Haemodialysis patients show a highly diminished antibody response after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination compared with healthy controls

Characterizing the clinical and economic burden of COVID-19 among individuals with immunocompromising conditions in Ontario, Canada - a matched, population-based observational study

AIMS

COVID-19 continues to be associated with substantial burden among immunocompromised patients (IC). This study aimed to describe and compare outcomes during and following COVID-19 hospitalizations among IC and non-IC patients.

METHODS

Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (January 2020-March 2023) were identified in Ontario health administrative claims databases. All eligible IC (≥1 of solid organ or stem cell transplant; hematological malignancy; rheumatoid arthritis; multiple sclerosis; or primary immunodeficiency) were matched (1:4) to eligible non-IC. Clinical, resource, and costburden were assessed during and post-hospitalization. Multivariate regression models were used to estimate relative risks (RRi), rates (RRa), and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusting for neighborhood deprivation, long-term care residency, baseline comorbidities, and COVID-19 vaccination status.

RESULTS

9,283 IC hospitalized (mean age 68.7 years; 52.1% female) were matched to 37,127 non-IC. During index hospitalization, IC had greater risks of intensive care unit admission (RRi = 1.06 [1.01-1.12]), ventilation (RRi = 1.27 [1.19-1.36]), and all-cause mortality (RRi = 1.34 [1.27-1.41]) compared to non-IC. Within 30-days post-discharge, IC had greater rates of all-cause readmission (RRa = 1.33 [1.26-1.40]), emergency departments admission (RRa = 1.13 [1.08-1.18]), home oxygen use (RRi = 1.35 [1.15-1.58]), and COVID-19-related rehabilitation (RRa = 1.52 [1.22-1.89]), resulting in 21% (16%-25%) and 51% (45%-58%) greater costs in hospital and post-discharge, respectively. All-cause mortality remained approximately 5% higher for IC vs. non-IC at 30- and 60-days post-discharge (p < .001). Resource use remained elevated among IC with 57% (50%-64%) greater costs within 180 days post-discharge.

LIMITATIONS

Unmeasured confounding remains; hospital prescription data were not available such that treatments for COVID-19 were not captured. Attribution of post-discharge resource use and costs to COVID-19 was subject to greater uncertainty further from the index hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

IC experienced more severe COVID-19 hospitalization outcomes compared to non-IC. COVID-mitigating policies and prophylactic treatments are needed to protect immunocompromised populations.

Adaptive clinical trial of AZD7442 and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in immunosuppressed patients highly vulnerable to infection with SARS-CoV-2 virus (RAPID-PROTECTION): protocol for a multicentre, interventional open-label, randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Despite repeated vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 virus, patients who are immunocompromised remain at very high risk of catching SARS-CoV-2 virus and becoming unwell. AZD7442 (Evusheld) is a long-acting monoclonal antibody treatment that has been shown in clinical trials to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection for up to a year after a single dose. Vaccines require a healthy immune system to generate protective immunity. AZD7442 may prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in immunocompromised individuals that may not have responded to repeated vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 virus. Unlike vaccinations, AZD7442 reaches effective levels within the body a few hours after a single dose. The RAPID-PROTECTION trial will determine the levels of immune protection that AZD7442 offers patients at the very highest risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and whether this protection can be further enhanced by repeated vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 virus.

METHODS

RAPID-PROTECTION is a multicentre, interventional and open-label adaptive platform trial that aims to recruit 350 immunocompromised participants across five UK centres. Participants will be administered AZD7442 on day 0 followed by a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination 28 days later. Participants will be randomised (1:1) to the Moderna vaccine or Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. Participant samples will be taken at baseline and at multiple timepoints after the administration of AZD7442.

ANALYSIS

The participant samples will be analysed to measure the function and magnitude of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody and T-cell responses at baseline and at multiple timepoints after the administration of AZD7442. The immunological effect of the study interventions will be determined by comparison of the results of immunological assessments at baseline and subsequent timepoints.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial protocol was approved by the research ethics committee of the National Health Service (reference 22/HRA/0359), Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales on 25 July 2022. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN53507177.

Impaired Hepatitis B and COVID-19 vaccination responses show strong concordance in hemodialysis patients with end stage renal disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing hemodialysis are at increased risk for infection and impaired vaccination responses. We analyzed overlap and influencing factors of vaccination responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus disease 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Hepatitis B virus (HBV).

METHODS

SARS-CoV-2 and HBV vaccination response was assessed in a cohort of German ESRD hemodialysis patients. Anti-HBs- and SARS-CoV-2 anti-S-IgG were analyzed by ELISA. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from clinical files.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients with complete information on HBV and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination responses were included. More than one-third (35.4%) of non-responders upon HBV vaccination were identified. Unresponsiveness after HBV and poor response after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination showed strong overlap, and overall, 70.3% of patients were classified into concordant HBV/SARS vaccination response groups. HBV vaccination non-responsiveness, but not poor SARS-CoV-2 post-vaccination immunity was associated with obesity, while poor SARS-CoV-2 vaccination responses were associated increased age.

CONCLUSION

Our findings confirm previous reports on impaired vaccination response in hemodialysis patients and show that post-vaccination humoral responses against SARS-CoV-2 and HBV display strong overlap in this vulnerable patient group. These results may help to adapt vaccination strategies in this highly vulnerable population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trial Registry, DRKS00021152.

Antibody Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Transplant Recipients and Hemodialysis Patients: Data from the Dominican Republic

Background: The global COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in approximately 7 million deaths and a historic vaccination effort, with over 13.6 billion doses administered. Despite this, understanding of immune responses in vulnerable populations, such as transplant recipients (TR) and hemodialysis patients (HD), remains limited, especially outside the US and Europe. Methods: To address this gap, we analyzed blood samples and deidentified data from the Instituto Nacional de Coordinación de Trasplante (INCORT) in The Dominican Republic, measuring antibody levels to SARS-CoV-2 post-infection and vaccination with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and Sinovac-CoronaVac (Sinovac) in TR, HD, and healthy controls (CO). Using a fluorescent multiplex assay (mPlex-CoV) and mixed-effects modeling, we assessed variations in anti-S, anti-RBD, and anti-N IgG antibodies. Results: The results indicate that the CO group experienced an early peak in anti-S and anti-RBD antibodies, followed by stabilization. In contrast, the TR and HD groups showed a slower, gradual increase in antibodies. Despite fluctuations in the HD group, both the TR and HD groups maintained high anti-S and anti-RBD IgG levels, indicating a back-boosting effect from vaccination. However, elevated anti-N IgG levels in the TR and HD groups suggest potential reinfections. Additionally, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection led to higher anti-S IgG levels, with BNT162b2 associated with higher anti-S IgG and CoronaVac associated with higher anti-N IgG levels. Conclusion: These findings highlight the variability in antibody responses and the need for targeted public health strategies to diverse immunological profiles.

Increase of Hepatitis B Surface Antibody Levels After Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccine in Hemodialysis Patients: An Important Single-Center Observation

BACKGROUND

The effects of COVID-19 vaccines on immunocompromised people such as hemodialysis (HD) patients are an important topic that should be addressed. This study reports an observation of the effect of the third dose of the Sinopharm vaccine (SphV3) on the level of hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs) in HD patients, and the differences between anti-HBs titers before and after SphV3 were analytically evaluated.

METHODS

This single-center observational study involved all HD patients presented to Shariati Hospital, Tehran, Iran, from February 2021 to March 2022. All patients received three doses of the Sinopharm vaccine over 8 months. The anti-HBs level is measured every 6 months as the routine evaluation against HBV infection for all HD patients. Three months before (anti-HBs-B3) and 3 months after (anti-HBs-A3) SphV3 were the routine times to measure the anti-HBs titer during this study.

RESULTS

Twenty-five HD patients were enrolled. Overall, the anti-HBs-A3 was significantly higher than anti-HBs-B3 (p = 0.001). The anti-HBs levels before and after SphV3 were not statistically remarkable in patients with diabetes and ischemic heart disease. The patients with a history of kidney transplant and those with a history of COVID-19 had significant differences between anti-HBs-B3 and anti-HBs-A3 (p = 0.002, p = 0.003, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our findings revealed that inactivated COVID-19 vaccine may be involved in the humoral immune response to hepatitis B in HD patients. It may be novel and have significant implications for the vaccination protocol for immunocompromised patients, including those undergoing HD and transplant recipients.

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Tixagevimab-Cilgavimab: A Target Trial Emulation Study

BACKGROUND

Immunocompromised individuals are at high risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and subsequent severe or fatal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet they have suboptimal responses to mRNA and inactivated COVID-19 vaccines. The efficacy of tixagevimab-cilgavimab in reducing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was demonstrated in phase III clinical trials. Nevertheless, real-world data on the effectiveness and safety of tixagevimab-cilgavimab remain limited.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tixagevimab-cilgavimab among immunocompromised individuals.

