Reduced antibody activity against SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 delta virus in serum of mRNA-vaccinated individuals receiving tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors

Effect of treatment with original or biosimilar adalimumab on SARS-CoV2 vaccination antibody titers

The technological process of production of biosimilars determines the degree of biosimilarity to the original biological drug. In particular, the focus is on the similarity of immunogenic responses. The primary endpoint of our retrospective study was to find the differences in SARS-CoV-2 antibody amount between patients treated with original adalimumab and biosimilar adalimumab MSB11022 (Idacio) and the differences in the SARS-CoV-2 antibody amount between patients treated with and without biological treatment. We collected the gender, autoimmune disease type, age, and treatment data of the patients in the outpatient clinic MEDICAL PLUS, s.r.o., Uherske Hradiste. These patients suffer from autoimmune rheumatic diseases. All patients received the mRNA vaccine (Pfizer/BioNTech - BNT162b2), with a 21-day (interquartile range, 21-24) gap between the two vaccinations. Patients receiving adalimumab were able to develop cellular immune responses after the second vaccination dose, as well as the individuals without adalimumab. In the period of 6-23 weeks after the second vaccination dose (D63 - D182), the SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels did not change significantly in the patients receiving the original adalimumab, while in the patients receiving biosimilar adalimumab a significant decrease was revealed. A statistically significant difference in the SARS-CoV-2 antibody amount between the patients without biological treatment (median: 504.3 U/mL) and with biological treatment (Original and Biosimilar - median: 47.2 and 28.2 U/mL, respectively) was confirmed on day 182. According to our observation, the effect of the treatment type on the increase/decrease of antibodies over time is dominant, while the impact of other variables (gender, methotrexate treatment, autoimmune disease type, and age) was confirmed as insignificant or minor.

Effect of Secukinumab and Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors on Humoral Response to BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine in Patients With Spondyloarthritis Compared to Immunocompetent Controls

OBJECTIVE

To assess the humoral response to the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine among patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) receiving secukinumab (SEC) compared to those receiving tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and immunocompetent controls.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with psoriatic arthritis or axial SpA receiving SEC (n = 37) or TNFi (monotherapy, n = 109; + methotrexate [MTX], n = 16), immunocompetent controls (n = 122), and patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving TNFi therapy (controls, n = 50) were vaccinated with 2 or 3 doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine. We evaluated humoral response, adverse events, and disease activity, and monitored for breakthrough coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) postvaccination.

RESULTS

The 2-dose vaccine regimen induced a comparable seropositive response in all study groups. S1/S2 antibody titers (in binding antibody units/mL; mean [SD]) were higher in the SEC group vs the TNFi + MTX-SpA and TNFi-RA groups (192.5 [68.4] vs 104.6 [46.9], P < 0.001, and 143.1 [81.9], P = 0.004). After 6 months, 96.3%, 96.6%, and 80.9% of the SEC, immunocompetent, and TNFi monotherapy-SpA groups (P = 0.10), respectively; 66.7% of the TNFi + MTX-SpA group (P = 0.03); and 63% of the TNFi-RA group (P = 0.004) remained seropositive. S1/S2 antibody titer decline was steeper in the TNFi groups than the SEC group. After the third dose, 100% of the SpA and immunocompetent and 88.9% of the TNFi-RA (P = 0.25) groups were seropositive. Rate of breakthrough COVID-19 infection was higher in the TNFi groups than in the SEC group (36-37.5% vs 10.8%). No significant between-group differences were observed for postvaccination disease activity and adverse events.

CONCLUSION

SEC did not interfere with the immunogenic response to BNT162b2 vaccine in patients with SpA; however, TNFi therapy was associated with lower S1/S2-antibody titers, faster decline, and higher rate of breakthrough infections.

Immunosuppressive therapy and humoral response to third mRNA COVID-19 vaccination with a six-month interval in rheumatic disease patients

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the long-term impact of immunosuppressive therapeutic agents on antibody response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA vaccination in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRD) in order to propose a strategy for annual vaccination.

METHODS

This prospective multicentre cohort study evaluated the humoral response to second and third BNT162b2 and/or mRNA-1273 vaccines in 382 Japanese AIRD patients classified into 12 different medication groups and in 326 healthy controls (HCs). The third vaccination was administered six months after the second vaccination. Antibody titres were measured using the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assay.

