-1 : 40) with a significant reduced rate of responder subjects with respect to the wild-type strain (77.5% versus 95%; P = 0.0022) and Delta variant (77.5% versus 93.7%; P = 0.0053). During the follow-up period, seven patients (8%) had a confirmed post-vaccination infection, but none of them required hospitalization or oxygen therapy. Conclusions Our work highlights a significant humoral and cellular immune response among patients with solid tumors 6 months after the third BNT162b2 vaccine dose, although a reduction in neutralizing activity against Omicron was observed. Only two patients (2.4%) showed negative spike-specific IgG antibody levels (<33.8 BAU/ml) Only 39/83 (47%) subjects showed maximum level of neutralizing antibodies (NT Abs). T-cellular positive response was observed in 38/61 (62.3%) analyzed patients. The lowest median level of NT Ab response was observed against the Omicron variant. Seven patients (8%) had a post-vaccination infection; none of them required hospitalization or oxygen therapy.
Collapse
|
17
|
Brief Research Report: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunity in Long Lasting Responders to Cancer Immunotherapy Through mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccination. Front Immunol 2022; 13:908108. [PMID: 35911701 PMCID: PMC9330498 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.908108] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2022] [Accepted: 06/01/2022] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
Cancer patients (CPs) have been identified as particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and therefore are a priority group for receiving COVID-19 vaccination. From the patients with advanced solid tumors, about 20% respond very efficiently to immunotherapy with anti-PD1/PD-L1 antibodies and achieve long lasting cancer responses. It is unclear whether an efficient cancer-specific immune response may also correlate with an efficient response upon COVID-19 vaccination. Here, we explored the antiviral immune response to the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 in a group of 11 long-lasting cancer immunotherapy responders. We analysed the development of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG serum antibodies, virus neutralizing capacities and T cell responses. Control groups included patients treated with adjuvant cancer immunotherapy (IMT, cohort B), CPs not treated with immunotherapy (no-IMT, cohort C) and healthy controls (cohort A). The median ELISA IgG titers significantly increased after the prime-boost COVID vaccine regimen in all cohorts (Cohort A: pre-vaccine = 900 (100-2700), 3 weeks (w) post-boost = 24300 (2700-72900); Cohort B: pre-vaccine = 300 (100-2700), 3 w post-boost = 8100 (300-72900); Cohort C: pre-vaccine = 500 (100-2700), 3 w post-boost = 24300 (300-72900)). However, at the 3 w post-prime time-point, only the healthy control group showed a statistically significant increase in antibody levels (Cohort A = 8100 (900-8100); Cohort B = 900 (300-8100); Cohort C = 900 (300-8100)) (P < 0.05). Strikingly, while all healthy controls generated high-level antibody responses after the complete prime-boost regimen (Cohort A = 15/15 (100%), not all CPs behaved alike [Cohort B= 12/14 (84'6%); Cohort C= 5/6 (83%)]. Their responses, including those of the long-lasting immunotherapy responders, were more variable (Cohort A: 3 w post-boost (median nAb titers = 95.32 (84.09-96.93), median Spike-specific IFN-γ response = 64 (24-150); Cohort B: 3 w post-boost (median nAb titers = 85.62 (8.22-97.19), median Spike-specific IFN-γ response (28 (1-372); Cohort C: 3 w post-boost (median nAb titers = 95.87 (11.8-97.3), median Spike-specific IFN-γ response = 67 (20-84)). Two long-lasting cancer responders did not respond properly to the prime-boost vaccination and did not generate S-specific IgGs, neutralizing antibodies or virus-specific T cells, although their cancer immune control persisted for years. Thus, although mRNA-based vaccines can induce both antibody and T cell responses in CPs, the immune response to COVID vaccination is independent of the capacity to develop an efficient anti-cancer immune response to anti PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies.
