Response to additional COVID-19 vaccine doses in people who are immunocompromised: a rapid review

COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy in Participants With Weakened Immune Systems From 4 Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Although the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines are highly efficacious at preventing severe disease in the general population, current data are lacking regarding vaccine efficacy (VE) for individuals with mild immunocompromising conditions.

METHODS

A post hoc, cross-protocol analysis of participant-level data from the blinded phase of four randomized, placebo-controlled, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine phase 3 trials (Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax) was performed. We defined a "tempered immune system" (TIS) variable via a consensus panel based on medical history and medications to determine VE against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 cases in TIS participants versus non-TIS individuals starting at 14 days after completion of the primary series through the blinded phase for each of the 4 trials. An analysis of participants living with well-controlled human immunodeficiency virus was conducted using the same methods.

RESULTS

A total of 3852/30 351 (12.7%) Moderna participants, 3088/29 868 (10.3%) Novavax participants, 3549/32 380 (11.0%) AstraZeneca participants, and 5047/43 788 (11.5%) Janssen participants were identified as having a TIS. Most TIS conditions (73.9%) were due to metabolism and nutritional disorders. Vaccination (vs placebo) significantly reduced the likelihood of symptomatic and severe COVID-19 for all participants for each trial. VE was not significantly different for TIS participants versus non-TIS for either symptomatic or severe COVID-19 for each trial, nor was VE significantly different in the symptomatic endpoint for participants with human immunodeficiency virus.

CONCLUSIONS

For individuals with mildly immunocompromising conditions, there is no evidence of differences in VE against symptomatic or severe COVID-19 compared with those with non-TIS in the 4 COVID-19 vaccine randomized controlled efficacy trials.

How I treat: Coronavirus disease 2019 in leukemic patients and hematopoietic cell transplant recipients

Among immunocompromised hosts, leukemia patients, and hematopoietic cell transplant recipients are particularly vulnerable, facing challenges in balancing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) management with their underlying conditions. In this How I Treat article, we discuss how we approach severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections in daily clinical practice, considering the existing body of literature and for topics where the available data are not sufficient to provide adequate guidance, we provide our opinion based on our clinical expertise and experience. Diagnostic approaches include nasopharyngeal swabs for polymerase chain reaction testing and chest computed tomography scans for symptomatic patients at risk of disease progression. Preventive measures involve strict infection control protocols and prioritizing vaccination for both patients and their families. Decisions regarding chemotherapy or hematopoietic cell transplantation in leukemia patients with COVID-19 require careful consideration of factors such as COVID-19 severity and treatment urgency. Treatment protocols include early initiation of antiviral therapy, with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or remdesivir. For cases of prolonged viral shedding, distinguishing between viable and non-viable viruses remains challenging but is crucial for determining contagiousness and guiding management decisions. Overall, individualized approaches considering immune status, clinical presentation, and viral kinetics are essential for effectively managing COVID-19 in leukemia patients.

SARS-CoV-2 Variants and Clinical Outcomes of Special Populations: A Scoping Review of the Literature

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted special populations, including immunocompromised individuals, people living with HIV (PLWHIV), pediatric patients, and those with chronic liver disease (CLD). This scoping review aims to map the clinical outcomes of these vulnerable groups when infected with various SARS-CoV-2 variants. The review identifies trends and patterns, noting that early variants, such as Alpha and Delta, are associated with more severe outcomes, including higher hospitalization and mortality rates. In contrast, the Omicron variant, despite its increased transmissibility, tends to cause milder clinical manifestations. The review highlights the necessity for ongoing surveillance and tailored healthcare interventions due to the heterogeneity of patient populations and the evolving nature of the virus. Continuous monitoring and adaptive healthcare strategies are essential to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on these high-risk groups.

HTRF-based assay for detection of mono-ADP-ribosyl hydrolyzing macrodomains and inhibitor screening

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the lack of effective, ready-to-use antivirals for the treatment of viruses with pandemic potential. The development of a diverse drug portfolio is therefore crucial for pandemic preparedness. Viral macrodomains are attractive therapeutic targets as they are suggested to play an important role in evading the innate host immune response, making them critical for viral pathogenesis. Macrodomains function as erasers of mono-ADP-ribosylation (deMARylation), a post-translational modification that is involved in interferon signaling. Herein, we report the development of a modular HTRF-based assay, that can be used to screen for inhibitors of various viral and human macrodomains. We characterized the five most promising small molecule SARS-CoV-2 Mac1 inhibitors recently reported in the literature for potency and selectivity and conducted a pilot screen demonstrating HTS suitability. The ability to directly detect enzymatic activity makes the DeMAR assay a valuable addition to the existing tools for macrodomain drug discovery.

Oral Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have not shown a significant benefit of postexposure prophylaxis.

METHODS

We conducted a phase 2-3 double-blind trial to assess the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in asymptomatic, rapid antigen test-negative adults who had been exposed to a household contact with Covid-19 within 96 hours before randomization. The participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (300 mg of nirmatrelvir and 100 mg of ritonavir) every 12 hours for 5 days or for 10 days or matching placebo for 5 or 10 days. The primary end point was the development of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) infection, confirmed on reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) or rapid antigen testing, through 14 days in participants who had a negative RT-PCR test at baseline.

RESULTS

A total of 2736 participants were randomly assigned to a trial group - 921 to the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, 917 to the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, and 898 to the placebo group. Symptomatic, confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection developed by day 14 in 2.6% of the participants in the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, 2.4% of those in the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, and 3.9% of those in the placebo group. In each nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, the percentage of participants in whom symptomatic, confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection developed did not differ significantly from that in the placebo group, with risk reductions relative to placebo of 29.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], -16.7 to 57.8; P = 0.17) in the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and 35.5% (95% CI, -11.5 to 62.7; P = 0.12) in the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group. The incidence of adverse events was similar across the trial groups, with dysgeusia being the most frequently reported adverse event (in 5.9% and 6.8% of the participants in the 5-day and 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir groups, respectively, and in 0.7% of those in the placebo group).

CONCLUSIONS

In this placebo-controlled trial, postexposure prophylaxis with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for 5 or 10 days did not significantly reduce the risk of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. (Funded by Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05047601.).

Real World Use of Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis of COVID-19 in Immunocompromised Individuals: Data from the OCTOPUS Study

Objective. We aimed to report the real-world use and outcomes over time in immunocompromised individuals receiving tixagevimab/cilgavimab (T/C) pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Methods. This observational study included participants who received T/C PrEP, categorized into three groups: (i) No COVID-19 (NoC), i.e., participants who never had COVID-19; (ii) Hybrids (H), i.e., participants who had COVID-19 before PrEP; and (iii) Break-through Infections (BTIs), i.e., participants who had COVID-19 after PrEP. The study measured several immune markers at the administration of T/C (T0) at 3 (T1), 6 (T2), and 9 (T3) months afterward. These markers included: anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG antibodies; BA.5-neutralizing antibodies (nAbs); mucosal IgG; and T cell immunity. The incidence rate ratios for BTIs were analyzed using a Poisson regression model. Results. A total of 231 participants with a median age of 63 years (IQR 54.0-73.0). were included. Among these, 84% had hematological diseases and received a median of three vaccine doses. N = 72 participants belonged to the NoC group, N = 103 to the H group, and n = 56 to the BTI group (24%), with most BTIs being mild/moderate. The incidence rate (IR) of BTIs was 4.2 per 100 patient-months (95% CI 3.2-5.4), with no associated risk factors identified. There was a significant increase in anti-RBD IgG levels 3 months after the T/C administration in all groups, followed by a decline at 6 months, whereas at the same time points, geometric mean titers (GMTs) of anti-BA.5 nAbs were low for all groups and were around or below the detection threshold. No significant changes were observed in IFN-γ levels. The mucosal immune response was observed only 3 months after the PrEP administration. Conclusion. We provided a real-world experience model on the clinical efficacy of T/C PrEP in preventing severe COVID-19 during the Omicron wave through a comprehensive virological and immunological study. While waiting for the arrival of new monoclonal antibodies that can effectively neutralize the most recent variants, T/C PrEP remains the only viable strategy in the available armamentarium today to prevent COVID-19 complications in an extremely fragile population with suboptimal immune responses to COVID-19 vaccines.

Immunogenicity of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 in Immunocompromised Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Using GRADE

INTRODUCTION

Immunocompromised (IC) patients mount poor immune responses to vaccination. Higher-dose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines may offer increased immunogenicity.

METHODS

A pairwise meta-analysis of 98 studies reporting comparisons of mRNA-1273 (50 or 100 mcg/dose) and BNT162b2 (30 mcg/dose) in IC adults was performed. Outcomes were seroconversion, total and neutralizing antibody titers, and cellular immune responses.

RESULTS

mRNA-1273 was associated with a significantly higher seroconversion likelihood [relative risk, 1.11 (95% CI, 1.08, 1.14); P < 0.0001; I2 = 66.8%] and higher total antibody titers [relative increase, 50.45% (95% CI, 34.63%, 66.28%); P < 0.0001; I2 = 89.5%] versus BNT162b2. mRNA-1273 elicited higher but statistically nonsignificant relative increases in neutralizing antibody titers and cellular immune responses versus BNT162b2.