RESULTS

The seroconversion rate and antibody titres were lower in AIRD patients than in HCs 3-6 weeks after the second vaccination and 3-6 weeks after the third vaccination. Seroconversion rates were <90% after the third vaccination in patients receiving mycophenolate mofetil and rituximab. Antibody levels after the third vaccination were significantly lower in the groups prescribed TNF inhibitor with or without methotrexate, abatacept and rituximab or cyclophosphamide than those of HCs in a multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex, and glucocorticoid dosage. The third vaccination induced an adequate humoral response in patients treated with sulfasalazine, bucillamine, methotrexate monotherapy, iguratimod, interleukin-6 inhibitors or calcineurin inhibitors including tacrolimus.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeated vaccinations in many immunosuppressed patients produced antibody responses similar to those observed in HCs. In contrast, annual vaccination in patients receiving TNF inhibitors, abatacept, mycophenolate mofetil and rituximab may require caution.

Safety and immunogenicity of a third COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases compared with healthy controls

OBJECTIVES

A third COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for immunosuppressed patients. However, data on immunogenicity and safety of a third COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are sparse and therefore addressed within this clinical trial.

METHODS

60 immunosuppressed patients and 48 healthy controls (HCs) received a third vaccination with an mRNA vaccine. The primary endpoint was defined as the presence of antibody levels against the receptor-binding domain (RBD)>1500 BAU/mL in patients with IMIDs versus HCs. Further endpoints included differences in neutralising antibodies and cellular immune responses after the third vaccination. Reactogenicity was recorded for 7 days, and safety was evaluated until week 4.

RESULTS

Rate of individuals with anti-RBD antibodies>1500 BAU/mL was not significantly different after the third vaccination between patients with IMIDs and HCs (91% vs 100% p=0.101). Anti-RBD and neutralising antibody levels were significantly lower in patients with IMIDs after the third vaccination than in HCs (p=0.002 and p=0.016, respectively). In contrast, fold increase in antibody levels between week 0 and 4 was higher in patients with IMIDs. Treatment with biological (b) disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD) or combination of bDMARDs and conventional synthetic DMARDs was associated with reduced antibody levels. Enhanced cellular immune response to wild type and Omicron peptide stimulation was observed after the third vaccination. No serious adverse event was attributed to the third vaccination.

CONCLUSION

Our clinical trial data support the immunogenicity and safety of a third COVID-19 vaccination in patients with IMIDs. However, effects of DMARD therapy on immunogenicity should be considered.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT No: 2021-002693-10.

Structural evolution of Delta lineage of SARS-CoV-2

One of the main obstacles in prevention and treatment of COVID-19 is the rapid evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein. Given that Spike is the main target of common treatments of COVID-19, mutations occurring at this virulent factor can affect the effectiveness of treatments. The B.1.617.2 lineage of SARS-CoV-2, being characterized by many Spike mutations inside and outside of its receptor-binding domain (RBD), shows high infectivity and relative resistance to existing cures. Here, utilizing a wide range of computational biology approaches, such as immunoinformatics, molecular dynamics (MD), analysis of intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs), protein-protein interaction analyses, residue scanning, and free energy calculations, we examine the structural and biological attributes of the B.1.617.2 Spike protein. Furthermore, the antibody design protocol of Rosetta was implemented for evaluation the stability and affinity improvement of the Bamlanivimab (LY-CoV55) antibody, which is not capable of interactions with the B.1.617.2 Spike. We observed that the detected mutations in the Spike of the B1.617.2 variant of concern can cause extensive structural changes compatible with the described variation in immunogenicity, secondary and tertiary structure, oligomerization potency, Furin cleavability, and drug targetability. Compared to the Spike of Wuhan lineage, the B.1.617.2 Spike is more stable and binds to the Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) with higher affinity.

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.

Persistence of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies and anti-Omicron IgG induced by BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease: an explanatory study in Japan

Background

Autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease (AIRD) patients are at high risk of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the medium-term effects of immunosuppressants on vaccine efficacy are unknown. We investigated the duration of humoral responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) wild-type and Omicron variant in AIRD patients administered with two doses of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine.