Collapse
|
18
|
High Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern Breakthrough Infections Despite Residual Humoral and Cellular Immunity Induced by BNT162b2 Vaccination in Healthcare Workers: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study in Belgium. Viruses 2022; 14:1257. [PMID: 35746728 PMCID: PMC9228150 DOI: 10.3390/v14061257] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2022] [Revised: 05/30/2022] [Accepted: 05/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
To mitigate the massive COVID-19 burden caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), several vaccination campaigns were initiated. We performed a single-center observational trial to monitor the mid- (3 months) and long-term (10 months) adaptive immune response and to document breakthrough infections (BTI) in healthcare workers (n = 84) upon BNT162b2 vaccination in a real-world setting. Firstly, serology was determined through immunoassays. Secondly, antibody functionality was analyzed via in vitro binding inhibition and pseudovirus neutralization and circulating receptor-binding domain (RBD)-specific B cells were assessed. Moreover, the induction of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells was investigated by an interferon-γ release assay combined with flowcytometric profiling of activated CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Within individuals that did not experience BTI (n = 62), vaccine-induced humoral and cellular immune responses were not correlated. Interestingly, waning over time was more pronounced within humoral compared to cellular immunity. In particular, 45 of these 62 subjects no longer displayed functional neutralization against the delta variant of concern (VoC) at long-term follow-up. Noteworthily, we reported a high incidence of symptomatic BTI cases (17.11%) caused by alpha and delta VoCs, although vaccine-induced immunity was only slightly reduced compared to subjects without BTI at mid-term follow-up.
Collapse
|
19
|
COVID-19 and Cancer: Special Considerations for Patients Receiving Immunotherapy and Immunosuppressive Cancer Therapies. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2022; 42:1-13. [PMID: 35658503 DOI: 10.1200/edbk_359656] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Patients with cancer generally have a higher risk of adverse outcomes from COVID-19, with higher age, male sex, poor performance status, cancer type, and uncontrolled malignant disease as the main risk factors. However, the influence of specific cancer therapies varies and raises concerns during the pandemic. In patients undergoing cancer immunotherapy or other immunosuppressive cancer treatments, we summarize the evidence on outcomes from COVID-19; address the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination; and review COVID-19 antiviral therapeutics for the patient with cancer. Despite higher mortality for patients with cancer, treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors does not seem to increase mortality risk based on observational evidence. Inhibitory therapies directed toward B-cell lineages, including monoclonal antibodies against CD20 and CAR T-cell therapies, are associated with poor outcomes in COVID-19; however, the data are sparse. Regarding vaccination in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, clinical efficacy comparable to that in the general population can be expected. In patients undergoing B-cell-depleting therapy, immunogenicity and clinical efficacy are curtailed, but vaccination is not futile, which is thought to be due to the cellular response. Vaccine reactogenicity and toxicity in all groups of patients with cancer are comparable to that of the general population. Preexposure prophylaxis with monoclonal antibodies directed against the viral spike may provide passive immunity for those not likely to mount an adequate vaccine response. If infected, prompt treatment with monoclonal antibodies or oral small molecule antivirals is beneficial, though with oral antiviral therapies, care must be taken to avoid drug interactions in patients with cancer.
Collapse
|
20
|
Abstract
Patients with cancer have a higher risk of severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and associated mortality than the general population. Owing to this increased risk, patients with cancer have been prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination globally, for both primary and booster vaccinations. However, given that these patients were not included in the pivotal clinical trials, considerable uncertainty remains regarding vaccine efficacy, and the extent of humoral and cellular immune responses in these patients, as well as the risks of vaccine-related adverse events. In this Review, we summarize the current knowledge generated in studies conducted since COVID-19 vaccines first became available. We also highlight critical points that might affect vaccine efficacy in patients with cancer in the future.
Collapse
|
21
|
COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Malignancy; A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2022; 13:860238. [PMID: 35586627 PMCID: PMC9108702 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.860238] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2022] [Accepted: 02/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Data on the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with malignancy are immature. In this paper, we assessed the literature involving the use of COVID-19 vaccines in cancer patients and reported the seroconversion rates as the main outcome and severity of COVID-19 infection and side effects following COVID-19 vaccination as the secondary outcomes. Methods A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. Searches were conducted in electronic websites, databases, and journals, including Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from January 01, 2019, to November 30, 2021. Studies reporting data on the safety and efficacy of COVID vaccine in cancer patients using any human samples were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the NEWCASTLE-OTTAWA scale in the included studies. Results A total of 724 articles were identified from databases, out of which 201 articles were duplicates and were discarded. Subsequently, 454 articles were excluded through initial screening of the titles and abstracts. Moreover, 41 studies did not report the precise seroconversion rate either based on the type of cancer or after injection of a second dose of COVID vaccine. Finally, 28 articles met all the inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review. The overall seroconversion rates after receiving a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine, based on type of cancer were 88% (95% CI, 81%-92%) and 70% (95% CI, 60%-79%) in patients with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies, respectively. Conclusion Overall, we conclude that vaccination against COVID-19 in patients with active malignancies using activated and inactivated vaccines is a safe and tolerable procedure that is also accompanied by a high efficacy.
