POS1285 IMMUNOGENICITY AND SAFETY OF THE CHADOX 1 COVID-19 VACCINE IN PATIENTS WITH AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES AND HEALTHY CONTROLS: DATA FROM SAFER STUDY

Background

Patients with autoimmune inflammatory diseases (AID) have been prioritized for urgent vaccination to mitigate COVID-19 risk. However, few studies in the literature assessed the immunogenicity and safety of the COVID-19 vaccine in patients with AID.

Objectives

In this context, the present study aims to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of the vaccine against COVID-19 in patients with AID.

Methods

These data are from “Safety and efficacy on COVID-19 Vaccine in Rheumatic Disease” - SAFER study, a Brazilian multicentric prospective phase IV study to evaluate COVID-19 Vaccine in AID, in the real-life, in Brazil. Immunogenicity and adverse events (AE) from a single center were assessed, after 2 doses of ChAdOx1 (Oxford/AstraZeneca), 8 weeks of interval, in patients with AID and healthy controls (HC). Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years and fulfilling criteria according to international classification for AID. Exclusion criteria: pregnancy, previous severe AE to any vaccine, other immunosuppression causes. Stratification of post-vaccination AE was performed using a diary, filled out daily and returned at the end of 28 days for each dose. Participants were followed up through blood collection for measurement of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain by chemiluminescence (SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay, Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL, USA) at baseline and 28 days after the second dose. The seropositivity was defined for titers ≥50 AU/mL. Quantitative analyses were presented as observed frequency, percentage, central tendency, and variability measurements. The sample’s normal distribution was verified through the Shapiro-Wilk test. The Kruskal-Wallis test and the post-hoc Dwass-Steel-Critchlow-Fligner pairwise comparisons test were used to compare the IgG-S titers between the groups through the evaluation period. Categorical data were addressed using the Fisher´s exact or Chi-squared (χ2) test. An alpha level of 5% significance was used in all analyses.

Results

A total of 377 volunteers with AID and 50 HC were included in the study. Patients with spondyloarthritis (N=64), systemic lupus erythematosus (N=63), rheumatoid arthritis (N=61), primary Sjögren’s syndrome (N=61), vasculitis (N=31), systemic sclerosis (N=14), inflammatory myopathy (N=9), Crohn´s disease (N=49), ulcerative colitis (N=11) and other systemics AID (N=12) were evaluated. Both groups had female predominance (73.5% vs. 74.0%, p=0.937) and were homogeneous for age (43.5 vs. 41.7,p=0.308). The seroconversion among those not reactive (IgG-S negative at baseline) (46 HC and 191 AID), 28 days after second dose was 97.1% for spondyloarthritis (p=0.425), systemic lupus erythematosus 88.2% (0.006), rheumatoid arthritis 93.5% (0.158), primary Sjögren’s syndrome 92.6% (0.133), systemic sclerosis or inflammatory myopathy 47.1% (0.001), inflammatory bowel disease 100% (0.999) and vasculitis 80% (0.006), while in healthy control was 100%. In comparison with HC, there was a statistically significant difference in IgG-S titles only in systemic sclerosis or inflammatory myopathy (1.694 AU/ml vs. 3.719 AU/ml; p=0.006). Both groups only presented mild AE. Pain at the injection (85.7% vs. 78.4%, p=0.239), headache (67.3% vs. 53.8, p=0.074) and fatigue (59.2% Vs. 46.2%, p=0.089) were more common in HC than AID. Overall, reactions like arthralgia (52.6 vs. 22.4%, p<0.001), hematoma (14.1 vs. 4.1%, p=0.05), cutaneous rash (9.5 vs. 0%, p=0.024) were more frequent in AID. Most participants related that they felt safer after receiving a COVID-19 vaccination, and 52.4% did not reported a worse patient global assessment (PGA) index.

Conclusion

In conclusion, our data indicated that ChAdOx1 vaccine is safe and induced high titers and seroconversion rate in AID. More severe AID, such as vasculitis, systemic lupus erythematosous, and systemic sclerosis and myositis showed a lower seroconversion rate. Further analysis will explore the association between immunossupressant and reactivity, and booster dose.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements to DECIT/MS and ICEPI/SESA for supporting the study.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

Brazilian version of the Berg balance scale

The purpose of the present study was to translate and adapt the Berg balance scale, an instrument for functional balance assessment, to Brazilian-Portuguese and to determine the reliability of scores obtained with the Brazilian adaptation. Two persons proficient in English independently translated the original scale into Brazilian-Portuguese and a consensus version was generated. Two translators performed a back translation. Discrepancies were discussed and solved by a panel. Forty patients older than 65 years and 40 therapists were included in the cultural adaptation phase. If more than 15% of therapists or patients reported difficulty in understanding an item, that item was reformulated and reapplied. The final Brazilian version was then tested on 36 elderly patients (over age 65). The average age was 72 years. Reliability of the measure was assessed twice by one physical therapist (1-week interval between assessments) and once by one independent physical therapist. Descriptive analysis was used to characterize the patients. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Pearson's correlation coefficient were computed to assess intra- and interobserver reliability. Six questions were modified during the translation stage and cultural adaptation phase. The ICC for intra- and interobserver reliability was 0.99 (P < 0.001) and 0.98 (P < 0.001), respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficient for intra- and interobserver reliability was 0.98 (P < 0.001) and 0.97 (P < 0.001), respectively. We conclude that the Brazilian version of the Berg balance scale is a reliable instrument to be used in balance assessment of elderly Brazilian patients.