METHODS

Adults who were immunocompromised or receiving immunosuppressive therapies were included in this target trial emulation using territory-wide electronic health records in Hong Kong. A sequential trial emulation approach was adopted to compare effectiveness and safety outcomes between individuals who received tixagevimab-cilgavimab and individuals who did not.

RESULTS

A total of 746 tixagevimab-cilgavimab recipients and 2980 controls were included from 1 May 2022 to 30 November 2022. Tixagevimab-cilgavimab significantly reduced the risk of COVID-19 infection (hazard ratio [HR] 0.708, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.527-0.951) during a median follow-up of 60 days. No significant difference was observed in the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisation. Zero versus eight COVID-19 mortality cases and zero versus two severe COVID-19 cases were observed in tixagevimab-cilgavimab recipients and controls, respectively. Notably, significant risk reduction in COVID-19 infection was also observed among immunocompromised individuals who had been previously vaccinated with three or more doses of COVID-19 vaccine, or had no prior COVID-19 infection history.

CONCLUSIONS

Tixagevimab-cilgavimab was effective in reducing COVID-19 infection among immunocompromised patients during the Omicron wave. Findings were consistent among individuals who previously received three or more doses of COVID-19 vaccine, or had no previous history of COVID-19 infection.

The inactivated herpes zoster vaccine HZ/su induces a varicella zoster virus specific cellular and humoral immune response in patients on dialysis

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the immunogenicity of the inactivated herpes-zoster vaccine HZ/su in patients at increased risk for VZV-reactivation, we analysed the quantity and quality of the vaccine-induced cellular and humoral immunity in patients on dialysis with uremic immunodeficiency.

METHODS

In this observational study, 29 patients and 39 immunocompetent controls underwent standard dual-dose vaccination. Blood samples were analysed before and two weeks after each vaccination, and after one year. Specific T-cells were characterized after stimulation with VZV-gE-peptides based on induction of cytokines and CTLA-4-expression using flow-cytometry. Antibodies were analysed using ELISA.

FINDINGS

Both groups showed an increase in VZV-gE-specific CD4 T-cell levels over time (p < 0.0001), although median levels reached after second vaccination were lower in patients (0.17% (IQR 0.21%)) than in controls (0.24% (IQR 0.3%), p = 0.042). VZV-gE specific CD8 T-cells were only poorly induced. CTLA-4 expression on VZV-gE-specific CD4 T-cells was strongest after second dose with no differences between the groups (p = 0.45). Multifunctional cells co-expressing IFNγ, IL-2, and TNF were higher in patients after first vaccination (p = 0.028). Median VZV-specific IgG-levels reached a maximum after second vaccination with significantly lower levels in patients (10796 (IQR 12482) IU/l) than in controls (16899 (IQR 14019) IU/l, p = 0.009). Despite similar CD4 T-cell levels after one year (p = 0.415), antibody levels remained significantly lower in patients (p = 0.0008).

INTERPRETATION

VZV-gE vaccination induced specific antibodies and CD4 T-cells in both patients and controls, whereas CD8 T-cell-induction was poor. Quantitative and qualitative differences in immunity may indicate reduced duration of protection which may necessitate booster vaccinations in patients on dialysis.

FUNDING

HOMFORexzellent (to D.S.).

A NONPARAMETRIC MIXED-EFFECTS MIXTURE MODEL FOR PATTERNS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH COVID-19

Some patients with COVID-19 show changes in signs and symptoms such as temperature and oxygen saturation days before being positively tested for SARS-CoV-2, while others remain asymptomatic. It is important to identify these subgroups and to understand what biological and clinical predictors are related to these subgroups. This information will provide insights into how the immune system may respond differently to infection and can further be used to identify infected individuals. We propose a flexible nonparametric mixed-effects mixture model that identifies risk factors and classifies patients with biological changes. We model the latent probability of biological changes using a logistic regression model and trajectories in the latent groups using smoothing splines. We developed an EM algorithm to maximize the penalized likelihood for estimating all parameters and mean functions. We evaluate our methods by simulations and apply the proposed model to investigate changes in temperature in a cohort of COVID-19-infected hemodialysis patients.

Effectiveness and safety of immune response to SARS‑CoV‑2 vaccine in patients with chronic kidney disease and dialysis: A systematic review and meta‑analysis

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is the most effective way to prevent COVID-19. However, for chronic kidney disease patients on long-term dialysis, there is a lack of evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of the immune response to the vaccine. The present meta-analysis explores the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccine in the immune response of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing dialysis. PubMed, Web of Science, Science Direct, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2022. Data analysis was performed using REVMAN 5.1s and Stata14 software. Baseline data and endpoint events were extracted, mainly including age, sex, dialysis vintage, body mass index (BMI), vaccine type and dose, history of COVID-19 infection, seropositivity rate, antibody titer, pain at injection site, headache and other safety events. The meta-analysis included 33 trials involving 81,348 patients. The immune efficacy of patients with CKD and dialysis was 80% (95 CI, 73-87%). The seropositivity rate of individuals without COVID-19 infection was 76.48% (3,824/5,000), while the seropositivity rate of individuals with COVID-19 infection was 80.82% (1,858/2,299). The standard mean difference of antibody titers in CKD and dialysis patients with or without COVID-19 infection was 27.73 (95% CI, -19.58-75.04). A total of nine studies reported the most common adverse events: Pain at the injection site, accounting for 18% (95 CI, 6-29%), followed by fatigue and headache, accounting for 8 (95 CI, 4-13%) and 6% (95 CI, 2-9%), respectively. COVID-19 vaccine benefitted patients with CKD undergoing dialysis with seropositivity rate ≥80%. Adverse events such as fatigue, headache, and pain at the injection site may occur after COVID-19 vaccination but the incidence is low.

Assessing the Burden and Cost of COVID-19 Across Variants in Commercially Insured Immunocompromised Populations in the United States: Updated Results and Trends from the Ongoing EPOCH-US Study

INTRODUCTION/METHODS

EPOCH-US is an ongoing, retrospective, observational cohort study among individuals identified in the Healthcare Integrated Research Database (HIRD®) with ≥ 12 months of continuous health plan enrollment. Data were collected for the HIRD population (containing immunocompetent and immunocompromised [IC] individuals), individual IC cohorts (non-mutually exclusive cohorts based on immunocompromising condition and/or immunosuppressive [IS] treatment), and the composite IC population (all unique IC individuals). This study updates previous results with addition of the general population cohort and data specifically for the year of 2022 (i.e., Omicron wave period). To provide healthcare decision-makers the most recent trends, this study reports incidence rates (IR) and severity of first SARS-CoV-2 infection; and relative risk, healthcare utilization, and costs related to first COVID-19 hospitalizations in the full year of 2022 and overall between April 2020 and December 2022.

RESULTS

These updated results showed a 2.9% prevalence of immune compromise in the population. From April 2020 through December 2022, the overall IR of COVID-19 was 115.7 per 1000 patient-years in the composite IC cohort and 77.8 per 1000 patient-years in the HIRD cohort. The composite IC cohort had a 15.4% hospitalization rate with an average cost of $42,719 for first COVID-19 hospitalization. Comparatively, the HIRD cohort had a 3.7% hospitalization rate with an average cost of $28,848 for first COVID-19 hospitalization. Compared to the general population, IC individuals had 4.3 to 23 times greater risk of hospitalization with first diagnosis of COVID-19. Between January and December 2022, hospitalizations associated with first COVID-19 diagnosis cost over $1 billion, with IC individuals (~ 3% of the population) generating $310 million (31%) of these costs.

CONCLUSION

While only 2.9% of the population, IC individuals had a higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and incurred higher healthcare costs across variants. They also disproportionately accounted for over 30% of total costs for first COVID-19 hospitalization in 2022, amounting to ~ $310 million. These data highlight the need for additional preventive measures to decrease the risk of developing severe COVID-19 outcomes in vulnerable IC populations.

Potent induction of humoral and cellular immunity after bivalent BA.4/5 mRNA vaccination in dialysis patients

Knowledge on immunogenicity of the bivalent Omicron BA.4/5 vaccine in dialysis patients and the effect of a previous infection is limited. Therefore, vaccine-induced humoral and cellular immunity was analyzed in dialysis patients and immunocompetent controls with and without prior infection. In an observational study, 33 dialysis patients and 58 controls matched for age, sex and prior infection status were recruited. Specific IgG, neutralizing antibody activity and cellular immunity towards the spike-antigen from parental SARS-CoV-2 and Omicron-subvariants BA.1, BA.2 and BA.4/5 were analyzed before and 13-18 days after vaccination. The bivalent vaccine led to a significant induction of IgG, neutralizing titers, and specific CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell levels. Neutralizing activity towards the parental strain was higher than towards the Omicron-subvariants, whereas specific T-cell levels towards parental spike and Omicron-subvariants did not differ indicating substantial cross-reactivity. Dialysis patients with prior infection had significantly higher spike-specific CD4+ T-cell levels with lower CTLA-4 expression compared to infection-naive patients. When compared to controls, no differences were observed between infection-naive individuals. Among convalescent individuals, CD4+ T-cell levels were higher in patients and neutralizing antibodies were higher in controls. Vaccination was overall well tolerated in both dialysis patients and controls with significantly less adverse events among patients. In conclusion, our study did not provide any evidence for impaired immunogenicity of the bivalent Omicron BA.4/5 vaccine in dialysis patients. Unlike in controls, previous infection of patients was even associated with higher levels of spike-specific CD4+ T cells, which may reflect prolonged encounter with antigen during infection.