CONCLUSION

Higher-dose mRNA-1273 had increased immunogenicity versus BNT162b2 in IC patients.

Protecting the vulnerable: addressing the COVID-19 care needs of people with compromised immunity

While the general population regained a certain level of normalcy with the end of the global health emergency, the risk of contracting COVID-19 with a severe outcome is still a major concern for people with compromised immunity. This paper reviews the impact of COVID-19 on people with immunocompromised status, identifies the gaps in the current management landscape, and proposes actions to address this unmet need. Observational studies have demonstrated that people with immune dysfunction have a higher risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death, despite vaccination, than the general population. More research is needed to define the optimal prevention and treatment strategies that are specific to people with immunocompromised status, including novel vaccination strategies, monoclonal antibodies that provide passive immunity and complement suboptimal vaccination responses, and improved and safer antiviral treatment for COVID-19. Preventive measures beyond vaccination alone are urgently needed to protect this vulnerable population.

SARS-CoV-2 resistance to monoclonal antibodies and small-molecule drugs

Over four years have passed since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The scientific response has been rapid and effective, with many therapeutic monoclonal antibodies and small molecules developed for clinical use. However, given the ability for viruses to become resistant to antivirals, it is perhaps no surprise that the field has identified resistance to nearly all of these compounds. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of the resistance profile for each of these therapeutics. We hope that this resource provides an atlas for mutations to be aware of for each agent, particularly as a springboard for considerations for the next generation of antivirals. Finally, we discuss the outlook and thoughts for moving forward in how we continue to manage this, and the next, pandemic.

Immunogenicity after vaccination of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cancer: a prospective, single center, observational study

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer, particularly those undergoing chemotherapy, are at risk from the low immunogenicity of Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) vaccines.

METHODS

This prospective study assessed the seroconversion rate of COVID-19 vaccines among patients with cancer and hospital staff. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein-specific IgG (S-IgG) concentrations were evaluated before the first vaccination, and 1-3 and 4-6 months after the second vaccination. The primary endpoint was the seroconversion rate measured 1-3 months after the second vaccine.

RESULTS

In total, 590 patients and 183 healthy hospital staff were analyzed. At 1-3 months after the second vaccination, the S-IgG antibody concentration exceeded the cut-off value (20 BAU/mL) in 96.1% (567/590) of the patients with cancer and 100% (183/183) of the healthy controls (p = 0.0024). At 4-6 months after the second vaccination, the S-IgG antibody concentration exceeded the cut-off value (20 BAU/ml for S-IgG) in 93.1% (461/495) of the patients with cancer and 100% (170/170) of the healthy controls (p < 0.0001). Old age, being male, and low lymphocyte count were related to low SARS-CoV-2 S-IgG levels 1-3 months after the second vaccination among patients, while body mass index, smoking history, and serum albumin level were not. Patients undergoing platinum combination therapy and alkylating agent among cytotoxic drugs, and PARP inhibitor, mTOR inhibitor, and BCR-ABL inhibitor exhibited a low S-IgG antibody concentration compared to the no treatment group.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccine immunogenicity was reduced among patients with cancer, especially under several treatment regimens.

AZD1222 effectiveness against severe COVID-19 in individuals with comorbidity or frailty: The RAVEN cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Despite being prioritized during initial COVID-19 vaccine rollout, vulnerable individuals at high risk of severe COVID-19 (hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, or death) remain underrepresented in vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies. The RAVEN cohort study (NCT05047822) assessed AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCov-19) two-dose primary series VE in vulnerable populations.

METHODS

Using the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Clinical Informatics Digital Hub, linked to secondary care, death registration, and COVID-19 datasets in England, COVID-19 outcomes in 2021 were compared in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals matched on age, sex, region, and multimorbidity.

RESULTS

Over 4.5 million AZD1222 recipients were matched (mean follow-up ∼5 months); 68% were ≥50 years, 57% had high multimorbidity. Overall, high VE against severe COVID-19 was demonstrated, with lower VE observed in vulnerable populations. VE against hospitalization was higher in the lowest multimorbidity quartile (91.1%; 95% CI: 90.1, 92.0) than the highest quartile (80.4%; 79.7, 81.1), and among individuals ≥65 years, higher in the 'fit' (86.2%; 84.5, 87.6) than the frailest (71.8%; 69.3, 74.2). VE against hospitalization was lowest in immunosuppressed individuals (64.6%; 60.7, 68.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on integrated and comprehensive UK health data, overall population-level VE with AZD1222 was high. VEs were notably lower in vulnerable groups, particularly the immunosuppressed.

Boosting Vaccine Response in Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease Patients With Inadequate Seroconversion: An Analysis of the Immunogenicity of Vector-Based and Inactivated Vaccines

BACKGROUND

An additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine is being offered to vaccinated people, especially those immunocompromised. The most widely available vaccines in India are the adenoviral vector-based AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) and the heat-inactivated (BBV152). This study investigated the efficacy of both vaccines in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRD).

OBJECTIVES

 To compare final anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers, neutralization of pseudovirions by these antibodies, and T cell responses between patients of AIRD who had received the third dose of AZD1222 and BBV152 vaccines.

METHODS

Patients with stable AIRD who had completed two doses of COVID-19 vaccination but had a suboptimal response (anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody<212) were randomized (1:1) to receive either AZD1222 or BBV152 as a booster dose. Patients with previous hybrid immunity or those who developed COVID-19 during the trial were excluded. Antibody titers, neutralization of Wuhan and Omicron pseudovirions, and interferon release by T cells (enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot (ELISpot)) in response to the Spike antigen were measured four weeks after this booster dose.

RESULTS

146 were screened, 91 were randomized, and 67 were analyzed per protocol. The third dose improved antibody titers (p<0.001), neutralization of the Wuhan strain (p<0.001), and T cell interferon release (p<0.001) but not neutralization of the Omicron strain (p=0.24). Antibody titers were higher (p<0.005) after ADZ1222 boost (2,414 IU (interquartile range (IQR): 330-10,315)) than BBV1222 (347.7 IU (0.4-973)). Neutralization of the Wuhan stain was better (AZD1222: 76.6%(23.0-95.45) versus BBV152 (32.7% (0-78.9), p=0.03 by ANCOVA). Neutralization of Omicron (0 (0-28.4) vs 0 (0-4.8)) and T cell interferon release (57.0 IU (23.5-95) vs 50.5 IU (13.2-139)) were similar.

CONCLUSION

The third dose improved all parameters of immunogenicity in AIRD patients with previous inadequate responses except Omicron neutralization. The vector-based vaccine exhibits notable efficacy, particularly in antibody titers and neutralizing the Wuhan strain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CTRI/2021/12/038928.

Longevity of the humoral and cellular responses after SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccinations in immunocompromised patients

We assessed the humoral and cellular immune responses after two booster mRNA vaccine administrations [BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine)] in cohorts of immunocompromised patients (n = 199) and healthy controls (HC) (n = 54). All patients living with HIV (PLWH) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients and almost all (98.2%) of the primary immunodeficiency (PID) patients had measurable antibodies 3 and 6 months after administration of the third and fourth vaccine dose, comparable to the HCs. In contrast, only 53.3% and 83.3% of the multiple sclerosis (MS) and rheumatologic patients, respectively, developed a humoral immune response. Cellular immune response was observed in all PLWH after administration of four vaccine doses. In addition, cellular immune response was positive in 89.6%, 97.8%, 73.3% and 96.9% of the PID, MS, rheumatologic and CKD patients, respectively. Unlike the other groups, only the MS patients had a significantly higher cellular immune response compared to the HC group. Administration of additional vaccine doses results in retained or increased humoral and cellular immune response in patients with acquired or inherited immune disorders.

Efficacy of vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2 virus in patients with chronic kidney disease on hemodialysis

SARS-CoV-2 has had a great impact on world health, patients on hemodialysis have a higher rate of infection and death due to COVID-19. Vaccination is important to control infection and improve the prognosis of infected patients. To describe the efficacy of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in Chilean patients on hemodialysis during the year 2021. Retrospective observational study. A total of 9,712 clinical records were reviewed. Data were presented as summary measures. Fisher's exact test, Mann-Whitney U test, and multivariate logistic regression were used for the analysis. Risk and survival analysis were calculated, considering a statistical significance of less than 0.05. The average age of the patients attended was 61.5 ± 14.6 years. Average time on dialysis 67.6 months and 35.0% diabetic. 93.2% of patients were vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, 70.7% of them received booster doses. The risk of infection was higher for those who received one or no dose, compared to those who received booster doses against SARS-CoV-2: OR = 252.46 [165.13; 401.57]. Of the infected patients, 15.7% died from COVID-19. The risk of death was higher in unvaccinated or single-dose patients compared to those vaccinated with two doses: OR = 2.64 [2.23; 3.12]. Patients with two doses and a booster had a longer survival compared to those who received one or no dose of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 (p < .05). The vaccination in Chile, which started in February 2021, has demonstrated that booster doses against SARS-CoV-2 significantly reduced the risk of infection, hospitalization, and death due to COVID-19 in patients on hemodialysis.