Methods

Serum-neutralizing antibody (NAb) and anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD)/spike antibody levels were measured. Short- and medium-term effects of immunosuppressants were analyzed pre-vaccination (Term 1) and 14-42 days (Term 2) and 100-200 days (Term 3) after the second vaccination.

Findings

From Feb 1, 2021, to Feb 28, 2022, 439 AIRD patients and 146 healthy controls were investigated. The seropositivity rate and log₁₀-NAb titers were significantly lower in AIRD patients than in controls at Terms 2 and 3. In rheumatoid arthritis patients, tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors (TNFis) at Term 3, and older age, glucocorticoids, and abatacept at Terms 2 and 3 were risk factors for reduced responses. Anti-Omicron RBD/spike IgG levels strongly correlated with NAb titers.

Interpretation

Glucocorticoids, TNFis, and abatacept treatments negatively affect the longevity of humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2, including Omicron, after two vaccine doses. These findings may inform the timing of additional vaccination for AIRD patients.

Funding

Cloud Funding of Peace Winds Japan; Center of Innovation Program from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan; Japan Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI; Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development; Kansai Economic Federation; Mitsubishi Zaidan; and Research Grant from Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development-Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology.

Social Media for Research Discourse, Dissemination, and Collaboration in Rheumatology

Social media has become an important venue for rheumatologists, patients, organizations, and other stakeholders to discuss recent research advances in diagnosis and management of rheumatic disorders. In this article, we describe the current state of how social media may enhance dissemination, discourse, and collaboration in rheumatology research. Social media may refer to social platforms like Twitter and Instagram or digital media like podcasts and other websites that are operated for providing as free, open-access medical education (FOAM). Twitter has been one of the most active social media venues and continues to host a vibrant rheumatology community. Examples of research discussions on Twitter include organic user tweets, educational threads ("tweetorials"), live-tweeting academic conferences, and journals posting recently-accepted articles. Some research collaborations have been initiated through social media interactions. Social media may also directly contribute to research by facilitating the recruitment of study participants and the collection of survey-based data. Thus, social media is an evolving and important tool to enhance research discourse, dissemination, and collaboration in rheumatology.

Fatal Acute Hemorrhagic Encephalomyelitis and Antiphospholipid Antibodies following SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination: A Case Report

Acute hemorrhagic encephalomyelitis (AHEM) is a rare hyperacute form of acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM). The disease is characterized by fulminant inflammation and demyelination in the brain and spinal cord and is often preceded by an infection or vaccination. This case report presents a 53-year-old male with rheumatoid arthritis and ongoing treatment with methotrexate and etanercept who developed fatal AHEM following the second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. The disease course was complicated by multiorgan thromboembolic disease and the presence of high/moderate levels of cardiolipin IgG antibodies and anti-beta-2 glycoprotein 1 IgG antibodies suggesting a possible antiphospholipid syndrome. Treatment with immunosuppressive therapies failed to improve the course. The report comprises comprehensive clinical, neuroimaging, and neuropathological findings. The case highlights diagnostic challenges in a patient with several preceding risk factors, including autoimmune disease, immunotherapy, and vaccination, with possible pathophysiological implications. The temporal association with the COVID-19 vaccination may suggest possible causality although evidence cannot be ascertained. Reporting possible adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination is important to identify at-risk populations and to accomplish control of the current pandemic.

Postvaccination anti-S IgG levels predict anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralising activity over 24 weeks in patients with RA

OBJECTIVES

To correlate immune responses following a two-dose regimen of mRNA anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to the development of a potent neutralising antiviral activity.

METHODS

The RECOVER study was a prospective, monocentric study including patients with RA and healthy controls (HCs). Assessments were performed before, and 3, 6, 12 and 24 weeks, after the first vaccine dose, respectively, and included IgG, IgA and IgM responses (against receptor binding domain, S1, S2, N), IFN-γ ELISpots as well as neutralisation assays.