Impaired antibody response to inactivated COVID-19 vaccines in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes

Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are at an increased risk of morbidity and mortality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Data on the antibody response to COVID-19 vaccines in T2D patients are less studied. This study aimed to evaluate IgG antibody response to inactivated COVID-19 vaccines in hospitalized T2D patients. Hospitalized patients with no history of COVID-19 and received two doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines (Sinopharm or CoronaVac) were included in this study from March to October 2021. SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies were measured 14-60 days after the second vaccine dose. A total of 209 participants, 96 with T2D and 113 non-diabetes patients, were included. The positive rate and median titer of IgG antibody against receptor-binding domain (anti-RBD) of spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2 in T2D group were lower than in control group (67.7% vs 83.2%, p = .009; 12.93 vs 17.42 AU/ml, p = .014) respectively. Similarly, seropositivity and median titers of IgG antibody against the nucleocapsid (N) and S proteins of SARS-CoV-2 (anti-N/S) in T2D group were lower than in control group (68.8% vs 83.2%, p = .032; 18.81 vs 29.57 AU/mL, p = .012) respectively. After adjustment for age, sex, BMI, vaccine type, days after the second vaccine dose, hypertension, kidney disease, and heart disease, T2D was identified as an independent risk factor for negative anti-RBD and anti-N/S seropositivity, odd ratio 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.19, 0.89) and 0.42 (95% CI 0.20, 0.91), respectively. T2D is associated with impaired antibody response to inactivated COVID-19 vaccine.

Partial recovery of SARS-CoV-2 immunity after booster vaccination in renal transplant recipients

The pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus has been especially detrimental to patients with end-stage renal disease. History with other vaccines suggests that patients with renal disease may not respond adequately to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. The aim of this study is to evaluate the immunity to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in renal patients. Post SARS-CoV-2 vaccination first, and after the booster dose, antibodies and cellular immunity were studied in patients on hemodialysis (N = 20), peritoneal dialysis (N = 10) and renal transplantation (N = 10). After the two doses of vaccine, there was an effective immunity in dialysis patients, with 100% seroconversion and 87% detection of cellular immunity (85% in hemodialysis and 90% in peritoneal dialysis). In contrast, in renal transplant recipients there was only 50% seroconversion and cellular immunity was detected in 30% of patients. After the booster dose, all dialysis patients achieved a cellular and antibody immunity, whereas in transplant patients, despite improvement, 20% did not produce antibodies and in 37.5% cellular immunity could not be detected. The mRNA vaccine plus booster performs excellently in dialysis patients, whereas in kidney transplant recipients, despite the booster, complete immunization is not achieved.

Evaluation of commercial assays for the assessment of SARS-CoV-2 antibody response in hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Hemodialysis patients exhibit variable immunogenicity following administration of the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the use of two commercial assays in the assessment of SARS-CoV-2 antibody response in hemodialysis patients and to compare their utility to commonly used SARS-CoV-2 serological assays developed in Canada.

METHODS

We evaluated serologic antibody response in 85 hemodialysis patients up to 6 months after receiving both doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. In addition, antibody response was assessed in 46 chronic kidney disease patients and 40 COVID-19 naïve health care workers (HCW) up to 3 months and 9 months, respectively. Anti-spike (S) and anti-nucleocapsid (N) levels were measured using Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays on the Roche analyzer and compared to ELISA-based detection of anti-S, anti-receptor binding domain (RBD), and anti-N.

RESULTS

The Elecsys anti-N immunoassay showed 93 % concordance with the anti-N ELISA. The Elecsys anti-S immunoassay showed 97 % concordance with the anti-S ELISA and 89 % concordance with the anti-RBD ELISA. HCWs exhibited significantly higher anti-S levels relative to hemodialysis patients. Anti-S levels decreased significantly over a 6-month period (p < 0.001) in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis. In addition, anti-S levels decreased significantly over a 9-month (p < 0.001) and 3-month period (p < 0.001) in HCWs and CKD patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There is high concordance between commercial SARS-CoV-2 serological assays and SARS-CoV-2 serological assays developed in Canada. Hemodialysis patients exhibited varying immunogenicity following two doses of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine with anti-S levels decreasing over time.

Adverse Effects Reported and Insights Following Sinopharm COVID-19 Vaccination

Vaccines are promising strategies for controlling COVID-19; however, COVID-19 vaccine side effects play a central role in public confidence in the vaccine and its uptake process. This study aimed to provide evidence on the post-vaccination early side effects of the BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) vaccine. This cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted between November 2021 and January 2022 among recipients of the BBIBP-CorV vaccine, using a questionnaire-based survey. Our final sample consisted of 657 participants, including 392 women. Among the study cases, only 103 (15.7%) participants received one dose of vaccine, and the rest received both doses (N = 554, 84.3%). Systemic symptoms (first dose: N = 187, both doses: N = 128) were the most commonly reported events after vaccination, and among them, injection site pain (first dose: 19.3%, both doses: 12.9%) was the most prevalent adverse effect. All reporting events were mild and resolved in less than 3 days without hospitalization. Among the participants, females and young people aged 35-65 were more prone to manifest side effects (N = 169, 53.3%) after the vaccine injection. Furthermore, our results revealed that the recipients who were suffering from underlying diseases, including diabetes, renal disorder, and respiratory illness, reported fewer adverse responses after vaccination in comparison with healthy individuals. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 may lead to some adverse reactions in recipients. However, the frequency of post-vaccination early side effects differed in people, but all responses were slight and temporary.

Assessment of humoral immune response to different COVID-19 vaccines in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis

INTRODUCTION

The immune response to different Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines is under-investigated in end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients, especially in the Middle East and North Africa. We carried out this research to estimate the effectiveness of COVID-19 immunization in ESKD patients on regular hemodialysis (HD).

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, we enrolled 60 ESKD patients on regular HD who had completed COVID-19 vaccination and 30 vaccinated healthy participants. Serum levels of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 immunoglobulin G (SARS-COV2 IgG) were quantified 1 month after completing the vaccination schedule, and all participants were followed up from October 2021 to March 2022. The vaccines used in the study were from Pfizer-BioNTech, AstraZeneca, and Sinopharm.

RESULTS

The median level of SARS-COV2 IgG was lower in HD patients than in healthy participants (p < 0.001). Regarding the type of COVID-19 vaccination, there was no statistical difference in SARS-COV2 IgG levels among HD patients. During the observation period, none of the HD patients had COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccination appeared to be protective in HD patients for 6 months and the side effects of vaccines were tolerable.

Impact of COVID-19 Vaccinations on Menstrual Bleeding

INTRODUCTION

Vaccination has a fundamental role in protecting against and modifying the severity of several infectious diseases, including COVID-19. Several immune and non-immune adverse events have been reported post-COVID-19 vaccine. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the COVID-19 vaccine on women's menstrual bleeding.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among 399 vaccinated women in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. Data were collected using a direct interview-based questionnaire including four sections.

RESULTS

A total of 399 women were recruited, with a mean age of 25.54 ± 6.177 years. More than half (53.9%) of the participants reported post-vaccination menstrual bleeding abnormality in terms of a heavy or irregular cycle. Out of the total number, 40 (21.4%) women reported having heavy menstrual flow, and 67 (16.8%) had non-menstrual bleeding after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Fully vaccinated women were at a greater risk of post-vaccination menstrual bleeding abnormality (p = 0.058). However, there was no correlation between booster shot type and menstrual bleeding abnormality (p > 0.05). In addition, there was no significant association between non-menstrual bleeding and the type of booster shot, the type of the first dose, and prior history of COVID-19 infection (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Despite vaccination being the most effective way to prevent COVID-19, it does have an impact on menstrual bleeding in terms of menorrhagia and metrorrhagia. Therefore, more studies are needed to understand the mechanism and the long-term impact of COVID-19 vaccines on the hemostatic system.

Humeral and cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients on peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease are at high risk for coronavirus disease 2019. Little is known about immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination in patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD).

METHOD

We prospectively enrolled 306 PD patients receiving two doses of vaccines (ChAdOx1-S: 283, mRNA-1273: 23) from July 2021 at a medical center. Humeral and cellular immune responses were assessed by anti-spike IgG concentration and blood T cell interferon-γ production 30 days after vaccination. Antibody ≥0.8 U/mL and interferon-γ ≥ 100 mIU/mL were defined as positive. Antibody was also measured in 604 non-dialysis volunteers (ChAdOx1-S: 244, mRNA-1273: 360) for comparison.