Collapse
|
22
|
Tozinameran. REACTIONS WEEKLY 2022. [PMCID: PMC9073469 DOI: 10.1007/s40278-022-14868-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
23
|
Immunogenicity and safety after the third dose of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with solid tumors on active treatment: a prospective cohort study. ESMO Open 2022; 7:100458. [PMID: 35427842 PMCID: PMC8913298 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100458] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2022] [Revised: 02/28/2022] [Accepted: 03/03/2022] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although a full course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine is effective in cancer patients, the duration of the protection and the efficacy of a booster dose against the new variants remain unknown. We prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity of the third dose of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine in cancer patients undergoing active treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with solid cancer, vaccinated with a booster dose during active treatment, were enrolled in this study. Patients were classified into SARS-CoV-2 naïve (without previous COVID-19 infection) and SARS-CoV-2 experienced (with previous COVID-19 infection). Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titer and total anti-Spike immunoglobulin G (IgG) concentration were quantified in serum. Heparinized whole blood samples were used for SARS-CoV-2 Interferon Gamma Release Assay (IGRA). The primary endpoint was to assess the increase of IgG antibody level between baseline and 3 weeks after the booster. RESULTS One hundred and forty-two consecutive patients were recruited. In SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects, the median level of IgG was 157 BAU/ml [interquartile range (IQR) 62-423 BAU/ml] at T0 and reached a median of 2080 BAU/ml (IQR 2080-2080 BAU/ml) at 3 weeks after booster administration (T1; P < 0.0001). A median 16-fold increase of SARS-CoV-2 NT Ab titer (IQR 4-32) was observed in naïve subjects (from median 20, IQR 10-40, to median 640, IQR 160-640; P < 0.0001). Median interferon-γ level at T1 was significantly higher than that measured at T0 in SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects (P = 0.0049) but not in SARS-CoV-2-experienced patients. The median level of SARS-CoV-2 NT Abs was 32-fold lower against Omicron compared to the wild-type strain (P = 0.0004) and 12-fold lower compared to the Delta strain (P = 0.0110). CONCLUSIONS The third dose is able to trigger both the humoral and the cell-mediated immune response in cancer patients on active treatment. Our preliminary data about the neutralization of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine against variants of concern seem to confirm the lower vaccine activity.
Collapse
|
24
|
Abstract
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome
coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has affected over 220 million individuals worldwide,
and has been shown to cause increased disease severity and mortality in patients
with active cancer versus healthy individuals. Vaccination is important in
reducing COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality. Thus, the aim of this
article was to review the existing knowledge on effectiveness, immunogenicity
and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cancer. Fifty-four articles
were included following a search of PubMed and Google Scholar databases for
studies published between January 2020 and September 2021 that investigated
humoral and cell-mediated immune responses following COVID-19 vaccination in
patients with cancer. Immunogenicity of vaccines was found to be lower in
patients with cancer versus healthy individuals, and humoral immune responses
were inferior in those with haematological versus solid cancers. Patient-,
disease-, and treatment-related factors associated with poorer vaccine responses
should be identified and corrected or mitigated when possible. Consideration
should be given to offering patients with cancer second doses of COVID vaccine
at shorter intervals than in healthy individuals. Patients with cancer warrant a
third vaccine dose and must be prioritized in vaccination schedules. Vaccine
adverse effect profiles are comparable between patients with cancer and healthy
individuals.