Real-world clinical effectiveness of Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab and Regdanvimab monoclonal antibodies for COVID-19 treatment in Omicron variant-dominant period

Several virus-neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have become new tools in the treatment of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), but their effectiveness against the rapidly mutating virus is questionable. The present study investigated the effectiveness of Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab and Regdanvimab for mild and moderate COVID-19 treatment in real-world clinical practice during the Omicron variant-dominant period. Patients with known risk factors for disease progression and increasing disease severity were enrolled in the study within the first 7 days of symptom onset. Seventy-seven patients were divided into four groups: first 15 patients received 300 mg Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab intravenously (IV) and 23 patients got the same drug 300 mg intramuscularly (IM), the next 15 patients was on the same combination in dose of 600 mg IV, and 24 patients were on Regdanvimab at a dose of 40 mg/kg IV. By Day 4, 100% of Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab IV patients showed negative polymerase chain reaction results for SARS-CoV-2 Ribonucleic acid (RNA) regardless of the mAbs dose while in the Regdanvimab group 29% of the patients were positive for SARS-CoV-2 virus RNA. The testing for virus neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) to various Omicron sublineages (BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5) showed that an increase in nAb levels was detected in blood serum immediately after the drug administration only in Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab 300 mg and 600 mg IV groups. In the group of intravenous Regdanvimab, a significant increase in the level of nAbs to the Wuhan variant was detected immediately after the drug administration, while no increase in nAbs to different Omicron sublineages was observed.

Clinical trial registration

https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT05982704.

Comparative effectiveness of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis using the GRADE framework

Introduction

Despite representing only 3% of the US population, immunocompromised (IC) individuals account for nearly half of the COVID-19 breakthrough hospitalizations. IC individuals generate a lower immune response after vaccination in general, and the US CDC recommended a third dose of either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccines as part of their primary series. Influenza vaccine trials have shown that increasing dosage could improve effectiveness in IC populations. The objective of this systematic literature review and pairwise meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of mRNA-1273 (50 or 100 mcg/dose) vs BNT162b2 (30 mcg/dose) in IC populations using the GRADE framework.

Methods

The systematic literature search was conducted in the World Health Organization COVID-19 Research Database. Studies were included in the pairwise meta-analysis if they reported comparisons of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 in IC individuals ≥18 years of age; outcomes of interest were symptomatic, laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, SARS-CoV-2 infection, severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization due to COVID-19, and mortality due to COVID-19. Risk ratios (RR) were pooled across studies using random-effects meta-analysis models. Outcomes were also analyzed in subgroups of patients with cancer, autoimmune disease, and solid organ transplant. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework.

Results

Overall, 17 studies were included in the pairwise meta-analysis. Compared with BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 was associated with significantly reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.75-0.97]; P=0.0151; I2 = 67.7%), severe SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.77-0.93]; P=0.0009; I2 = 0%), COVID-19-associated hospitalization (RR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.79-0.97]; P<0.0001; I2 = 0%), and COVID-19-associated mortality (RR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.44-0.90]; P=0.0119; I2 = 0%) in IC populations. Results were consistent across subgroups. Because of sample size limitations, relative effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in IC populations cannot be studied in randomized trials. Based on nonrandomized studies, evidence certainty among comparisons was type 3 (low) and 4 (very low), reflecting potential biases in observational studies.

Conclusion

This GRADE meta-analysis based on a large number of consistent observational studies showed that the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine is associated with improved clinical effectiveness in IC populations compared with BNT162b2.

Relatively preserved functional immune capacity with standard COVID-19 vaccine regimen in people living with HIV

Introduction

People living with HIV (PLWH) are at a higher risk of severe disease with SARS-CoV-2 virus infection. COVID-19 vaccines are effective in most PLWH. However, suboptimal immune responses to the standard two-shot regimen are a concern, especially for those with moderate to severe immunodeficiency. An additional dose is recommended as part of the extended primary series in Taiwan. Herein, we study the efficacy of this additional shot in PLWH with mild immunodeficiency compared to that in healthy non-HIV people.

Methods

In total, 72 PLWH that were asymptomatic or with mild immunodeficiency (CD4 counts ≥200/mm3) and suppressed virology, and 362 healthcare workers of our hospital were enrolled. None of the participants had a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. They received mRNA-1273 and ChAdOx1 vaccines. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing and anti-Spike IgG antibodies, and SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses were evaluated.

Results

The standard two-shot regimen elicited lower responses in PLWH than the healthcare workers without HIV infection, although the difference was statistically insignificant. They had comparable levels of neutralizing and anti-Spike antibodies and comparable effector CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses. The third shot boosted the SARS-CoV-2 immunity significantly more with better antibody responses and higher IFN-γ and IL-2 responses of the CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in PLWH compared to those without HIV. Upon in vitro stimulation with extracted Wuhan strain SARS-CoV-2 proteins, CD8+ T cells from PLWH after 3 shots had more durable effector responses than the non-HIV controls with extended time of stimulation.

Conclusion

This subtle difference between PLWH and non-HIV people implied immune exhaustion with two shots in non-HIV people. Slightly compromised immunity in PLWH indeed preserved the functional capacity for further response to the third shot or natural infection.

SARS-CoV-2 Mac1 is required for IFN antagonism and efficient virus replication in cell culture and in mice

Several coronavirus (CoV) encoded proteins are being evaluated as targets for antiviral therapies for COVID-19. Included in these drug targets is the conserved macrodomain, or Mac1, an ADP-ribosylhydrolase and ADP-ribose binding protein encoded as a small domain at the N terminus of nonstructural protein 3. Utilizing point mutant recombinant viruses, Mac1 was shown to be critical for both murine hepatitis virus (MHV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV virulence. However, as a potential drug target, it is imperative to understand how a complete Mac1 deletion impacts the replication and pathogenesis of different CoVs. To this end, we created recombinant bacterial artificial chromosomes (BACs) containing complete Mac1 deletions (ΔMac1) in MHV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2. While we were unable to recover infectious virus from MHV or MERS-CoV ΔMac1 BACs, SARS-CoV-2 ΔMac1 was readily recovered from BAC transfection, indicating a stark difference in the requirement for Mac1 between different CoVs. Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 ΔMac1 replicated at or near wild-type levels in multiple cell lines susceptible to infection. However, in a mouse model of severe infection, ΔMac1 was quickly cleared causing minimal pathology without any morbidity. ΔMac1 SARS-CoV-2 induced increased levels of interferon (IFN) and IFN-stimulated gene expression in cell culture and mice, indicating that Mac1 blocks IFN responses which may contribute to its attenuation. ΔMac1 infection also led to a stark reduction in inflammatory monocytes and neutrophils. These results demonstrate that Mac1 only minimally impacts SARS-CoV-2 replication, unlike MHV and MERS-CoV, but is required for SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis and is a unique antiviral drug target.

The Burden of COVID-19 in the Immunocompromised Patient: Implications for Vaccination and Needs for the Future

Approximately 3% of US adults are immunocompromised and less capable of fighting infections such as SARS-CoV-2 (the causative agent of COVID-19). Individuals may be immunocompromised for reasons related to an underlying medical condition or to immunomodulatory therapies that alter the immune response. In general, vaccination with mRNA-based vaccines is effective at reducing COVID-19-associated hospitalization and death among immunocompromised populations, particularly after 3 or more doses. However, the immunocompromised population is heterogeneous, with COVID-19 vaccine-elicited immune responses and risk for severe COVID-19 existing on a continuum. Therefore, understanding the impact of vaccination and the complexity of immune responses across heterogeneous immunocompromised individuals is essential for guiding effective vaccination regimens including additional (booster) doses. In this article, we provide an overview of the immunocompromised population and the burden of disease attributable to COVID-19, while discussing key opportunities and challenges of vaccinating immunocompromised individuals.

A modeling-based approach to optimize COVID-19 vaccine dosing schedules for improved protection

While the development of different vaccines slowed the dissemination of SARS-CoV-2, the occurrence of breakthrough infections has continued to fuel the COVID-19 pandemic. To secure at least partial protection in the majority of the population through 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, delayed administration of boosters has been implemented in many countries. However, waning immunity and emergence of new variants of SARS-CoV-2 suggest that such measures may induce breakthrough infections due to intermittent lapses in protection. Optimizing vaccine dosing schedules to ensure prolonged continuity in protection could thus help control the pandemic. We developed a mechanistic model of immune response to vaccines as an in silico tool for dosing schedule optimization. The model was calibrated with clinical data sets of acquired immunity to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in healthy and immunocompromised participants and showed robust validation by accurately predicting neutralizing antibody kinetics in response to multiple doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Importantly, by estimating population vulnerability to breakthrough infections, we predicted tailored vaccination dosing schedules to minimize breakthrough infections, especially for immunocompromised individuals. We identified that the optimal vaccination schedules vary from CDC-recommended dosing, suggesting that the model is a valuable tool to optimize vaccine efficacy outcomes during future outbreaks.