RESULT

PD patients had less adverse events after vaccinations than volunteers. After the first dose of vaccine, the median antibody concentrations were 8.5 U/mL and 50.4 U/mL in ChAdOx1-S group and mRNA-1273 group of PD patients, and 66.6 U/mL and 195.3 U/mL in ChAdOx1-S group and mRNA-1273 group of volunteers, respectively. And after the second dose of vaccine, the median antibody concentrations were 344.8 U/mL and 9941.0 U/mL in ChAdOx1-S group and mRNA-1273 group of PD patients, and 620.3 U/mL and 3845.0 U/mL in ChAdOx1-S group and mRNA-1273 group of volunteers, respectively. The median IFN-γ concentration was 182.8 mIU/mL in ChAdOx1-S group, which was substantially lower than the median concentration 476.8 mIU/mL in mRNA-1273 group of PD patients.

CONCLUSION

Both vaccines were safe and resulted in comparable antibody seroconversion in PD patients when compared with volunteers. However, mRNA-1273 vaccine induced significantly higher antibody and T cell response than ChAdOx1-S in PD patients. Booster doses are recommended for PD patients after two doses of ChAdOx1-S vaccination.

Comparative analysis of the effectiveness difference of SARS-COV-2 mRNA vaccine in different populations in the real world: A review

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has ravaged the world since December 2019. Up to now, it is still prevalent around the world. Vaccines are an important means to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and reduce severe disease and mortality. Currently, different types of novel coronavirus vaccines are still being developed and improved, and the relevant vaccines that have been approved for marketing have been widely vaccinated around the world. As vaccination coverage continues to grow, concerns about the efficacy and safety of vaccines after real-world use have grown. Some clinical studies have shown that vaccine effectiveness is closely related to antibody response after vaccination. Among them, the advantages of COVID-19 messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccine, such as better adaptability to variant strains and better immune response ability, have attracted great attention. However, different populations with different genders, ages, previous COVID-19 infection history, underlying diseases and treatments will show different antibody responses after mRNA vaccination, which will affect the protection of the vaccine. Based on this, this paper reviews the reports related severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 mRNA vaccines, and summarizes the effectiveness of vaccines in different populations and different disease states and looked forward to the precise vaccination strategy of the vaccine in the future.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody titer after BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in Japanese patients who underwent renal replacement therapy, hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination is recommended for patients undergoing renal replacement therapy (RRT), including hemodialysis (HD), peritoneal dialysis (PD), and kidney transplantation (KT). However, the difference in the immune response between RRT patients and healthy individuals after mRNA vaccines remains uncertain.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study evaluated the anti-severe-acute-respiratory-syndrome-coronavirus-2 (anti-SARS-CoV-2) IgG antibody acquisition, titers and their changes, normal response rate (reaching titers of healthy individuals), factors associated with a normal response, and effectiveness of booster vaccination in Japanese RRT patients.

RESULTS

Most HD and PD patients acquired anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies after the second vaccination; however, their antibody titers and normal response rates (62-75%) were low compared with those of healthy subjects. Approximately 62% of KT recipients acquired antibodies, but the normal response rate was low (23%). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody waning occurred in the control, HD, and PD groups, while negative or very low titers remained in KT recipients. Third booster vaccination was effective in most HD and PD patients. However, the effect was mild in KT recipients - only 58% reached a normal response level. Multivariate logistic regression analyses demonstrated that younger age, higher serum albumin level, and RRT other than KT were significantly associated with a normal response after the second vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

RRT patients, particularly KT recipients, exhibited poor vaccine responses. Booster vaccination would be beneficial for HD and PD patients; however, its effect in KT recipients was mild. Further COVID-19 vaccinations using the latest vaccine or alternative procedures should be considered in RRT patients.

Assessing the risk and costs of COVID-19 in immunocompromised populations in a large United States commercial insurance health plan: the EPOCH-US Study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence of patients with an immunocompromising condition at risk for COVID-19, estimate COVID-19 prevalence rate (PR) and incidence rate (IR) by immunocompromising condition, and describe COVID-19-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs.

METHODS

Using the Healthcare Integrated Research Database (HIRD), patients with ≥1 claim for an immunocompromising condition of interest or ≥2 claims for an immunosuppressive (IS) treatment and COVID-19 diagnosis during the infection period (1 April 2020-31 March 2022) and had ≥12 months baseline data were included. Cohorts (other than the composite cohort) were not mutually exclusive and were defined by each immunocompromising condition. Analyses were descriptive in nature.

RESULTS

Of the 16,873,161 patients in the source population, 2.7% (n = 458,049) were immunocompromised (IC). The COVID-19 IR for the composite IC cohort during the study period was 101.3 per 1000 person-years and the PR was 13.5%. The highest IR (195.0 per 1000 person-years) and PR (20.1%) were seen in the end-stage renal disease (ESRD) cohort; the lowest IR (68.3 per 1000 person-years) and PR (9.4%) were seen in the hematologic or solid tumor malignancy cohort. Mean costs for hospitalizations associated with the first COVID-19 diagnosis were estimated at nearly $1 billion (2021 United States dollars [USD]) for 14,516 IC patients, with a mean cost of $64,029 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunocompromised populations appear to be at substantial risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes, leading to increased costs and HCRU. Effective prophylactic options are still needed for these high-risk populations as the COVID-19 landscape evolves.

Response to Immunization against SARS-CoV-2 and Risk of Omicron Infection in Dialysis Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study

It is not well established to what extent previous immunizations offer protection against infections with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in dialysis patients. We aimed to define the relevant humoral response in dialysis patients using a SARS-CoV-2 IgG chemiluminescence microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) compared to the activity of neutralizing antibodies assessed by a virus neutralization test. Next, we aimed to determine differences in humoral and cellular response levels over time among patients infected or not infected by the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2. Immunological parameters of cellular and humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 were analyzed at baseline and after 3 (T3), 6 (T6) and 14 months (T14). In this monocentric cohort study, we followed 110 dialysis patients (mean age 68.4 ± 13.7 years, 60.9% male) for a median of 545 days. We determined an anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG level of 56.7 BAU/mL as an ideal cut-off value with a J-index of 90.7. Patients infected during the Omicron era had significantly lower (p < 0.001) mean antibody levels at T0 (3.5 vs. 111.2 BAU/mL), T3 (269.8 vs. 699.8 BAU/mL) and T6 (260.2 vs. 513.9 BAU/mL) than patients without Omicron infection. Patients who developed higher antibody levels at the time of the basic immunizations were less likely to become infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the Omicron era. There is a need to adjust the cut-off values for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels in dialysis patients.

Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in haemodialysis patients: a prospective cohort study

End-stage renal disease patients on haemodialysis (HD) have been largely excluded from SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials due to safety reasons and shown to mount lower responses to vaccination. This study aims to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine among HD patients compared to healthy controls. All subjects who received the primary inactivated COVID-19 vaccination had their blood samples tested 21 days after the second dose. We report the immunogenicity based on anti-RBD IgG titre (IU/mL), the inhibition rate of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) (%) to RBD, and seroconversion rates. Adverse events were assessed within 30 min and on the 7th day after each dose. Among 75 HD patients and 71 healthy controls, we observed no significant difference in all immunogenicity measures: anti-RBD IgG GMT (277.91 ± 7.13 IU/mL vs. 315.50 ± 3.50 IU/mL, p = 0.645), NAbs inhibition rate (82% [53-96] vs. 84% [39-98], p = 0.654), and seroconversion rates (anti-RBD IgG: 86.7% vs. 85.9%, p = 0.895; NAbs: 45.3% vs. 60.6%, p = 0.065). The number of adverse events is not significantly different between the two groups. The primary inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination elicits an adequate antibody response and can be safely administered in haemodialysis patients.

Serological Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Hemodialyzed Patients and the Association with Later COVID-19 Positivity

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine may differ in hemodialysis patients. The aim of this prospective multicenter study was to determine the degree of serological response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in the population of dialysis patients and its association with later SARS-CoV-2 infections.

METHODS

A blood sample was taken for the determination of COVID-19 serological status (IgG antibodies) in 706 dialysis patients 16 weeks after vaccination with the second dose (Pfizer-BioNTech).

RESULTS

Only 314 (44.5%) hemodialyzed patients had a satisfactory response to the COVID-19 vaccine. Eighty-two patients (11.6%) had a borderline response, while 310 patients (43.9%) had an unsatisfactory (negative) post-vaccinal antibody titer. A longer dialysis vintage had an increased odds ratio (OR) of 1.01 for the occurrence of COVID-19 positivity after vaccination. In the group of subsequently positive patients, 28 patients (13.6%) died from complications of COVID-19. We have found differences in mean survival time between patients with and without appropriate responses to vaccination in favor of patients with a satisfactory serological response.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that the dialysis population will not have the same serological response to the vaccine as the general population. The majority of dialysis patients did not develop a severe clinical picture or die at the time of positivity for COVID-19.