Collapse
|
25
|
mRNA-COVID19 Vaccination Can Be Considered Safe and Tolerable for Frail Patients. Front Oncol 2022; 12:855723. [PMID: 35371993 PMCID: PMC8969577 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.855723] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2022] [Accepted: 02/21/2022] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Frail patients are considered at relevant risk of complications due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and, for this reason, are prioritized candidates for vaccination. As these patients were originally not included in the registration trials, fear related to vaccine adverse events and disease worsening was one of the reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Herein, we report the safety profile of the prospective, multicenter, national VAX4FRAIL study (NCT04848493) to evaluate vaccines in a large trans-disease cohort of patients with solid or hematological malignancies and neurological and rheumatological diseases. Methods Between March 3 and September 2, 2021, 566 patients were evaluable for safety endpoint: 105 received the mRNA-1273 vaccine and 461 the BNT162b2 vaccine. Frail patients were defined per protocol as patients under treatment with hematological malignancies (n = 131), solid tumors (n = 191), immune-rheumatological diseases (n = 86), and neurological diseases (n = 158), including multiple sclerosis and generalized myasthenia. The impact of the vaccination on the health status of patients was assessed through a questionnaire focused on the first week after each vaccine dose. Results The most frequently reported moderate–severe adverse events were pain at the injection site (60.3% after the first dose, 55.4% after the second), fatigue (30.1%–41.7%), bone pain (27.4%–27.2%), and headache (11.8%–18.9%). Risk factors associated with the occurrence of severe symptoms after vaccine administration were identified through a multivariate logistic regression analysis: age was associated with severe fever presentation (younger patients vs. middle-aged vs. older ones), female individuals presented a higher probability of severe pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, and bone pain; and the mRNA-1237 vaccine was associated with a higher probability of severe pain at the injection site and fever. After the first dose, patients presenting a severe symptom were at a relevant risk of recurrence of the same severe symptom after the second one. Overall, 11 patients (1.9%) after the first dose and 7 (1.2%) after the second one required postponement or suspension of the disease-specific treatment. Finally, two fatal events occurred among our 566 patients. These two events were considered unrelated to the vaccine. Conclusions Our study reports that mRNA-COVID-19 vaccination is safe also in frail patients; as expected, side effects were manageable and had a minimum impact on patient care path.
Collapse
|
26
|
Impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the use of PD-1 inhibitor in treating patients with cancer: a real-world study. J Immunother Cancer 2022; 10:jitc-2021-004157. [PMID: 35264438 PMCID: PMC8915379 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2021-004157] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/30/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Anti-COVID-19 vaccination may have functional implications for immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment in patients with cancer. This study was undertaken to determine whether the safety or efficacy of anti-PD-1 therapy is reduced in patients with cancer during COVID-19 vaccination. A large multicenter observational study was conducted in 83 Chinese hospitals between January 28, 2021 and September 30, 2021. A total of 3552 patients were screened and 2048 eligible patients with cancer receiving PD-1 inhibitor treatment were recruited. All enrolled patients had received camrelizumab treatment alone or in conjunction with other cancer therapies. Among these, 1518 (74.1%) patients received the BBIBP-CorV vaccine and were defined as the vaccinated subgroup. The remaining 530 (25.9%) patients did not receive anti-COVID-19 vaccination and were defined as the non-vaccinated subgroup. For all participants, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events criteria were used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of camrelizumab treatment, respectively. Propensity score match analysis with the optimal pair matching was used to compare these criteria between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated subgroups. A total of 2048 eligible patients with cancer were included (median age 59 years, 27.6% female). Most patients (98.8%) had metastatic cancer of the lung, liver or intestinal tract. Aside from the PD-1 inhibitor treatment, 55.9% of patients received additional cancer therapies. 1518 (74.1%) patients received the BBIBP-CorV vaccine with only mild side effects reported. The remaining patients did not receive COVID-19 vaccination and had a statistically greater percentage of comorbidities. After matching for age, gender, cancer stage/types, comorbidity and performance status, 1060 patients (530 pairs) were selected for propensity score match analysis. This analysis showed no significant differences in overall response rate (25.3% vs 28.9%, p=0.213) and disease control rate (64.6% vs 67.0%, p=0.437) between vaccinated and non-vaccinated subgroups. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were reported in both subgroups after camrelizumab treatment. Among vaccinated patients who experienced irAEs, the median interval between the first dose of camrelizumab treatment and the first vaccine shot was ≤16 days. Compared with the non-vaccinated subgroup, irAEs in vaccinated patients were more frequently reported as mild (grade 1 or 2 irAEs; 33.8% vs 19.8%, p<0.001) and these patients were less likely to discontinue the PD-1 inhibitor treatment (4.2% vs 20.4%, p<0.001). Severe irAEs (grade 3 irAE or higher) related to camrelizumab treatment were reported, however no significant differences in the frequency of such events were observed between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated subgroups. The COVID-19 vaccine, BBIBP-CorV, did not increase severe anti-PD-1-related adverse events nor did it reduce the clinical efficacy of camrelizumab in patients with cancer. Thus, we conclude that patients with cancer need not suspend anti-PD-1 treatment during COVID-19 vaccination.