RESULTS

In patients with RA, IgG responses developed slower with lower peak titres compared with HC. Potent neutralising activity assessed by a SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralisation assay after 12 weeks was observed in all 21 HCs, and in 60.3% of 73 patients with RA. A significant correlation between peak anti-S IgG levels 2 weeks after the second vaccine dose and potent neutralising activity against SARS-CoV-2 was observed at weeks 12 and 24. The analysis of IgG, IgA and IgM isotype responses to different viral proteins demonstrated a delay in IgG but not in IgA and IgM responses. T cell responses were comparable in HC and patients with RA but declined earlier in patients with RA.

CONCLUSION

In patients with RA, vaccine-induced IgG antibody levels were diminished, while IgA and IgM responses persisted, indicating a delayed isotype switch. Anti-S IgG levels 2 weeks after the second vaccine dose correlate with the development of a potent neutralising activity after 12 and 24 weeks and may allow to identify patients who might benefit from additional vaccine doses or prophylactic regimen.

The Impact of Immune-Modifying Treatments for Skin Diseases on the Immune Response to COVID-19 Vaccines: a Narrative Review

Purpose of Review

SARS-CoV-2 has had a devastating global effect, with vaccinations being paramount in the public health strategy against COVID-19. Vaccinations have uncoupled infection from adverse COVID-19 outcomes worldwide. While immune-modifying therapies are effective for the management of skin diseases such as psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, these medications also impair protective immune responses. There has been longstanding uncertainty and concern over the impact of immune-modifying therapies on the effectiveness of vaccines; for example, it is well recognised that methotrexate impairs humoral responses to both influenza and pneumococcal vaccines. This narrative review aims to discuss the evidence to date on the impact of immune-modifying therapies on the immune response to COVID-19 vaccines, with a focus on the first two vaccine doses.

Recent Findings

Individuals receiving immune-modifying therapy are more likely to have attenuated humoral responses to a single dose of COVID-19 vaccine compared to healthy controls; however, this may be improved by a complete course of vaccination. B cell targeted biologics such as rituximab markedly impair the humoral response to both the first and second COVID-19 vaccination. There remains a paucity of data on cellular immune responses, with the few available studies indicating lower responses to two vaccine doses in individuals receiving immune-modifying therapies compared to healthy controls, which may impact the durability of immune responses.

Summary

Inadequate humoral immune responses to a single dose of vaccine in the context of immune-modifying therapy are improved by a complete course of vaccination. Individuals receiving immune-modifying treatments should be encouraged to take up a complete vaccine course to mitigate their risk against COVID-19. Research in large patient populations on the longevity/kinetics of the complex humoral and cellular response to subsequent vaccine doses, including against newer variants of concern, is warranted, in addition to data on immune correlates of vaccine clinical effectiveness.

Inefficient Induction of Neutralizing Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Therapy after Receiving a Third mRNA Vaccine Dose

Management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) often relies on biological and immunomodulatory agents for remission through immunosuppression, raising concerns regarding the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine's effectiveness. The emergent variants have hindered the vaccine neutralization capacity, and whether the third vaccine dose can neutralize SARS-CoV-2 variants in this population remains unknown. This study aims to evaluate the humoral response of SARS-CoV-2 variants in patients with IBD 60 days after the third vaccine dose [BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna)]. Fifty-six subjects with IBD and 12 healthy subjects were recruited. Ninety percent of patients with IBD (49/56) received biologics and/or immunomodulatory therapy. Twenty-four subjects with IBD did not develop effective neutralizing capability against the Omicron variant. Seventy percent (17/24) of those subjects received anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy [10 = adalimumab, 7 = infliximab], two of which had a history of COVID-19 infection, and one subject did not develop immune neutralization against three other variants: Gamma, Epsilon, and Kappa. All subjects in the control group developed detectable antibodies and effective neutralization against all seven SARS-CoV-2 variants. Our study shows that patients with IBD might not be protected against SARS-CoV-2 variants, and more extensive studies are needed to evaluate optimal immunity.