Clinical manifestations of COVID-19 infection in dialysis patients and protective effect of COVID-19 vaccine

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

COVID-19 infection poses a special challenge to patients with dialysis patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical manifestations of dialysis patients with COVID-19 and the protective effect of the vaccine.

METHODS

We included 41 studies based on big data, mainly analyzing the clinical symptoms of dialysis patients with COVID-19, the proportion of severe patients before and after vaccination, and the humoral reaction of vaccine in the body.

RESULTS

6.1% to 35.7% of dialysis patients with COVID-19 developed respiratory distress symptoms and needed to be admitted to an intensive care unit for mechanical ventilation. The incidence and mortality of COVID-19 in dialysis patients before vaccination were 5.5% and 1.1%, respectively, and decreased to 4.5% and 0.6% in breakthrough infected patients. There was no statistical difference in serum conversion rates between dialysis patients and healthy controls, but the neutralizing antibody titer in the control group was 1922 (IQR 533 to 3186) AU/mL, and the neutralizing antibody titer in dialysis patients significantly decreased to 367 (IQR 171 to 1650) AU/mL (P=0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

Dialysis is associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19, and generally has a poor seroconversion response to vaccines. It also confirms the protective effect of vaccines on high-risk populations such as dialysis.

Immunogenicity and Safety of Homologous and Heterologous Prime-Boost of CoronaVac® and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 among Hemodialysis Patients: An Observational Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Vaccines that prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection are considered the most promising approach to modulating the pandemic. There is scarce evidence on the efficacy and safety of different vaccine prime-boost combinations in MHD patients since most clinical trials have used homologous mRNA vaccine regimens.

METHODS

This prospective observational study assessed the immunogenicity and safety of homologous CoronaVac® (SV-SV), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) (AZ-AZ), and the heterologous prime-boost of SV-AZ, among MHD patients.

RESULTS

A total of 130 MHD participants were recruited. On day 28, after the second dose, seroconversion results of the surrogate virus neutralization test were not different between vaccine regimens. The magnitude of the receptor-binding domain-specific IgG was highest among the SV-AZ. Different vaccine regimens had a distinct impact on seroconversion, for which the heterologous vaccine regimen demonstrated a higher probability of seroconversion (OR 10.12; p = 0.020, and OR 1.81; p = 0.437 for SV-AZ vs. SV-SV, and SV-AZ vs. AZ-AZ, respectively). There were no serious adverse events reported in any of the vaccine groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunization with SV-SV, AZ-AZ, and SV-AZ could generate humoral immunity without any serious adverse events among MHD patients. Using the heterologous vaccine prime-boost seemed to be more efficacious in terms of inducing immunogenicity.

Potent SARS-CoV2-specific T-cell response in asymptomatic hemodialysis patients with hidden COVID-19 infection history

BACKGROUND

COVID-19-related immune responses in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are characterized in detail by the humoral response, but their cellular immunity has not been clarified. Here, we evaluated virus-specific T cells in parallel with serology-related tests.

METHODS

In this study, 104 ESRD patients at the hemodialysis ward of Imam Reza hospital at Tabriz (Iran) were enrolled. After blood sampling, SARS-CoV2-specific humoral and cellular immune responses were evaluated by SARS-CoV2-specific IgM/IgG ELISA and peptide/MHCI-Tetramers flow cytometry, respectively.

RESULTS

Our results showed that 14 (13.5%) and 45 (43.3%) patients had specific SARS-CoV2 IgM and IgG in their sera, respectively. Immunophenotyping for SARS-CoV2-specific CD8+ T lymphocytes revealed that 68 (65.4%) patients had these types of cells. Among SARS-CoV2-specific CD8+ T lymphocytes positive subjects, 13 and 43 individuals had positive results for specific SARS-CoV2 IgM and IgG existence, respectively. Also, there was a relationship between specific SARS-CoV2 IgM (p = 0.031) and IgG (p < 0.0001) existence and having SARS-CoV2-specific TCD8+ lymphocytes in the studied population.

CONCLUSION

Despite not having clinical symptoms, a high rate of SARS-CoV2-specific T-cell response in asymptomatic ESRD patients may reveal a high burden of asymptomatic COVID-19 infection in these patients.

Trajectory of Humoral Responses to Two Doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccination in Patients Receiving Maintenance Hemodialysis

The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine is one of the most commonly delivered SARS-CoV-2 vaccines worldwide; however, few clinical studies have investigated its immunogenicity in dialysis patients. We prospectively enrolled 123 patients on maintenance hemodialysis at a medical center in Taiwan. All patients were infection-naive, had received two doses of the AZD1222 vaccine, and were monitored for 7 months. The primary outcomes were anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) antibody concentrations before and after each dose and 5 months after the second dose and neutralization capacity against ancestral SARS-CoV-2, delta, and omicron variants. The anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD antibody titers significantly increased with time following vaccination, with a peak at 1 month after the second dose (median titer, 498.8 U/mL; interquartile range, 162.5 to 1,050 U/mL), and a 4.7-fold decrease at 5 months. At 1 month after the second dose, 84.6, 83.7, and 1.6% of the participants had neutralizing antibodies against the ancestral virus, delta variant, and omicron variant, respectively, measured by a commercial surrogate neutralization assay. The geometric mean 50% pseudovirus neutralization titers for the ancestral virus, delta variant, and omicron variant were 639.1, 264.2, and 24.7, respectively. The anti-RBD antibody titers correlated well with neutralization capacity against the ancestral virus and delta variant. Transferrin saturation and C-reactive protein were associated with neutralization against the ancestral virus and delta variant. Although two doses of the AZD1222 vaccine initially elicited high anti-RBD antibody titers and neutralization against the ancestral virus and delta variant in hemodialysis patients, neutralizing antibodies against omicron variant were rarely detected, and the anti-RBD and neutralization antibodies waned over time. Additional/booster vaccinations are warranted in this population. IMPORTANCE Patients with kidney failure have worse immune response following vaccination compared to general population, but few clinical studies have investigated immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccination in hemodialysis patients. Here, we showed two doses of AZD1222 vaccines lead to high seroconversion rate of anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) antibodies, and more than 80% patients acquired neutralizing antibodies against ancestral virus and delta variant. However, seldom did they obtain neutralizing antibodies against the omicron variant. The geometric mean 50% pseudovirus neutralization titer against the ancestral virus was 25.9-fold higher than that against the omicron variant. Also, there was a substantial decay in anti-RBD titers with time. Our findings provided evidence supporting that more protective measures, including additional/booster vaccinations, is warranted in these patients during the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Humoral and cellular response after BNT162b2 vaccine booster in hemodialysis patients and kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Vulnerable populations, such as hemodialysis (HD) patients and kidney transplant (RTx) recipients, have priority for anti-COVID-19 vaccination, because of their impaired immune status. Here, we investigated the immune response after vaccination with BNT162b2 (two doses plus booster) in HD and RTx patients.

METHODS

A prospective, observational study was started in two homogeneous groups of 55 HD and 51 RTx patients previously matched from a cohort of 336 patients. Anti-RBD IgG levels, assayed after the second dose with BNT162b2 mRNA, were used to stratify subjects into quintiles. After the second dose and after booster, anti-RBD and IGRA test were evaluated in RTx and HD, belonging to the first and fifth quintiles.

RESULTS

After the second dose of vaccine, the median circulating levels of anti-RBD IgG were significantly higher in HD (1456 AU/mL) compared to RTx (27.30 AU/mL). IGRA test showed significantly higher values in the HD (382 mIU/mL) compared with the RTx (73 mIU/mL). After the booster, humoral response increased significantly in both HD (p = 0.0002) and RTx groups (p = 0.009), whereas the T-cellular immunity remained essentially stable in most patients. In RTx patients with a low humoral response after the second dose, the third dose did not significantly strengthen either humoral or cellular immunity.

CONCLUSIONS

For HD and RTx, there is great variability in the humoral response to anti-COVID-19 vaccination, with a stronger response in the HD group. The booster dose was ineffective at reinforcing the humoral and cellular immune response in most RTx patients hyporesponsive to the second dose.

Cellular and Humoral Responses in Dialysis Patients after Vaccination with the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 Vaccines

The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 has raised considerable concern about the detrimental effects it can induce in public health, with the interest of the scientific community being focused on the development of preventive and therapeutic approaches. Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are amongst vulnerable populations for critical illness owing to the presence of other comorbidities, their defective immune system, and their inability of self-isolation. To date, vaccination constitutes the most promising method to manage viral dispersion. Therefore, it is particularly important to investigate the effectiveness of available vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in this risk group. Here, we summarize initial experience regarding the humoral and cellular immune responses elicited in dialysis patients after completion of the recommended vaccination regimen, as well as after booster dose administration, with one of the two mRNA vaccines, namely, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273. In conclusion, a significantly diminished and delayed immune pattern was observed in ESRD patients compared to healthy population, with a peak in antibody titers occurring 3-5 weeks after the second dose. A booster dose significantly augmented the immune response in dialysis patients with either mRNA-based vaccine. Variables adversely correlating with the weak immunogenicity observed in dialysis patients include immunosuppressive therapy, older age, comorbidities, longer time in hemodialysis treatment, and higher body mass index. On the contrary, previous COVID-19 infection and administration of the mRNA-1273 vaccine are deemed to induce a more favorable immune response. Further investigation is needed to thoroughly understand the efficacy of mRNA-based vaccines in hemodialysis patients and define predictive factors that can influence it.