Collapse
|
27
|
Cellular Immune Response after Vaccination in Patients with Cancer—Review on Past and Present Experiences. Vaccines (Basel) 2022; 10:vaccines10020182. [PMID: 35214642 PMCID: PMC8875094 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines10020182] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2021] [Revised: 01/17/2022] [Accepted: 01/20/2022] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Patients with cancer are at particular risk for infection but also have diminished vaccine responses, usually quantified by the level of specific antibodies. Nonetheless, vaccines are specifically recommended in this vulnerable patient group. Here, we discuss the cellular part of the vaccine response in patients with cancer. We summarize the experience with vaccines prior to and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in different subgroups, and we discuss why, especially in patients with cancer, T cells may be the more reliable correlate of protection. Finally, we provide a brief outlook on options to improve the cellular response to vaccines.
Collapse
|
28
|
Analysis of the humoral and cellular immune response after a full course of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in cancer patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with or without chemotherapy: an update after 6 months of follow-up. ESMO Open 2021; 7:100359. [PMID: 34973510 PMCID: PMC8664661 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100359] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2021] [Revised: 11/24/2021] [Accepted: 11/28/2021] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The durability of immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in cancer patients remains to be elucidated. We prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity of the vaccine in triggering both the humoral and the cell-mediated immune response in cancer patients treated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 with or without chemotherapy 6 months after BNT162b2 vaccine. Patients and methods In the previous study, 88 patients were enrolled, whereas the analyses below refer to the 60 patients still on immunotherapy at the time of the follow-up. According to previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure, patients were classified as SARS-CoV-2-naive (without previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure) and SARS-CoV-2-experienced (with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection). Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titer against the B.1.1 strain and total anti-spike immunoglobulin G concentration were quantified in serum samples. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assay was used for quantification of anti-spike interferon-γ (IFN-γ)-producing cells/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Fifty patients (83.0%) were on immunotherapy alone, whereas 10 patients (7%) were on chemo-immunotherapy. We analyzed separately patients on immunotherapy and patients on chemo-immunotherapy. Results The median T-cell response at 6 months was significantly lower than that measured at 3 weeks after vaccination [50 interquartile range (IQR) 20-118.8 versus 175 IQR 67.5-371.3 IFN-γ-producing cells/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells; P < 0.0001]. The median reduction of immunoglobulin G concentration was 88% in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects and 2.1% in SARS-CoV-2-experienced subjects. SARS-CoV-2 NT Ab titer was maintained in SARS-CoV-2-experienced subjects, whereas a significant decrease was observed in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects (from median 1 : 160, IQR 1 : 40-1 : 640 to median 1 : 20, IQR 1 : 10-1 : 40; P < 0.0001). A weak correlation was observed between SARS-CoV-2 NT Ab titer and spike-specific IFN-γ-producing cells at both 6 months and 3 weeks after vaccination (r = 0.467; P = 0.0002 and r = 0.428; P = 0.0006, respectively). Conclusions Our work highlights a reduction in the immune response in cancer patients, particularly in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects. Our data support administering a third dose of COVID-19 vaccine to cancer patients treated with programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors. Median spike-specific T-cell response at 6 months was lower compared with 3 weeks after vaccine in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects. Median reduction of SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulin G concentration was 88% in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects. The SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing activity was maintained stable in subjects with previous COVID-19. No COVID-19 cases were documented throughout the period of study.
Collapse
|
29
|
Vaccination against Cancer or Infectious Agents during Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy. Vaccines (Basel) 2021; 9:vaccines9121396. [PMID: 34960142 PMCID: PMC8706349 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines9121396] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2021] [Revised: 11/14/2021] [Accepted: 11/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has substantially increased the overall survival of cancer patients and has revolutionized the therapeutic situation in oncology. However, not all patients and cancer types respond to ICI, or become resistant over time. Combining ICIs with therapeutic cancer vaccines is a promising option as vaccination may help to overcome resistance to immunotherapies while immunotherapies may increase immune responses to the particular cancer vaccine by reinvigorating exhausted T cells. Thus, it would be possible to reprogram a response with appropriate vaccines, using a particular cancer antigen and a corresponding ICI. Target populations include currently untreatable cancer patients or those who receive treatment regimens with high risk of serious side effects. In addition, with the increased use of ICI in clinical practice, questions arise regarding safety and efficacy of administration of conventional vaccines, such as influenza or COVID-19 vaccines, during active ICI treatment. This review discusses the main principles of prophylactic and therapeutic cancer vaccines, the potential impact on combining therapeutic cancer vaccines with ICI, and briefly summarizes the current knowledge of safety and effectiveness of influenza and COVID-19 vaccines in ICI-treated patients.
Collapse
|