Polyfunctional antibodies: a path towards precision vaccines for vulnerable populations

Vaccine efficacy determined within the controlled environment of a clinical trial is usually substantially greater than real-world vaccine effectiveness. Typically, this results from reduced protection of immunologically vulnerable populations, such as children, elderly individuals and people with chronic comorbidities. Consequently, these high-risk groups are frequently recommended tailored immunisation schedules to boost responses. In addition, diverse groups of healthy adults may also be variably protected by the same vaccine regimen. Current population-based vaccination strategies that consider basic clinical parameters offer a glimpse into what may be achievable if more nuanced aspects of the immune response are considered in vaccine design. To date, vaccine development has been largely empirical. However, next-generation approaches require more rational strategies. We foresee a generation of precision vaccines that consider the mechanistic basis of vaccine response variations associated with both immunogenetic and baseline health differences. Recent efforts have highlighted the importance of balanced and diverse extra-neutralising antibody functions for vaccine-induced protection. However, in immunologically vulnerable populations, significant modulation of polyfunctional antibody responses that mediate both neutralisation and effector functions has been observed. Here, we review the current understanding of key genetic and inflammatory modulators of antibody polyfunctionality that affect vaccination outcomes and consider how this knowledge may be harnessed to tailor vaccine design for improved public health.

Differential cellular and humoral immune responses in immunocompromised individuals following multiple SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations

Introduction

The heterogeneity of the immunocompromised population means some individuals may exhibit variable, weak or reduced vaccine-induced immune responses, leaving them poorly protected from COVID-19 disease despite receiving multiple SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations. There is conflicting data on the immunogenicity elicited by multiple vaccinations in immunocompromised groups. The aim of this study was to measure both humoral and cellular vaccine-induced immunity in several immunocompromised cohorts and to compare them to immunocompetent controls.

Methods

Cytokine release in peptide-stimulated whole blood, and neutralising antibody and baseline SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific IgG levels in plasma were measured in rheumatology patients (n=29), renal transplant recipients (n=46), people living with HIV (PLWH) (n=27) and immunocompetent participants (n=64) post third or fourth vaccination from just one blood sample. Cytokines were measured by ELISA and multiplex array. Neutralising antibody levels in plasma were determined by a 50% neutralising antibody titre assay and SARS-CoV-2 spike specific IgG levels were quantified by ELISA.

Results

In infection negative donors, IFN-γ, IL-2 and neutralising antibody levels were significantly reduced in rheumatology patients (p=0.0014, p=0.0415, p=0.0319, respectively) and renal transplant recipients (p<0.0001, p=0.0005, p<0.0001, respectively) compared to immunocompetent controls, with IgG antibody responses similarly affected. Conversely, cellular and humoral immune responses were not impaired in PLWH, or between individuals from all groups with previous SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Discussion

These results suggest that specific subgroups within immunocompromised cohorts could benefit from distinct, personalised immunisation or treatment strategies. Identification of vaccine non-responders could be critical to protect those most at risk.

Antidepressant drug prescription and incidence of COVID-19 in mental health outpatients: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Currently, the main pharmaceutical intervention for COVID-19 is vaccination. While antidepressant (AD) drugs have shown some efficacy in treatment of symptomatic COVID-19, their preventative potential remains largely unexplored. Analysis of association between prescription of ADs and COVID-19 incidence in the population would be beneficial for assessing the utility of ADs in COVID-19 prevention.

METHODS

Retrospective study of association between AD prescription and COVID-19 diagnosis was performed in a cohort of community-dwelling adult mental health outpatients during the 1st wave of COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Clinical record interactive search (CRIS) was performed for mentions of ADs within 3 months preceding admission to inpatient care of the South London and Maudsley (SLaM) NHS Foundation Trust. Incidence of positive COVID-19 tests upon admission and during inpatient treatment was the primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

AD mention was associated with approximately 40% lower incidence of positive COVID-19 test results when adjusted for socioeconomic parameters and physical health. This association was also observed for prescription of ADs of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) class.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary study suggests that ADs, and SSRIs in particular, may be of benefit for preventing COVID-19 infection spread in the community. The key limitations of the study are its retrospective nature and the focus on a mental health patient cohort. A more definitive assessment of AD and SSRI preventative potential warrants prospective studies in the wider demographic.

Real-World Safety of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

With the mass vaccination program for COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, there has been sufficient real-world study (RWS) on the topic to summarize their safety in the total population and in immunocompromised (IC) patients who were excluded from phase 3 clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, with a total of 5,132,799 subjects from 122 articles. In the case of the total population vaccinated with first, second, and third doses, the pooled incidence of any adverse events (AEs) was 62.20%, 70.39%, and 58.60%; that of any local AEs was 52.03%, 47.99%, and 65.00%; that of any systemic AEs was 29.07%, 47.86%, and 32.71%. Among the immunocompromised patients, the pooled odds ratio of any AEs, any local AEs, and systemic AEs were slightly lower than or similar to those of the healthy controls at 0.60 (95% CI: 0.33-1.11), 0.19 (95% CI: 0.10-0.37), and 0.36 (95% CI: 0.25-0.54), with pooled incidences of 51.95%, 38.82%, and 31.00%, respectively. The spectrum of AEs associated with the vaccines was broad, but most AEs were transient, self-limiting, and mild to moderate. Moreover, younger adults, women, and people with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to experience AEs.

[SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after booster vaccination. Identification of subgroups with poor response]

Objective

To determine which patients within the high-risk group are most likely to have insufficient post-vaccination immunity.

Methods

Determination of IgG titers against SARS-CoV-2 after the booster dose. Vaccine response was categorized as negative (IgG titers < 34 BAU/ml), indeterminate (titers 34 - 259 BAU/ml) or positive (≥ 260 BAU/ml).

Results

765 patients were included (31.25% of those vaccinated). 54 (7.1%) on treatment with biologics, 90 (11.8%) with hematologic disease, 299 (39.1%) with oncologic pathology, 304 (39.7%) with solid organ transplant and 18 (2.4%) with immunosuppression for other reasons. 74 patients (9.7%) had negative serology and 45 (5.9%) had indeterminate titers. By diagnostic group, the patients with the highest proportion of negative or indeterminate serology were patients with biologic treatment (55.6%, mainly at expense of antiCD20), hematologic (35.4%) and transplant patients (17.8%, mainly lung and kidney). Oncology and other immunosuppressed patients had a favorable response to vaccination.

Conclusion

Patients treated with antiCD20 drugs, hematologic patients and transplanted patients (mainly lung and kidney) have a higher risk of not achieving post-vaccination immunity. It is essential to identify them in order to individualize and optimize their management.

Comparative effectiveness of two- and three-dose COVID-19 vaccination schedules involving AZD1222 and BNT162b2 in people with kidney disease: a linked OpenSAFELY and UK Renal Registry cohort study

Background

Kidney disease is a key risk factor for COVID-19-related mortality and suboptimal vaccine response. Optimising vaccination strategies is essential to reduce the disease burden in this vulnerable population. We therefore compared the effectiveness of two- and three-dose schedules involving AZD1222 (AZ; ChAdOx1-S) and BNT162b2 (BNT) among people with kidney disease in England.

Methods

With the approval of NHS England, we performed a retrospective cohort study among people with moderate-to-severe kidney disease. Using linked primary care and UK Renal Registry records in the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform, we identified adults with stage 3-5 chronic kidney disease, dialysis recipients, and kidney transplant recipients. We used Cox proportional hazards models to compare COVID-19-related outcomes and non-COVID-19 death after two-dose (AZ-AZ vs BNT-BNT) and three-dose (AZ-AZ-BNT vs BNT-BNT-BNT) schedules.

Findings

After two doses, incidence during the Delta wave was higher in AZ-AZ (n = 257,580) than BNT-BNT recipients (n = 169,205; adjusted hazard ratios [95% CIs] 1.43 [1.37-1.50], 1.59 [1.43-1.77], 1.44 [1.12-1.85], and 1.09 [1.02-1.17] for SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19-related hospitalisation, COVID-19-related death, and non-COVID-19 death, respectively). Findings were consistent across disease subgroups, including dialysis and transplant recipients. After three doses, there was little evidence of differences between AZ-AZ-BNT (n = 220,330) and BNT-BNT-BNT recipients (n = 157,065) for any outcome during a period of Omicron dominance.

Interpretation

Among individuals with moderate-to-severe kidney disease, two doses of BNT conferred stronger protection than AZ against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease. A subsequent BNT dose levelled the playing field, emphasising the value of heterologous RNA doses in vulnerable populations.

Funding

National Core Studies, Wellcome Trust, MRC, and Health Data Research UK.

Changes in COVID-19-related mortality across key demographic and clinical subgroups in England from 2020 to 2022: a retrospective cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has been shown to differently affect various demographic and clinical population subgroups. We aimed to describe trends in absolute and relative COVID-19-related mortality risks across clinical and demographic population subgroups during successive SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves.

METHODS

We did a retrospective cohort study in England using the OpenSAFELY platform with the approval of National Health Service England, covering the first five SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves (wave one [wild-type] from March 23 to May 30, 2020; wave two [alpha (B.1.1.7)] from Sept 7, 2020, to April 24, 2021; wave three [delta (B.1.617.2)] from May 28 to Dec 14, 2021; wave four [omicron (B.1.1.529)] from Dec 15, 2021, to April 29, 2022; and wave five [omicron] from June 24 to Aug 3, 2022). In each wave, we included people aged 18-110 years who were registered with a general practice on the first day of the wave and who had at least 3 months of continuous general practice registration up to this date. We estimated crude and sex-standardised and age-standardised wave-specific COVID-19-related death rates and relative risks of COVID-19-related death in population subgroups.