Waning Humoral Response 6 Month after Double Vaccination with the mRNA-BNT162b2 Vaccine in Hemodialysis Patients

Introduction

Although most hemodialysis patients (HDP) exhibit an initial seroresponse to vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), studies have shown this response to be lower compared to healthy subjects. This fact raised concerns regarding the durability of the immune response and effective protection against severe Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in this vulnerable population. The aim of our study was to evaluate the change in antibody levels over time in HDP population.

Materials and Methods

We performed a prospective multicenter study, evaluating antibody response among HDP at 2 and at 6 months after complete two-dose vaccination course with the mRNA-BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine. The study was performed in 14 hemodialysis units of a private dialysis provider in Lithuania. The serum samples of 189 HDP were tested for SARS-CoV-2 IgG against the Spike glycoprotein.

Results

189 HDP participated in the study. Patients were 64.3±15.7 years of age, 116 (61.4%) were males and 73 (38.6%) were females. Among them, 183 (96.8%) were seropositive for anti-S IgG at 2 months after the second immunization dose. Six months after the second dose only 145 (76.7%) of study participants had positive anti-S IgG titers. The median level of anti-S IgG titers after 2 months was 383.1 BAU/mL (166.2-995.6) and after 6 months this level significantly decreased to 51.4 BAU/mL (22.0-104.0) (p<0.001). Seroresponses at both time points inversely correlated with increasing patient's age. Risk factor for absent response after 2 months included oncologic disease. Systemic autoimmune disease and a history of myocardial infarction increased risk to be seronegative 6 months after the second vaccine dose.

Conclusions

The majority of hemodialysis patients seroresponded after BNT162b2/Pfizer vaccination, but vaccine-induced humoral immunity wanes over time.

High Plasma Levels of Fibroblast Growth Factor 23 Are Associated with Increased Risk of COVID-19 in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients on Hemodialysis: Results of a Prospective Cohort

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are a population with high rates of COVID-19 and mortality. These patients present a low response to anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunization, which is associated with immune dysfunction. ESRD patients also present high plasma titers of Fibroblast Growth Factor 23 (FGF23), a protein hormone that reduces immune response in vivo and in vitro. Increased FGF23 levels associate with higher infection-related hospitalizations and adverse infectious outcomes. Thus, we evaluated whether ESRD patients with high FGF23 titers have an increased rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

We performed a prospective cohort of ESRD patients in hemodialysis who had measurements of plasma intact FGF23 in 2019. We determined COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and mortality between January 2020 and December 2021.

RESULTS

We evaluated 243 patients. Age: 60.4 ± 10.8 years. Female: 120 (49.3%), diabetes: 110 (45.2%). During follow-up, 45 patients developed COVID-19 (18.5%), 35 patients were hospitalized, and 12 patients died (mortality rate: 26.6%). We found that patients with higher FGF23 levels (defined as equal or above median) had a higher rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection versus those with lower levels (18.8% versus 9.9%; Hazard ratio: 1.92 [1.03-3.56], p = 0.039). Multivariate analysis showed that increased plasma FGF23 was independently associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19.

DISCUSSION

Our results suggest that high plasma FGF23 levels are a risk factor for developing COVID-19 in ESRD patients. These data support the potential immunosuppressive effects of high circulating FGF23 as a factor implicated in the association with worse clinical outcomes. Further data are needed to confirm this hypothesis.

Humoral response after BNT162b2 vaccine in Japanese hemodialysis patients

Background

Hemodialysis patients are more likely to be severely affected if infected by COVID-19. Contributing factors include chronic kidney disease, old age, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and cerebrovascular disease. Therefore, action against COVID-19 for hemodialysis patients is an urgent issue. Vaccines are effective in preventing COVID 19 infection. In hemodialysis patients, however, responses to hepatitis B and influenza vaccines are reportedly weak. The BNT162b2 vaccine has shown an efficacy rate of about 95% in the general population, but as far as we know there are only several reports of efficacy data in hemodialysis patients in Japan.

Methods

We assessed serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody (Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quan) in 185 hemodialysis patients and 109 health care workers. The exclusion criterion was positivity for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody before vaccination. Adverse reactions to BNT162b2 vaccine were evaluated through interviews.

Results

Following vaccination, 97.6% of the hemodialysis group and 100% of the control group were positive for the anti-spike antibody. The median level of anti-spike antibody was 2,728.7 AU/mL (IQR, 1,024.2-7,688.2 AU/mL) in the hemodialysis group and 10,500 AU/ml (IQR, 9,346.1-2,4500 AU/mL) in the health care workers group. The factors involved in the low response to the BNT152b2 vaccine included old age, low BMI, low Cr index, low nPCR, low GNRI, low lymphocyte count, steroid administration, and complications related to blood disorders.

Conclusions

Humoral responses to BNT162b2 vaccine in hemodialysis patients are weaker than in a healthy control sample. Booster vaccination is necessary for hemodialysis patients, especially those showing a weak or non-response to the two-dose BNT162b2 vaccine.Trial registration UMIN, UMIN000047032. Registered 28 February 2022, https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-bin/ctr/ctr_reg_rec.cgi.

Immune Response to Third and Fourth COVID-19 Vaccination in Hemodialysis Patients and Kidney Transplant Recipients

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a serious hazard for hemodialysis (HD) patients and kidney transplant (KTX) recipients as they suffer from an impaired immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. In addition, a definition of SARS-CoV-2 IgG titer that indicates a sufficient immune response, especially against new omicron variants, is urgently needed. In the present study, the immune response to either a third or a fourth dose of a mRNA vaccine was investigated in 309 dialysis and 36 KTX patients. SARS-CoV-2 IgG titer thresholds indicating neutralizing activity against wild type (WT) and the omicron variant BA.1 were quantified. After four vaccine doses, a high-neutralizing activity against WT was evidenced in HD patients, whereas the neutralizing rate against BA.1 was significant lower. Concerning KTX recipients, humoral and cellular immune responses after a third vaccination were still highly impaired. This calls for modified omicron-targeting vaccines.

A systematic review assessing the effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in chronic kidney disease (CKD) individuals

Background: SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus that has rapidly spread across the world with a detrimental effect on the global population. Several reports have highlighted an increased mortality rate and a higher severity of COVID-19 infection in chronic kidney disease (CKD) individuals. Upon the development of various SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, mRNA vaccines including BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 were deemed safe, with a high efficacy in preventing COVID-19 in the general population. This review investigates whether  SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines are as effective in triggering an immune response in Dialysis Patients (DPs) and Kidney Transplant Recipients (KTRs) and if a third dose is required in this  population. Methods: A systematic search employing the PRISMA criteria was conducted in several major databases, with the data being extracted from publications for the period January 2021 to May 2022 (PROSPERO: CRD42022338514, June 15, 2022). Results: 80 studies were included in this analysis with a total cohort number of 15,059 participants. Overall, 85.29% (OR = 17.08, 95% CI = 15.84-18.42, I ² = 98%) and 41.06% (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.48-0.5, I ² = 95%) of DPs and KTRs included in this review showed positive seroconversion after two doses of either mRNA vaccine, respectively. A total 76% (OR = 6.53, 95% CI = 5.63-7.5, I ² = 96%) of the cohort given a third dose of an mRNA vaccine demonstrated positive seroconversion, with 61.86% (OR = 2.31, 95% CI = 1.95-2.75 I ² = 95%) of the cohort that was assessed for a cellular response displaying a positive response. Conclusions: This data emphasises a reduced incidence of a positive immune response in DPs and KTRs compared to healthy controls, albeit a better response in DPs than when compared to KTRs alone was observed. A third dose  appears to increase the occurrence of an immune response in the overall DP/KTR cohort.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in a large European hemodialysis cohort

Background

Hemodialysis patients have high-risk of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection but were unrepresented in randomized controlled trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines. We estimated the real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in a large international cohort of hemodialysis patients.

Methods

In this historical, 1:1 matched cohort study, we included adult hemodialysis patients receiving treatment from December 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021. For each vaccinated patient, an unvaccinated control was selected among patients registered in the same country and attending a dialysis session around the first vaccination date. Matching was based on demographics, clinical characteristics, past COVID-19 infections and a risk score representing the local background risk of infection at vaccination dates. We estimated the effectiveness of mRNA and viral-carrier COVID-19 vaccines in preventing infection and mortality rates from a time-dependent Cox regression stratified by country.