Anti-TNFα Treatment Impairs Long-Term Immune Responses to COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treated with anti-tumor-necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) exhibited lower serologic responses one-month following the second dose of the COVID-19 BNT162b2 vaccine compared to those not treated with anti-TNFα (non-anti-TNFα) or to healthy controls (HCs). We comprehensively analyzed long-term humoral responses, including anti-spike (S) antibodies, serum inhibition, neutralization, cross-reactivity and circulating B cell six months post BNT162b2, in patients with IBD stratified by therapy compared to HCs. Subjects enrolled in a prospective, controlled, multi-center Israeli study received two BNT162b2 doses. Anti-S levels, functional activity, specific B cells, antigen cross-reactivity, anti-nucleocapsid levels, adverse events and IBD disease score were detected longitudinally. In total, 240 subjects, 151 with IBD (94 not treated with anti-TNFα and 57 treated with anti-TNFα) and 89 HCs participated. Six months after vaccination, patients with IBD treated with anti-TNFα had significantly impaired BNT162b2 responses, specifically, more seronegativity, decreased specific circulating B cells and cross-reactivity compared to patients untreated with anti-TNFα. Importantly, all seronegative subjects were patients with IBD; of those, >90% were treated with anti-TNFα. Finally, IBD activity was unaffected by BNT162b2. Altogether these data support the earlier booster dose administration in these patients.

Antibody Response Six Months after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are recommended to receive vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), regardless of their immunosuppression status. Immunosuppressive medications represent a mainstay of therapy in moderate to severe IBD; however, their impact on the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine response remains unclear. Studies thus far have shown that patients with IBD on various therapies had detectable antibody responses after standard vaccinations.1-5 To date, one study has examined the kinetics of antibody response at 3 months after vaccination in patients with IBD, but data beyond this time point are not yet available.6 The aim of this study was to assess anti-spike antibody response 6 months after completion of standard SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with IBD. Secondarily, we observed antibody kinetics over 6 months in a subset of patients post-vaccination.

Effectiveness and Durability of COVID-19 Vaccination in 9447 Patients With IBD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The serological responses after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination may be attenuated in immunocompromised individuals. The study aimed to systematically evaluate the seroconversion rates after complete vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched to identify studies reporting response to COVID-19 vaccination in IBD. Pooled seroconversion rates after complete vaccination were calculated. Subgroup analysis for vaccine types was also performed. Pooled seroconversion rates for various drugs or classes were also estimated. The pooled rates of breakthrough infections in vaccinated IBD patients were estimated. The pooled neutralization rates after complete vaccination were also estimated. The studies reporting durability of titers were systematically assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 46 studies were included. The pooled seroconversion rate for complete vaccination (31 studies, 9447 patients) was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-0.97; I2 = 90%). When compared with healthy control subjects, the pooled relative risk of seroconversion was lower (0.98; 95% CI, 0.98-0.99; I2 = 39%). The pooled seroconversion rates were statistically similar among various drug classes. The pooled positivity of neutralization assays (8 studies, 771 participants) was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.70-0.87; I2 = 82%). The pooled relative risk of breakthrough infections in vaccinated IBD patients was similar to vaccinated control subjects (0.60; 95% CI, 0.25-1.42; I2 = 79%). Most studies suggested that titers fall after 4 weeks of COVID-19 vaccination, and the decay was higher in patients on anti-tumor necrosis factor alone or combination with immunomodulators. An additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine elicited serological response in most nonresponders to complete vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Complete COVID-19 vaccination is associated with seroconversion in most patients with IBD. The decay in titers over time necessitates consideration of additional doses in these patients.

Favorable vaccine-induced SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response profile in patients undergoing immune-modifying therapies

BACKGROUNDPatients undergoing immune-modifying therapies demonstrate a reduced humoral response after COVID-19 vaccination, but we lack a proper evaluation of the effect of such therapies on vaccine-induced T cell responses.METHODSWe longitudinally characterized humoral and spike-specific T cell responses in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), who were on antimetabolite therapy (azathioprine or methotrexate), TNF inhibitors, and/or other biologic treatment (anti-integrin or anti-p40) for up to 6 months after completing 2-dose COVID-19 mRNA vaccination.RESULTSWe demonstrate that a spike-specific T cell response was not only induced in treated patients with IBD at levels similar to those of healthy individuals, but also sustained at higher magnitude for up to 6 months after vaccination, particularly in those treated with TNF inhibitor therapy. Furthermore, the spike-specific T cell response in these patients was mainly preserved against mutations present in SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) and characterized by a Th1/IL-10 cytokine profile.CONCLUSIONDespite the humoral response defects, patients under immune-modifying therapies demonstrated a favorable profile of vaccine-induced T cell responses that might still provide a layer of COVID-19 protection.FUNDINGThis study was funded by the National Centre for Infectious Diseases (NCID) Catalyst Grant (FY2021ES) and the National Research Fund Competitive Research Programme (NRF-CRP25-2020-0003).