FINDINGS

18 895 870 adults were included in wave one, 19 014 720 in wave two, 18 932 050 in wave three, 19 097 970 in wave four, and 19 226 475 in wave five. Crude COVID-19-related death rates per 1000 person-years decreased from 4·48 deaths (95% CI 4·41-4·55) in wave one to 2·69 (2·66-2·72) in wave two, 0·64 (0·63-0·66) in wave three, 1·01 (0·99-1·03) in wave four, and 0·67 (0·64-0·71) in wave five. In wave one, the standardised COVID-19-related death rates were highest in people aged 80 years or older, people with chronic kidney disease stage 5 or 4, people receiving dialysis, people with dementia or learning disability, and people who had received a kidney transplant (ranging from 19·85 deaths per 1000 person-years to 44·41 deaths per 1000 person-years, compared with from 0·05 deaths per 1000 person-years to 15·93 deaths per 1000 person-years in other subgroups). In wave two compared with wave one, in a largely unvaccinated population, the decrease in COVID-19-related mortality was evenly distributed across population subgroups. In wave three compared with wave one, larger decreases in COVID-19-related death rates were seen in groups prioritised for primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, including people aged 80 years or older and people with neurological disease, learning disability, or severe mental illness (90-91% decrease). Conversely, smaller decreases in COVID-19-related death rates were observed in younger age groups, people who had received organ transplants, and people with chronic kidney disease, haematological malignancies, or immunosuppressive conditions (0-25% decrease). In wave four compared with wave one, the decrease in COVID-19-related death rates was smaller in groups with lower vaccination coverage (including younger age groups) and conditions associated with impaired vaccine response, including people who had received organ transplants and people with immunosuppressive conditions (26-61% decrease).

INTERPRETATION

There was a substantial decrease in absolute COVID-19-related death rates over time in the overall population, but demographic and clinical relative risk profiles persisted and worsened for people with lower vaccination coverage or impaired immune response. Our findings provide an evidence base to inform UK public health policy for protecting these vulnerable population subgroups.

FUNDING

UK Research and Innovation, Wellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health and Care Research, and Health Data Research UK.

Effectiveness and Safety of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in HIV-Infected Patients-Real-World Study

The development of COVID-19 vaccines has been a triumph of biomedical research. However, there are still challenges, including assessment of their immunogenicity in high-risk populations, including PLWH. In the present study, we enrolled 121 PLWH aged >18 years, that were vaccinated against COVID-19 in the Polish National Vaccination Program. Patients filled in questionnaires regarding the side effects of vaccination. Epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory data were collected. The efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines was evaluated with an ELISA that detects IgG antibodies using a recombinant S1 viral protein antigen. The interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) was applied to quantitate interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) to assess cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2. In total, 87 patients (71.9%) received mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2-76 (59.5%), mRNA-1273- 11 (9.1%)). A total of 34 patients (28.09%) were vaccinated with vector-based vaccines (ChAdOx Vaxzevria- 20 (16.52%), Ad26.COV2.S- 14 (11.6%)). A total of 95 (78.5%) of all vaccinated patients developed a protective level of IgG antibodies. Only eight PLWH (6.6%) did not develop cellular immune response. There were six patients (4.95%) that did not develop a cellular and humoral response. Analysis of variance proved that the best humoral and cellular response related to the administration of the mRNA-1273 vaccine. COVID-19 vaccines were found to be immunogenic and safe in PLWH. Vaccination with mRNA vaccines were related to better humoral and cellular responses.

SARS-CoV-2 Mac1 is required for IFN antagonism and efficient virus replication in mice

Several coronavirus (CoV) encoded proteins are being evaluated as targets for antiviral therapies for COVID-19. Included in this set of proteins is the conserved macrodomain, or Mac1, an ADP-ribosylhydrolase and ADP-ribose binding protein. Utilizing point mutant recombinant viruses, Mac1 was shown to be critical for both murine hepatitis virus (MHV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV virulence. However, as a potential drug target, it is imperative to understand how a complete Mac1 deletion impacts the replication and pathogenesis of different CoVs. To this end, we created recombinant bacterial artificial chromosomes (BACs) containing complete Mac1 deletions (ΔMac1) in MHV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2. While we were unable to recover infectious virus from MHV or MERS-CoV ΔMac1 BACs, SARS-CoV-2 ΔMac1 was readily recovered from BAC transfection, indicating a stark difference in the requirement for Mac1 between different CoVs. Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 ΔMac1 replicated at or near wild-type levels in multiple cell lines susceptible to infection. However, in a mouse model of severe infection, ΔMac1 was quickly cleared causing minimal pathology without any morbidity. ΔMac1 SARS-CoV-2 induced increased levels of interferon (IFN) and interferon-stimulated gene (ISG) expression in cell culture and mice, indicating that Mac1 blocks IFN responses which may contribute to its attenuation. ΔMac1 infection also led to a stark reduction in inflammatory monocytes and neutrophils. These results demonstrate that Mac1 only minimally impacts SARS-CoV-2 replication, unlike MHV and MERS-CoV, but is required for SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis and is a unique antiviral drug target.

SIGNIFICANCE

All CoVs, including SARS-CoV-2, encode for a conserved macrodomain (Mac1) that counters host ADP-ribosylation. Prior studies with SARS-CoV-1 and MHV found that Mac1 blocks IFN production and promotes CoV pathogenesis, which has prompted the development of SARS-CoV-2 Mac1 inhibitors. However, development of these compounds into antivirals requires that we understand how SARS-CoV-2 lacking Mac1 replicates and causes disease in vitro and in vivo . Here we found that SARS-CoV-2 containing a complete Mac1 deletion replicates normally in cell culture but induces an elevated IFN response, has reduced viral loads in vivo , and does not cause significant disease in mice. These results will provide a roadmap for testing Mac1 inhibitors, help identify Mac1 functions, and open additional avenues for coronavirus therapies.

Attitudes and concerns regarding booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine among Egyptian patients with autoimmune and rheumatic diseases: a cross-sectional survey study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 booster dose vaccination acceptance and actual vaccination behavior is not known among Egyptian individuals with autoimmune and rheumatic diseases (ARDs). The aim of this study was to investigate the acceptability of booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, as well as the factors that drive and inhibit that acceptance among Egyptian patients diagnosed with ARDs.

METHODS

This interview-based, cross-sectional analytical study was carried out on ARD patients from 20 July to 20 November 2022. A questionnaire was created to assess sociodemographic and clinical data, as well as COVID-19 vaccination status and the intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose, perception of health benefits of it in addition to the perceived barriers and/or concerns.

RESULTS

A total of 248 ARD patients were included, with a mean age of 39.8 years (SD = 13.2), and 92.3% were females. Among them, 53.6% were resistant to the COVID-19 booster dose, whereas 31.9% were acceptant and 14.5% were hesitant. Those who were administering corticosteroids and hydroxychloroquine shown significantly greater booster hesitancy and resistance (p = 0.010 and 0.004, respectively). The primary motivation for taking a booster dose among the acceptant group was own volition (92%). Most acceptants believed that booster dose can prevent serious infection (98.7%) and community spread (96.2%). Among the hesitant and resistant groups, the main concerns for booster dose were fear about its major adverse effects (57.4%) and long-term impact (45.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a low acceptability rate of booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine among Egyptian patients with ARD diseases. Public health workers and policymakers need to make sure that all ARD patients get clear messages about accepting the COVID-19 booster dose.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among health workers in rural Uganda: A mixed methods study

Background

COVID-19 vaccination is the latest preventive intervention strategy in an attempt to control the global pandemic. Its efficacy has come under scrutiny because of break through infections among the vaccinated and need for booster doses. Besides, although health workers were prioritized for COVID-19 vaccine in most countries, anecdotal evidence points to high levels of reluctance to take the vaccine among health workers. We assessed COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among health workers in Dokolo district, northern Uganda.

Methods

This was a mixed-method, cross-sectional descriptive study. A customised self-administered data collection tool was used to collect quantitative data on characteristics, vaccination status and factors for or rejection of vaccine uptake. We conducted multivariable logistic regression to assess the association between selected exposures and vaccine hesitancy using Stata version 15. Conversely, qualitative data were collected using key informant interviews (KIIs) among 15 participants that were purposively selected. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis with the help of NVivo 12.0.

Results

Of the 346 health workers enrolled, (13.3% [46/346]) were vaccine hesitant. Factors associated with vaccine hesitancy included fear of side effects (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR]: 2.55; 95% Confidence Interval [95%CI]: 1.00, 6.49) and health workers' lack of trust in the information provided by health authorities (AOR: 6.74; 95% CI: 2.43, 18.72). Similar factors were associated with vaccine hesitancy when we used the vaccine hesitancy score. Fear of side effects, distrust in vaccine stakeholders, and lack of trust in the vaccine were barriers to COVID-19 vaccination among health workers.

Conclusion

A small proportion of health workers were found to be hesitant to take the COVID-19 vaccine in this study. The paucity of COVID-19 vaccine safety information, which eroded the health workers' trust in the information they received on the vaccine, was responsible for health workers hesitancy to take up the vaccine in Uganda.