Results

In the effectiveness analysis concerning mRNA vaccines, we observed 850 SARS-CoV-2 infections and 201 COVID-19 related deaths among the 28110 patients during a mean follow up of 44 ± 40 days. In the effectiveness analysis concerning viral-carrier vaccines, we observed 297 SARS-CoV-2 infections and 64 COVID-19 related deaths among 12888 patients during a mean follow up of 48 ± 32 days. We observed 18.5/100-patient-year and 8.5/100-patient-year fewer infections and 5.4/100-patient-year and 5.2/100-patient-year fewer COVID-19 related deaths among patients vaccinated with mRNA and viral-carrier vaccines respectively, compared to matched unvaccinated controls. Estimated vaccine effectiveness at days 15, 30, 60 and 90 after the first dose of a mRNA vaccine was: for infection, 41.3%, 54.5%, 72.6% and 83.5% and, for death, 33.1%, 55.4%, 80.1% and 91.2%. Estimated vaccine effectiveness after the first dose of a viral-carrier vaccine was: for infection, 38.3% without increasing over time and, for death, 56.6%, 75.3%, 92.0% and 97.4%.

Conclusion

In this large, real-world cohort of hemodialyzed patients, mRNA and viral-carrier COVID-19 vaccines were associated with reduced COVID-19 related mortality. Additionally, we observed a strong reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection in hemodialysis patients receiving mRNA vaccines.

Humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in haemodialysis patients and a matched cohort

OBJECTIVES

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is a crucial intervention for infection control; however, the immune response to vaccination in dialysis patients has been reported to be moderate compared with healthy adults. There are few studies available on humoral response in immunised dialysis patients compared with well-matched control group, we conducted a prospective cohort study measuring SARS-CoV-2 antibody titres in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan since September 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

We compared the titres of both anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG and neutralising antibodies of 65 haemodialysis patients (dialysis group) with 500 residents in Soma, Fukushima (control group).

METHODS

Coarsened exact matching was used to balance sex, age and days from the second dose between dialysis and control groups.

RESULTS

Significant differences in the titres of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG and neutralising antibodies were observed between the dialysis and control groups; anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG: 168.35 (4.48-1074.29) AU/mL and 269.81 (4.72-945.96) AU/mL in dialysis and control groups, p=0.02, neutralising antibodies: 35.77 (2.94-826.06) AU/mL and 62.22 (0.00-535.57) AU/mL, p=0.007, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed significantly reduced anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 antibody and neutralising antibodies in haemodialysis patients compared with cohorts matched for duration after vaccination. Patients receiving haemodialysis should be carefully monitored for immunological responses to the vaccination and COVID-19 infection.

Long-term humoral immunity decline in hemodialysis patients following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination: A cohort study

Background and Aims

Dialysis patients are extremely vulnerable to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with high rates of hospitalization and mortality rates. In January 2021, the University of Virginia Dialysis Program initiated a program-wide vaccination campaign to administer the Pfizer BioNTech messenger RNA SARS-CoV-2 (BNT162b2) vaccine. The aim of this study was to characterize the long-term time-dependent decline in humoral immunity in hemodialysis patients.

Methods

A prospective cohort study measuring serial monthly semiquantitative IgG antibody levels to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor binding domain in fully vaccinated in-center hemodialysis patients. Samples were collected monthly and tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies against the anti-spike S1 domain for 2-6 months post full vaccination. Results were presented as internationally harmonized binding antibody units (BAU/ml). To analyze the change in antibody levels over time, a linear mixed model with random intercept and random slope was used for longitudinal antibody levels. A multivariable model was used to estimate the slope of antibody levels by adjusting for selected patient characteristics. Based on the estimated intercepts and slopes for each subject from the unadjusted model, 10-month antibody levels were projected.

Results

The mean baseline antibody level was 647.59 BAU/ml and 87.88% (29/33) of patients were considered qualitatively positive. Two patients were negative at baseline and an additional two had borderline results. Patient antibody levels declined at an adjusted average rate of 31% per month. At 6 months postvaccination, 40% of patients remaining in the cohort possessed either negative or borderline IgG antibody levels. Projecting future antibody levels suggests that 65% of the cohort will progress to borderline or negative antibody levels at 10 months post full vaccination.

Conclusion

The long-term vaccine response following vaccination with the BNT162b2 in hemodialysis patients was characterized. Our data add to the limited pool of data in this patient population and emphasize the critical need for vaccine boosters.

Immunogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in hemodialysis patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and Aims

Vaccine response is a concern in hemodialysis patients. Given that hemodialysis patients were not included in clinical trials, we aimed to synthesize the available evidence on the immunogenicity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines in hemodialysis patients.

Methods

We searched Scopus, PubMed, Sciencedirect, and finally google scholar databases for studies on COVID-19 mRNA-vaccines immunogenicity in hemodialysis patients up to December 1, 2021. Eligible articles measured antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike or Receptor-Binding Domain Antibody (S/RBD) postimmunization with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. The immunogenicity of the vaccine was evaluated using seroconversion rates measured between 21 and 30 days after the first immunization and between 14 and 36 days post the second dose. We included studies including participants without a history of COVID-19 before vaccination. Healthy controls or health-care workers served as the control groups. After selecting eligible articles, the data were finally extracted from included articles. We used a random effects model to estimate the pooled seroconversion rate after COVID-19 mRNA vaccine administration. We assessed the heterogeneity between studies with the I 2 statistical index.

Result

We selected 39 eligible citations comprising 806 cases and 336 controls for the first dose and 6314 cases and 927 controls for the second dose for statistical analysis. After the first dose of mRNA vaccines, the seroconversion rate was 36% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-0.47) and 68% (95% CI: 0.45-0.91) in hemodialysis patients and the control group, respectively. While seroconversion rate after the second dose of mRNA vaccines was 86% (95% CI: 0.81-0.91) and 100% (95% CI: 1.00-1.00) in hemodialysis patients and the control group, respectively.

Conclusion

Although the immune response of hemodialysis patients to the second dose of the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine is very promising, the seroconversion rate of dialysis patients is lower than healthy controls. Periodically assessment of antibody levels of hemodialysis patients at short intervals is recommended.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Kidney Transplant Candidates and Recipients

Kidney transplant candidates and kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) are at particular risk of severe complications of COVID-19 disease. In Western countries, mortality in affected hospitalized KTRs ranges between 19% and 50%. COVID-19 vaccination remains the most important measure to prevent the severity of infection in candidates and recipients of kidney transplant. However, the uraemic condition may affect the vaccine-induced immunity in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) and in KTRs. Retention of uraemic toxins, dysbiosis, dysmetabolism, and dialysis can diminish the normal response to vaccination, leading to dysfunction of inflammatory and immune cells. In KTRs the efficacy of vaccines may be reduced by the immunosuppressive medications, and more than half of kidney transplant recipients are unable to build an immune response even after four administrations of anti-COVID-19 vaccines. The lack of antibody response leaves these patients at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 disease. The aim of the present review is to focus on the main reasons for the impaired immunological response among candidates and kidney transplant recipients and to highlight some of the present options available to solve the problem.

Immune response after COVID-19 vaccination among patients with chronic kidney disease and kidney transplant

BACKGROUND

Vaccination of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and kidney transplants (KTs) may achieve a less robust immune response. Understanding such immune responses is crucial for guiding current and future vaccine dosing strategies.

METHODS

This prospective, observational study estimated the immunogenicity of humoral and cellular responses of two SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in different patient groups with CKD compared with controls. Secondary outcomes included adverse events after vaccination and the incidence of COVID-19 breakthrough infection, including illness severity.

RESULTS

In total, 212 patients received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (89.62 %) or inactivated vaccines (10.38 %).The antibody response against the S protein was analyzed at T0 (before the first injection), T1 (before the second injection), and T2 (12 weeks after the second injection). Seroconversion occurred in 92.31 % of controls at T2 and in 100 % of patients with CKD, 42.86 % undergoing KT, 80.18 % of hemodialysis (HD), and 0 % of patients undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) at T2 of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine. Neutralizing antibody levels by surrogate virus neutralization test were above the protective level at T2 in each group. The KT group exhibited the lowest neutralizing antibody and T cell response. Blood groups O and vaccine type were associated with good immunological responses. After the first dose, 14 individuals (6.6 out of the total population experienced COVID-19 breakthrough infection.

CONCLUSION

Immunity among patients with CKD and HD after vaccination was strong and comparable with that of healthy controls. Our study suggested that a single dose of the vaccine is not efficacious and delays may result in breakthrough infection. Some blood groups and types of vaccine can affect the immune response.

Antibody Responses of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines amongst Health Care Workers in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Tripura, India: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background

Vaccines against COVID-19 plays an important role in limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infections and also in curbing mortality and morbidity due to COVID-19.

Objective

To estimate the anti-spike antibody response after receiving the second dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines amongst health care workers of a tertiary care hospital in Tripura, India.

Materials and Method

A cross- sectional study was conducted from 1 July to 20 August 2021 at Agartala Government Medical College and GBP Hospital, Agartala among 561 health care workers who had received first and second doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and had completed 14 days after receiving the second dose.