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

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

Insights From Early Clinical Trials Assessing Response to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Immunocompromised Patients

It is critical to protect immunocompromised patients against COVID-19 with effective SARS-CoV-2 vaccination as they have an increased risk of developing severe disease. This is challenging, however, since effective mRNA vaccination requires the successful cooperation of several components of the innate and adaptive immune systems, both of which can be severely affected/deficient in immunocompromised people. In this article, we first review current knowledge on the immunobiology of SARS-COV-2 mRNA vaccination in animal models and in healthy humans. Next, we summarize data from early trials of SARS-COV-2 mRNA vaccination in patients with secondary or primary immunodeficiency. These early clinical trials identified common predictors of lower response to the vaccine such as anti-CD19, anti-CD20 or anti-CD38 therapies, low (naive) CD4+ T-cell counts, genetic or therapeutic Bruton tyrosine kinase deficiency, treatment with antimetabolites, CTLA4 agonists or JAK inhibitors, and vaccination with BNT162b2 versus mRNA1273 vaccine. Finally, we review the first data on third dose mRNA vaccine administration in immunocompromised patients and discuss recent strategies of temporarily holding/pausing immunosuppressive medication during vaccination.

Boosting with Omicron-matched or historical mRNA vaccines increases neutralizing antibody responses and protection against B.1.1.529 infection in mice

The B.1.1.529 Omicron variant jeopardizes vaccines designed with early pandemic spike antigens. Here, we evaluated in mice the protective activity of the Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccine against B.1.1.529 before or after boosting with preclinical mRNA-1273 or mRNA-1273.529, an Omicron-matched vaccine. Whereas two doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine induced high levels of serum neutralizing antibodies against historical WA1/2020 strains, levels were lower against B.1.1.529 and associated with infection and inflammation in the lung. A primary vaccination series with mRNA-1273.529 potently neutralized B.1.1.529 but showed limited inhibition of historical or other SARS-CoV-2 variants. However, boosting with mRNA-1273 or mRNA-1273.529 vaccines increased serum neutralizing titers and protection against B.1.1.529 infection. Nonetheless, the levels of inhibitory antibodies were higher, and viral burden and cytokines in the lung were slightly lower in mice given the Omicron-matched mRNA booster. Thus, in mice, boosting with mRNA-1273 or mRNA-1273.529 enhances protection against B.1.1.529 infection with limited differences in efficacy measured.

Neutralization assays for SARS-CoV-2: Implications for assessment of protective efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines

The WHO emergency use-listed (EUL) COVID-19 vaccines were developed against early strains of SARS-CoV-2. With the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) - Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Omicron, it is necessary to assess the neutralizing activity of these vaccines against the VOCs. PubMed and preprint platforms were searched for literature on neutralizing activity of serum from WHO EUL vaccine recipients, against the VOCs, using appropriate search terms till November 30, 2021. Our search yielded 91 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The analysis revealed a drop of 0-8.9-fold against Alpha variant, 0.3-42.4-fold against Beta variant, 0-13.8-fold against Gamma variant and 1.35-20-fold against Delta variant in neutralization titres of serum from the WHO EUL COVID-19 vaccine recipients, as compared to early SARS-CoV-2 isolates. The wide range of variability was due to differences in the choice of virus strains selected for neutralization assays (pseudovirus or live virus), timing of serum sample collection after the final dose of vaccine (day 0 to 8 months) and sample size (ranging from 5 to 470 vaccinees). The reasons for this variation have been discussed and the possible way forward to have uniformity across neutralization assays in different laboratories have been described, which will generate reliable data. Though in vitro neutralization studies are a valuable tool to estimate the performance of vaccines against the backdrop of emerging variants, the results must be interpreted with caution and corroborated with field-effectiveness studies.