A case of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron reinfection resulting in a significant immunity boost in a paediatric patient affected by B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia

BACKGROUND

Since its emergence in November 2021, SARS-CoV-2 Omicron clade has quickly become dominant, due to its increased transmissibility and immune evasion. Different sublineages are currently circulating, which differ in mutations and deletions in regions of the SARS-CoV-2 genome implicated in the immune response. In May 2022, BA.1 and BA.2 were the most prevalent sublineages in Europe, both characterized by ability of evading natural acquired and vaccine-induced immunity and of escaping monoclonal antibodies neutralization.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 5-years old male affected by B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia in reinduction was tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR at the Bambino Gesù Children Hospital in Rome in December 2021. He experienced a mild COVID-19 manifestation, and a peak of nasopharyngeal viral load corresponding to 15.5 Ct. Whole genome sequencing identified the clade 21 K (Omicron), sublineage BA.1.1. The patient was monitored over time and tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 after 30 days. Anti-S antibodies were detected positive with modest titre (3.86 BAU/mL), while anti-N antibodies were negative. 74 days after the onset of the first infection and 23 days after the last negative test, the patient was readmitted to hospital with fever, and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR (peak of viral load corresponding to 23.3 Ct). Again, he experienced a mild COVID-19. Whole genome sequencing revealed an infection with the Omicron lineage BA.2 (21L clade). Sotrovimab administration was started at the fifth day of positivity, and RT-PCR negativity occurred 10 days later. Surveillance SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR were persistently negative, and in May 2022, anti-N antibodies were found positive and anti-S antibodies reached titres > 5000 BAU/mL.

CONCLUSIONS

By this clinical case, we showed that SARS-CoV-2 reinfection within the Omicron clade can occur and can be correlated to inadequate immune responses to primary infection. We also showed that the infection's length was shorter in the second respect to first episode, suggesting that pre-existing T cell-mediated immunity, though not preventing re-infection, might have limited the SARS-CoV-2 replication capacity. Lastly, Sotrovimab treatment retained activity against BA.2, probably accelerating the viral clearance in the second infectious episode, after which seroconversion and increase of anti-S antibodies titres were observed.

One-month humoral response following two or three doses of messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines as primary vaccination in specific populations in France: first results from the Agence Nationale Recherche contre le Sida (ANRS)0001S COV-POPART cohort

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to investigate the 1-month humoral response to two or three doses of a messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine as a primary vaccination regimen in specific populations compared with that in healthy adults.

METHODS

Agence Nationale Recherche contre le Sida (ANRS)0001S-COV-POPART (NCT04824651) is a French nation-wide, multi-centre, prospective, observational cohort study assessing the immune response to COVID-19 vaccines routinely administered to 11 sub-groups of patients with chronic conditions and two control groups. Patients and controls who received at least two vaccine doses and whose results 1 month after the second dose were available were included. The humoral response was assessed 1 month after the first, second and third doses (if applicable) based on the percentage of responders (positive for anti-Spike severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2] IgG antibodies), geometric means of anti-Spike SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) and proportion of participants with anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific neutralizing antibodies (in vitro neutralization assay for the original SARS-CoV-2 strain). All analyses were centralized.

RESULTS

We included 4091 participants in this analysis: 2979 participants from specific sub-populations and 1112 controls. Only 522 (17.5%) participants from the specific populations received three doses as a primary vaccination regimen. Patients living with human immunodeficiency virus, cancer and diabetes had high percentages of responders after two doses, whereas patients with solid organ transplants, allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants and hypogammaglobulinaemia had the lowest percentage of responders (35.9% [95% CI, 29.2-43.0], 57.4% [95% CI, 48.1-66.3] and 77.1% [95% CI, 65.6-86.3], respectively). In those who received the third dose, the percentage of responders reached 54.2% (95% CI, 42.9-65.2) (vs. 32.3% [95% CI, 16.7-51.4] after 2 doses) among those with solid organ transplants and 73.9% (95% CI, 58.9-85.7) (vs. 56.1% [95% CI, 46.2-65.7] after 2 doses) among those with hematopoietic stem cell transplants. Similar results were found with anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific neutralizing antibodies.

CONCLUSIONS

A lower humoral response to COVID-19 vaccines was observed in the specific populations compared with that in the controls. The third dose of this vaccine in the primary regimen had a positive effect on the percentages of patients who developed anti-Spike IgG antibodies and specific neutralizing antibodies.

Immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Cross-Sectional Study in Korea

Eighty-five Korean kidney transplant recipients who received three doses of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine were tested with anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody and neutralizing antibody. High anti-RBD antibody (≥ 100 U/mL) and neutralizing antibody responses (≥ 30%) were detected in 51/85 (60.0%) patients. When we divided the patients with the time from transplantation to vaccination (< 1, 1-2.4, 2.5-4.9, and ≥ 5-year), anti-RBD antibody titers were 3.2 U/mL, 27.8 U/mL, 370.2 U/mL, and 5,094.2 U/mL (P < 0.001) and anti-neutralizing antibody levels were 2.2%, 11.6%, 45.6%, and 93.0% (P < 0.001), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed increased antibody responses when the time from transplantation to vaccination was five years or longer (odds ratio, 12.0; confidence interval, 2.7-52.8). Korean kidney transplant recipients had suboptimal antibody responses after the third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. A shorter time from transplantation to vaccination was a risk factor for a low antibody response.

Real-World Effectiveness of Sotrovimab for the Early Treatment of COVID-19 During SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron Waves in the USA

INTRODUCTION

Sotrovimab, a recombinant human monoclonal antibody (mAb) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had US Food and Drug Administration Emergency Use Authorization for the treatment of high-risk outpatients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from 26 May 2021 to 5 April 2022. Real-world clinical effectiveness of sotrovimab in reducing the risk of 30-day all-cause hospitalization and/or mortality was evaluated for the period when the prevalence of circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants changed between Delta and Omicron in the USA.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted of de-identified patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between 1 September 2021 to 30 April 2022 in the FAIR Health National Private Insurance Claims database. Patients meeting high-risk criteria were divided into two cohorts: sotrovimab and not treated with a mAb ("no mAb"). All-cause hospitalizations and facility-reported mortality ≤ 30 days of diagnosis ("30-day hospitalization or mortality") were identified. Multivariable and propensity score-matched Poisson and logistic regressions were conducted to estimate the adjusted relative risk (RR) and odds of 30-day hospitalization or mortality in each cohort.

RESULTS

Compared with the no mAb cohort (n = 1,514,868), the sotrovimab cohort (n = 15,633) was older and had a higher proportion of patients with high-risk conditions. In the no mAb cohort, 84,307 (5.57%) patients were hospitalized and 8167 (0.54%) deaths were identified, while in the sotrovimab cohort, 418 (2.67%) patients were hospitalized and 13 (0.08%) deaths were identified. After adjusting for potential confounders, the sotrovimab cohort had a 55% lower risk of 30-day hospitalization or mortality (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.41-0.49) and an 85% lower risk of 30-day mortality (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.08-0.29). Monthly, from September 2021 to April 2022, the RR reduction for 30-day hospitalization or mortality in the sotrovimab cohort was maintained, ranging from 46% to 71% compared with the no mAb cohort; the RR estimate in April 2022 was uncertain, with wide confidence intervals due to the small sample size.

CONCLUSION

Sotrovimab was associated with reduced risk of 30-day all-cause hospitalization and mortality versus no mAb treatment. Clinical effectiveness persisted during Delta and early Omicron variant waves and among all high-risk subgroups assessed.

Comparison of humoral immunogenicity in solid organ transplant recipients after third-dose mRNA vaccine with homologous or heterologous schedules: An observational study

BACKGROUND

Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are susceptible to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, immunogenicity studies of the Omicron variants per vaccination schedules are still lacking. We examined humoral immunogenicity following third-dose mRNA vaccine administration in Korean SOTRs who received primary COVID-19 vaccine series on homologous or heterologous schedules.

METHODS

We recruited SOTRs at Severance Hospital from October 27, 2021, to March 31, 2022. Blood samples were collected between 14 days and 5 months after the second and third mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) doses. SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG titer was analyzed. The neutralization inhibition rate was analyzed using the surrogate neutralization assay for the wild-type, Delta, and Omicron variants.

RESULTS

No significant differences existed in the SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG positivity rate between the homologous BNT162b2/BNT162b2/BNT162b2 (85%) and other heterologous groups (83% of ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1/BNT162b2, 90% of ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1/mRNA-1273, and 78% of ChAdOx1/BNT162b2/BNT162b2). No significant difference existed in the neutralization inhibition rates between the four groups for wild-type, Delta, and Omicron variants. Median neutralization inhibition rates against the Omicron variant (2-5%) were significantly lower than those against the wild-type (87-97%) and Delta (55-89%) variants (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of the schedule, the neutralization inhibition rate against the Omicron variant was poor; therefore, additional preventive measures are required in such high-risk populations.