Results

The present study showed that health care workers who had received both doses of COVID-19 vaccine had 99.5% seropositivity to anti-spike antibody. The median SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody titter was 250 with an IQR (211.55-250). Seropositivity rate was higher among Covishield recipients (99.8% [550/551]) as compared to Covaxin recipients (80% [8/10]) and it was found to be statistically significant (P = 0.000).

Conclusion

The present study suggests that a good immune response was elicited against spike antigen of SARS-CoV-2 after two complete doses of Covishield (ChAdOx1-nCoV-19) or Covaxin (BBV152).

Clinical Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Hemodialysis Patients

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic is a global public health problem. Patients with end-stage renal disease on hemodialysis are at a higher risk of infection and mortality than the general population. Worldwide, a vaccination campaign has been developed that has been shown to reduce severe infections and deaths in the general population. However, there are currently limited data on the clinical efficacy of vaccinations in the hemodialysis population.

METHODS

A national multicenter observational cohort was performed in Chile to evaluate the clinical efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in end-stage renal disease patients on chronic hemodialysis from February 2021 to August 2021. In addition, the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and CoronaVac (Sinovac) vaccines were evaluated. The efficacy of vaccination in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalizations, and deaths associated with COVID-19 was determined.

RESULTS

A total of 12,301 patients were evaluated; 10,615 (86.3%) received a complete vaccination (2 doses), 490 (4.0%) received incomplete vaccination, and 1196 (9.7%) were not vaccinated. During follow-up, 1362 (11.0%) patients developed COVID-19, and 150 died (case fatality rate: 11.0%). The efficacy of the complete vaccination in preventing infection was 18.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]:11.8-23.8%), and prevention of death was 66.0% (95% CI:60.6-70.7%). When comparing both vaccines, BNT162b2 and CoronaVac were effective in reducing infection and deaths associated with COVID-19. Nevertheless, the BNT162b2 vaccine had higher efficacy in preventing infection (42.6% vs. 15.0%) and deaths (90.4% vs. 64.8%) compared to CoronaVac.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study suggest that vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients on chronic hemodialysis was effective in preventing infection and death associated with COVID-19.

Immunogenicity and safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in hemodialysis patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Rationale and objective

COVID-19 vaccination is the most effective way to prevent COVID-19. For chronic kidney disease patients on long-term dialysis, there is a lack of evidence on the pros and cons of COVID-19 vaccination. This study was conducted to investigate the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients on dialysis.

Methods

PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systemically searched for cohort, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and cross-sectional studies. Data on immunogenicity rate, antibody titer, survival rate, new infection rate, adverse events, type of vaccine, and patient characteristics such as age, sex, dialysis vintage, immunosuppression rate, and prevalence of diabetes were extracted and analyzed using REVMAN 5.4 and Stata software. A random effects meta-analysis was used to perform the study.

Results

We screened 191 records and included 38 studies regarding 5,628 participants. The overall immunogenicity of dialysis patients was 87% (95% CI, 84-89%). The vaccine response rate was 85.1 in hemodialysis patients (HDPs) (1,201 of 1,412) and 97.4% in healthy controls (862 of 885). The serological positivity rate was 82.9% (777 of 937) in infection-naive individuals and 98.4% (570 of 579) in patients with previous infection. The Standard Mean Difference (SMD) of antibody titers in dialysis patients with or without previous COVID-19 infection was 1.14 (95% CI, 0.68-1.61). Subgroup analysis showed that the immunosuppression rate was an influential factor affecting the immunogenicity rate (P < 0.0001). Nine studies reported safety indices, among which four local adverse events and seven system adverse events were documented.

Conclusions

Vaccination helped dialysis patients achieve effective humoral immunity, with an overall immune efficiency of 87.5%. Dialysis patients may experience various adverse events after vaccination; however, the incidence of malignant events is very low, and no reports of death or acute renal failure after vaccination are available, indicating that vaccine regimens may be necessary.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42022342565, identifier: CRD42022342565.

Humoral Immune Response of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac Vaccinations in Hemodialysis Patients: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort

The CoronaVac vaccine is the most used anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine worldwide. Previous data indicate that this vaccine produces a lower immune response than RNA vaccines such as BNT162b2. End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients have an increased rate of COVID-19 and a reduced immune response to vaccinations. Currently, there is little data on this population’s immune response induced by CoronaVac. Methods: This study involved a prospective cohort of ESRD patients in chronic hemodialysis who received a two-dose immunization scheme of either CoronaVac (Sinovac Biotech) or BNT162b2 vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech). We measured the plasma levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. We determined antibody titers before immunization, 2 and 4 months after two doses, plus 4 months after a booster dose. Results: We evaluated 208 patients in three hemodialysis centers. The mean age was 62.6 ± 15.6 years, of whom 91 were female (41.75%). Eighty-one patients (38.94%) received the BNT162b2 vaccine and 127 (61.06%) received the CoronaVac vaccine. Patients who received the BNT162b2 vaccine had a higher humoral response compared to those who received the CoronaVac vaccine (4 months after the second dose: BNT162b2: 88.89%, CoronaVac: 51.97%, p < 0.001; 4 months after the booster: BNT162b2: 98.77%, CoronaVac: 86.61%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our results suggest that the CoronaVac vaccine induced a lower humoral response than the BNT162b2 vaccine in ESRD patients on hemodialysis.

The Waxing, Waning, and Predictors of Humoral Responses to Vector-Based SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Hemodialysis Patients

Hemodialysis (HD) patients are vulnerable to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and have a high mortality rate. We evaluated the anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody (ACOV2S) levels in 385 HD patients before and 4 and 8 weeks after the second dose of vector-based ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine. For study control, week 4 ACOV2S levels after the second vaccination dose were measured in 66 healthcare workers (HCWs). The seroconversion rate of HD patients was 98.96% 4 weeks after the second vaccination. Despite low antibody levels before the second dose (week 0), week 4 ACOV2S levels after the second vaccine dose in HD patients increased prominently and were compatible with those in HCWs (p = 0.814 for HCWs vs. HD patients). The ACOV2S levels in HD patients waned significantly 8 weeks after the second vaccination dose (p < 0.001 at week 8 vs. 4). Older age and immunosuppressant use were negative predictors, while higher C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were positive predictors of ACOV2S waxing after the second vaccine dose in HD patients. Higher CRP levels and platelet counts were independently associated with decreased ACOV2S waning. The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine is effective and safe for primary vaccination in HD patients and a booster dose is necessary.

Heterologous vector versus homologous mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccination in non-seroconverted immunosuppressed patients: a randomized controlled trial

Impaired response to COVID-19 vaccination is of particular concern in immunosuppressed patients. To determine the best vaccination strategy for this vulnerable group we performed a single center, 1:1 randomized blinded clinical trial. Patients who failed to seroconvert upon two mRNA vaccinations (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) are randomized to receive either a third dose of the same mRNA or the vector vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Primary endpoint is the difference in SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody seroconversion rate between vector and mRNA vaccinated patients four weeks after the third dose. Secondary outcomes include cellular immune responses. Seroconversion rates at week four are significantly higher in the mRNA (homologous vaccination, 15/24, 63%) as compared to the vector vaccine group (heterologous vaccination, 4/22, 18%). SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses are reduced but could be increased after a third dose of either vector or mRNA vaccine. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, patient age and vaccine type are associated with seroconversion. No serious adverse event is attributed to COVID-19 booster vaccination. Efficacy and safety data underline the importance of a booster vaccination and support the use of a homologous mRNA booster vaccination in immunosuppressed patients.Trial registration: EudraCT No.: 2021-002693-10.

Antibody Response and Adverse Events of AZD1222 COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients Undergoing Dialysis: A Prospective Cohort Study

This study observed the antibody response and adverse events of AZD1222 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) vaccination in dialysis patients. A prospective cohort study was conducted in E-Da Healthcare Group hospitals between 1 July and 30 November 2021. Patients receiving hemodialysis (HD, n = 204) or peritoneal dialysis (PD, n = 116) were enrolled alongside healthy subjects (control, n = 34). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD IgG antibodies were measured before the first vaccination (T0), four to six weeks afterwards (T1), one week before the second dose (T2), and four to six weeks afterwards (T3). Adverse events were recorded one week after each dose. The positive IgG rates in the HD (T1: 72%; T2: 62%) and PD (T1: 69%; T2: 70%) groups were lower than the control group (T1: 97%; T2: 91%), with lower median antibody titers. At T3, the positive antibody response rates (HD: 94%; PD: 93%; control: 100%) and titers were similar. Titers were higher after the second dose in all groups. Adverse events were more severe after the first dose and less common with HD than PD or controls. Dialysis patients exhibited lower antibody responses than controls after the first dose of the AZD1222 vaccine but achieved similar responses after consecutive vaccination. Age, health status, two vaccine doses, and alcohol consumption may influence antibody levels.