A modeling-based approach to optimize COVID-19 vaccine dosing schedules for improved protection

While the development of different vaccines has slowed the dissemination of SARS-CoV-2, the occurrence of breakthrough infections continues to fuel the pandemic. As a strategy to secure at least partial protection, with a single dose of a given COVID-19 vaccine to maximum possible fraction of the population, delayed administration of subsequent doses (or boosters) has been implemented in many countries. However, waning immunity and emergence of new variants of SARS-CoV-2 suggest that such measures may jeopardize the attainment of herd immunity due to intermittent lapses in protection. Optimizing vaccine dosing schedules could thus make the difference between periodic occurrence of breakthrough infections or effective control of the pandemic. To this end, we have developed a mechanistic mathematical model of adaptive immune response to vaccines and demonstrated its applicability to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines as a proof-of-concept for future outbreaks. The model was thoroughly calibrated against multiple clinical datasets involving immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and mRNA vaccines in healthy and immunocompromised subjects (cancer patients undergoing therapy); the model showed robust clinical validation by accurately predicting neutralizing antibody kinetics, a correlate of vaccine-induced protection, in response to multiple doses of mRNA vaccines. Importantly, we estimated population vulnerability to breakthrough infections and predicted tailored vaccination dosing schedules to maximize protection and thus minimize breakthrough infections, based on the immune status of a sub-population. We have identified a critical waiting window for cancer patients (or, immunocompromised subjects) to allow recovery of the immune system (particularly CD4+ T-cells) for effective differentiation of B-cells to produce neutralizing antibodies and thus achieve optimal vaccine efficacy against variants of concern, especially between the first and second doses. Also, we have obtained optimized dosing schedules for subsequent doses in healthy and immunocompromised subjects, which vary from the CDC-recommended schedules, to minimize breakthrough infections. The developed modeling tool is based on generalized adaptive immune response to antigens and can thus be leveraged to guide vaccine dosing schedules during future outbreaks.

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Tolerance and Immunogenicity in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Recipients Aged 5-11 Years Old-Non-Randomized Clinical Trial

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had a devastating impact on the world’s population in the years 2020−2022. The rapid development of vaccines enabled a reduction in the mortality and morbidity of COVID-19, but there are limited data about their effects on immunocompromised children. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the mRNA BNT162b2 (Pfizer/Biontech) vaccine in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) recipients. Material and methods: Two cohorts of 34 children after allo-HSCT and 35 healthy children aged 5−11 years were vaccinated with two doses of the mRNA BNT162b2 (10 µg) vaccine. All children were evaluated for adverse effects with electronic surveys and the immunogenicity of the vaccine was assessed with anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG titer measurements. Results: All reported adverse events (AEs) were classified as mild. The most common AE was pain at the injection site. All the other AEs (both local and systemic) were rarely reported (<15% patients). Both groups showed a similar response in anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG production. Patients after allo-HSCT that were undergoing immunosuppressive treatment presented a poorer immunological response than patients off of treatment. Time since HSCT, patient age, lymphocyte count, and total IgG concentration did not correlate with initial/post-vaccination anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers. Most patients who were eligible for a third dose of the vaccine had an excellent humoral response observed after two vaccine doses. Conclusions: The COVID-19 mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine is very well tolerated and highly immunogenic in 5−11-year-old children after HSCT. Children >2 years of age after HSCT who did not receive immunosuppressive treatment presented excellent antibody production after two doses of the vaccine, but children on immunosuppression may require a more intense vaccination schedule.

Four SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses or hybrid immunity in patients on immunosuppressive therapies: a Norwegian cohort study

Background

Data on response and safety of repeated vaccinations and hybrid immunity in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases on immunosuppressive therapy is needed to further develop vaccination strategies in this vulnerable population. This study aimed to evaluate hybrid immunity and humoral immune response and safety of four SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases on immunosuppressive therapy.

Methods

This prospective observational Norwegian study of vaccine response to COVID-19 (Nor-vaC) included adult patients aged 18 years and older with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis) on immunosuppressive therapy, who had received four SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses (vaccine group) or three vaccine doses followed by COVID-19 (hybrid group), and healthy controls receiving three vaccine doses (control group). Patients were recruited from the Division of Rheumatology at Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, and the Department of Gastroenterology at Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog. Patients who had COVID-19 before the third vaccine dose, and patients with allergies or intolerances to elements of the vaccine were excluded. Antibodies to the receptor-binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (anti-RBD antibodies) were assessed 2-4 weeks following vaccination or COVID-19. This study is registered at Clinialtrials.gov, NCT04798625.

Findings

Between Nov 12, 2021, and April 19, 2022, 1458 participants with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases provided post-vaccination samples at 2-4 weeks following a third vaccine dose. After 544 participants were excluded, 715 (78%) of the remaining 914 participants received the fourth dose of the vaccine, and of these, 536 (75%) provided post-vaccination samples 2-4 weeks after their fourth vaccination (vaccine group). 199 (22%) of the 914 had COVID-19 after their third dose of the vaccine and of these, 167 (84%) provided samples (hybrid group). 256 of the eligible 703 patients had rheumatoid arthritis, 107 had spondyloarthritis, 115 had psoriatic arthritis, 130 had Crohn's disease, and 95 had ulcerative colitis). Median age was 56 years [IQR 45-65], 398 (57%) were women, and 305 (43%) were men. Patients in the vaccine group had higher anti-RBD antibody concentrations following the fourth vaccine dose (median 6192 BAU/ml [IQR 2878-11 243]) than after the third dose (median 5087 BAU/ml [1250-9081]; p< 0·0001), but lower antibody concentrations than the control group following the third dose (median 7595 BAU/ml [5916-12 001]; p< 0·0001). Antibody concentrations were higher in the patients in the hybrid group (23 548 BAU/ml [IQR 11 440-35 935]) than in the vaccine group (p<0·0001). No difference was found in antibody concentrations between the fourth dose of BNT162b2 (full-dose) and mRNA-1273 (half-dose). Patients and controls had a comparable safety profile after both three and four vaccine doses.

Interpretation

Vaccine boosters improve humoral immune responses and are safe in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases on immunosuppressive therapy, and administration should be considered regularly in this patient group. Hybrid immunity with omicron induces a strong humoral response suggesting longer intervals between booster doses in this patient group.

Funding

The South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority, The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Akershus University Hospital.

A Four-Channel Surface Plasmon Resonance Sensor Functionalized Online for Simultaneous Detections of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody, Free Viral Particles, and Neutralized Viral Particles

Current tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detect either the constituent nucleic acids/proteins of the viral particles or antibodies specific to the virus, but cannot provide information about viral neutralization by an antibody and the efficacy of an antibody. Such information is important about individuals' vulnerability to severe symptoms or their likelihood of showing no symptoms. We immobilized online SARS-CoV-2 spike (S1) protein and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) into separate surface plasmon resonance (SPR) channels of a tris-nitrilotriacetic acid (tris-NTA) chip to simultaneously detect the anti-S1 antibody and viral particles in serum samples. In addition, with a high-molecular-weight-cutoff filter, we separated the neutralized viral particles from the free antibody molecules and used a sensing channel immobilized with Protein G to determine antibody-neutralized viral particles. The optimal density of probe molecules in each fluidic channel can be precisely controlled through the closure and opening of the specific ports. By utilizing the high surface density of ACE2, multiple assays can be carried out without regenerations. These three species can be determined with a short analysis time (<12 min per assay) and excellent sensor-to-sensor/cycle-to-cycle reproducibility (RSD < 5%). When coupled with an autosampler, continuous assays can be performed in an unattended manner at a single chip for up to 6 days. Such a sensor capable of assaying serum samples containing the three species at different levels provides additional insights into the disease status and immunity of persons being tested, which should be helpful for containing the SARS-CoV-2 spread during the era of incessant viral mutations.

Outpatient management of adults with COVID-19

ABSTRACT

This article discusses the outpatient management of adults with COVID-19 that reflects current evidence and best practices. Variants of concern, clinical presentation, assessment of the patient's clinical status, vaccination, medication management, and patient teaching are presented.

Molnupiravir Outpatient Treatment for Adults with COVID-19 in a Real-World Setting-A Single Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Molnupiravir is approved for the treatment of adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. The main goal of the treatment is to reduce hospitalization and mortality rate. This study aimed at the all-cause hospitalization and all-cause death assessment in patients at high risk of severe COVID-19 treated with molnupiravir.

METHODS

This was a prospective, observational single center study. Non-hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 symptoms with the onset of up to 5 days, and at high risk of severe COVID-19 illness received molnupiravir based on attending physician decisions.

RESULTS

In total, 107 patients were enrolled. Adverse events were reported in 28.0% of patients, with nausea and abdominal pain being the most commonly observed. No treatment-emergent AEs resulted in therapy discontinuation. Overall, 15 patients required hospitalization. During the observation, 2.8% (n = 3) of patients subsequently died. All deaths were considered to be related to COVID-19 complications. Age over 65 years, heart failure, and ischemic heart disease showed a significant correlation with the severe course of COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Molnupiravir may be perceived as an alternative treatment for patients with immunosuppression and advanced chronic kidney disease. Nevertheless, further studies are required to conclusively establish a role for molnupiravir in future COVID-19 treatment recommendations.

Patients with Hematological Malignancies Treated with T-Cell or B-Cell Immunotherapy Remain at High Risk of Severe Forms of COVID-19 in the Omicron Era

BACKGROUND

Patients with hematological malignancies are at greater risk of severe COVID-19 and have been prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination. A significant proportion of them have an impaired vaccine response, both due to the underlying disease and to the treatments.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study to identify the specific risks of the outpatient population with hematological diseases.

RESULT

Between 22 December 2021 to 12 February 2022, we followed 338 patients of which 16.9% (n = 57) developed SARS-CoV-2 infection despite previous vaccination (94.7%). COVID-19 patients were more likely to have received immunotherapy (85.5% vs. 41%, p < 10^-4), and particularly anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (40% vs. 14.9%, p < 10^-4) and Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) (7.3% vs. 0.7%, p < 10^-2). There was no significant difference in demographic characteristics or hematological malignancies between COVID-19-positive and non-positive patients. Patients hospitalized for COVID-19 had more frequently received immunotherapy than patients with asymptomatic or benign forms (100% vs. 77.3%, p < 0.05). Hospitalized COVID-19 patients had a higher proportion of negative or weakly positive serologies than non-hospitalized patients (92.3% vs. 61%, p < 0.05). Patients who received tixagevimab/cilgavimab prophylaxis (n = 102) were less likely to be COVID-19-positive (4.9 vs. 22%, p < 0.05) without significant difference in hospitalization rates.

CONCLUSION

In the immunocompromised population of patients with hematological malignancies, the underlying treatment of blood cancer by immunotherapy appears to be a risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 infection and for developing a severe form.

SARS-CoV-2 Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis with Sotrovimab and Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab in Immunocompromised Patients-A Single-Center Experience

Immunocompromised patients experience reduced vaccine effectiveness and are at higher risk for coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) death. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) aims to protect these patients. So far, only tixagevimab/cilgavimab is authorized for use as PrEP. This paper aims to provide real-world data on the use of tixagevimab/cilgavimab and sotrovimab as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) PrEP in immunocompromised patients, comparing the evolution of antibody levels and reporting the incidence of breakthrough infections. A retrospective, single-center analysis was conducted including 132 immunocompromised patients with inadequate vaccine response, who received COVID-PrEP at our clinic between January and June 2022. Initially, 95 patients received sotrovimab while 37 patients received tixagevimab/cilgavimab. Antibody levels after first PrEP with sotrovimab remain high for several months after infusion (median 10,058 and 7235 BAU/mL after 1 and 3 months, respectively), with higher titers than after tixagevimab/cilgavimab injection even 3 months later (7235 vs. 1647 BAU/mL, p = 0.0007). Overall, breakthrough infections were rare (13/132, 10%) when compared to overall infection rates during this period (over 30% of the Austrian population), with mild disease course and rapid viral clearance (median 10 days). Sotrovimab may be an additional option for SARS-CoV-2 PrEP.

SARS-CoV-2 in immunocompromised individuals

Immunocompromised individuals and particularly those with hematologic malignancies are at increased risk for SARS-CoV-2-associated morbidity and mortality due to immunologic deficits that limit prevention, treatment, and clearance of the virus. Understanding the natural history of viral infections in people with impaired immunity due to underlying conditions, immunosuppressive therapy, or a combination thereof has emerged as a critical area of investigation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies focused on these individuals have provided key insights into aspects of innate and adaptive immunity underlying both the antiviral immune response and excess inflammation in the setting of COVID-19. This review presents what is known about distinct states of immunologic vulnerability to SARS-CoV-2 and how this information can be harnessed to improve prevention and treatment strategies for immunologically high-risk populations.

Estimated Protection of Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection Against Reinfection With the Omicron Variant Among Messenger RNA-Vaccinated and Nonvaccinated Individuals in Quebec, Canada

Importance

The Omicron variant is phylogenetically and antigenically distinct from earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants and the original vaccine strain. Protection conferred by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection against Omicron reinfection, with and without vaccination, requires quantification.

Objective

To estimate the protection against Omicron reinfection and hospitalization conferred by prior heterologous non-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or up to 3 doses of an ancestral, Wuhan-like messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This test-negative, population-based case-control study was conducted between December 26, 2021, and March 12, 2022, and included community-dwelling individuals aged 12 years or older who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection in the province of Quebec, Canada.

Exposures

Prior laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection with or without mRNA vaccination.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and associated hospitalization, presumed to be associated with the Omicron variant according to genomic surveillance. The odds of prior infection with or without vaccination were compared for case participants with Omicron infection and associated hospitalizations vs test-negative control participants. Estimated protection was derived as 1 - the odds ratio, adjusted for age, sex, testing indication, and epidemiologic week. Analyses were stratified by severity and time since last non-Omicron infection or vaccine dose.

Results

This study included 696 439 individuals (224 007 case participants and 472 432 control participants); 62.2% and 63.9% were female and 87.4% and 75.5% were aged 18 to 69 years, respectively. Prior non-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected for 9505 case participants (4.2%) and 29 712 control participants (6.3%). Among nonvaccinated individuals, prior non-Omicron infection was associated with a 44% reduction (95% CI, 38%-48%) in Omicron reinfection risk, which decreased from 66% (95% CI, 57%-73%) at 3 to 5 months to 35% (95% CI, 21%-47%) at 9 to 11 months postinfection and was below 30% thereafter. The more severe the prior infection, the greater the risk reduction. Estimated protection (95% CI) against Omicron infection was consistently significantly higher among vaccinated individuals with prior infection compared with vaccinated infection-naive individuals, with 65% (63%-67%) vs 20% (16%-24%) for 1 dose, 68% (67%-70%) vs 42% (41%-44%) for 2 doses, and 83% (81%-84%) vs 73% (72%-73%) for 3 doses. For individuals with prior infection, estimated protection (95% CI) against Omicron-associated hospitalization was 81% (66%-89%) and increased to 86% (77%-99%) with 1, 94% (91%-96%) with 2, and 97% (94%-99%) with 3 mRNA vaccine doses, without signs of waning.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this study suggest that vaccination with 2 or 3 mRNA vaccine doses among individuals with prior heterologous SARS-CoV-2 infection provided the greatest protection against Omicron-associated hospitalization. In the context of program goals to prevent severe outcomes and preserve health care system capacity, a third mRNA vaccine dose may add limited protection in twice-vaccinated individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Immunogenicity and safety of the booster BNT162b2 vaccine in patients with axial spondyloarthritis treated with biological disease-modifying drugs

Background

Vaccination confers relatively short-term protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), indicating the need for booster doses. Immunocompromised individuals, including those with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), may have pronounced immune response waning. Vaccine-boosted humoral and T-cell responses minimize poor coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) outcome without increasing adverse events (AE). There is limited evidence of third-dose vaccination in axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA) patients. We investigated immune-response persistence after primary vaccination and immunogenicity and safety after the BNT162b2 booster vaccination.

Methods

This prospective observational study enrolled an AxSpA cohort treated with interleukin-17 (IL-17) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) inhibitors. Serum SARS-CoV-2-specific and virus-neutralizing antibodies for humoral response and flow cytometric detection of intracellular cytokines following SARS-CoV-2-specific peptide-based stimulation for T-cell immune responses were assessed, and safety was evaluated via a clinical questionnaire.

Results

Fifteen male AxSpA patients treated with TNFα (73·3%) or IL-17 (26·7%) inhibitors were enrolled and had humoral response persistence at 6 months: 905·6 ( ± 186·1 SD) and 409·1 ( ± 335·7) U/mL. Specific antibody concentrations further increased after booster vaccination to 989·7 ( ± 12·62) and 1000 U/mL and T-cell responders from 53·3% to 80%, with no differences between AxSpA (including “vaccination only” and “hybrid immunity” subgroups) and healthy control (HC) cohorts. No severe AE occurred; the AE spectrum was comparable to that of the general population.

Conclusion

Immune-response persistence after primary vaccination and immunogenicity after booster vaccination were unaffected by anti-IL17 or anti-TNFα therapy with similar AE as in the general population.

mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness Against Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalization Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

The study objective was to evaluate 2- and 3-dose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization among adult solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients.

METHODS

We conducted a 21-site case-control analysis of 10 425 adults hospitalized in March to December 2021. Cases were hospitalized with COVID-19; controls were hospitalized for an alternative diagnosis (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-negative). Participants were classified as follows: SOT recipient (n = 440), other immunocompromising condition (n = 1684), or immunocompetent (n = 8301). The VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was calculated as 1-adjusted odds ratio of prior vaccination among cases compared with controls.

RESULTS

Among SOT recipients, VE was 29% (95% confidence interval [CI], -19% to 58%) for 2 doses and 77% (95% CI, 48% to 90%) for 3 doses. Among patients with other immunocompromising conditions, VE was 72% (95% CI, 64% to 79%) for 2 doses and 92% (95% CI, 85% to 95%) for 3 doses. Among immunocompetent patients, VE was 88% (95% CI, 87% to 90%) for 2 doses and 96% (95% CI, 83% to 99%) for 3 doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines was lower for SOT recipients than immunocompetent adults and those with other immunocompromising conditions. Among SOT recipients, vaccination with 3 doses of an mRNA vaccine led to substantially greater protection than 2 doses.