American College of Rheumatology Guidance for COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases: Version 2

What the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic Has Taught Us About Immunosuppression, Vaccinations, and Immune Dysregulation: The Rheumatology Experience

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review reflects on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the field of rheumatology, emphasizing resulting insights related to the risks of viral infections in immunosuppressed patients, vaccine immunogenicity in immunocompromised patients, and immune dysregulation in the setting of viral infection.

RECENT FINDINGS

During the pandemic, global patient registries provided real-time insights into the risk factors associated with severe COVID-19 outcomes in rheumatology patients. Updated evidence-based recommendations from the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guided rheumatology practice during a time of considerable uncertainty. Studies on COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised populations enhanced our understanding of specific immunosuppressive therapies on vaccine efficacy. The immune dysregulation seen in severe COVID-19 underscored a role for immunomodulation in this and other severe infections. Furthermore, novel post-infectious conditions, namely multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) and Long COVID, reshaped our understanding of post-viral syndromes and revealed novel pathological mechanisms. Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrate the power of collaborative research. The scientific revelations from this dreadful time will, nonetheless, benefit the practice of rheumatology for years to come.

Analysis of factors involved in the development of humoral response to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with rheumatic pathology under biological treatment

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the development of new vaccines and their efficacy in patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases has been a target to investigate. The objective of this study is to evaluate the vaccine response rate in patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases under treatment with immunomodulators, including rituximab (RTX), as well as the influence of possible factors involved in the vaccination response in these patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A single-centre, prospective cohort study was conducted in 130 patients with immune-mediated rheumatic disease on treatment with immunomodulators, including RTX, who received the full course of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 with BioNTech/Pfizer, Moderna/Lonza, AstraZeneca, or Janssen between April and October 2021. Demographic factors such as age, sex, type of immune-mediated disease, immunomodulatory treatment and type of vaccine were analysed, as well as serological markers including anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels measured one and six months after vaccination, CD19+ lymphocyte levels and the presence or absence of hypogammaglobulinemia. A statistical analysis was performed to assess the influence of the different variables collected in the study on the antibody titres.

RESULTS

A sample of 130 patients was studied, 41 under treatment with RTX and 89 with other immunomodulators. A lower vaccination response rate was observed in patients with RTX (12/34, 36.7%) one month after the primary vaccination compared to 96.5% (82/85) of patients who did not receive this drug and did respond. In the analysis of secondary variables, hypogammaglobulinemia was significantly associated with lack of development of a vaccine response. The administration of the last RTX cycle in the 6 months prior to vaccination and low CD19+ levels (<20 mg/dL) also had a negative influence on the development of a vaccine response. In the group of patients who were not receiving RTX treatment, the vaccination response was like that observed in the general population. We did not observe statistically significant differences in the vaccine response based on immunomodulatory treatment other than RTX, concomitant corticosteroid treatment, type of immune-mediated pathology, age, or sex.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

In patients with rheumatic diseases receiving immunomodulatory treatment, the response to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is comparable to the general population, except in the case of patients receiving RTX, who have a lower response rate (around 36.7%) which is associated with factors such as hypogammaglobulinemia, pre-vaccination CD19+ lymphocyte levels, and a period between vaccination and the last dose of RTX of less than 6 months. It is important to take these factors into consideration to optimize vaccination in these patients.

Third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine in cardiothoracic transplant recipients: predictive factors for humoral response

BACKGROUND

We report the results of a prospective study on the immunogenicity of a 3rd dose of BNT162b2 in thoracic organ recipients with no or minimal response following a two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination scheme.

METHODS

A total of 243 transplant recipients received a homologue 3rd dose. Anti-SARS-CoV2-immunoglobulins (IgGs) were monitored immediately before (T1), 4 weeks (T2) as well as 2 and 4 months after the 3rd dose. Neutralizing antibody capacity (NAC) was determined at T2. To reveal predictors for detectable humoral response, patients were divided into a positive response group (n = 129) based on the combined criteria of IgGs and NAC above the defined cut-offs at T2-and a group with negative response (n = 114), with both, IgGs and NAC beyond the cut-offs.

RESULTS

The 3rd dose induced a positive humoral response in 53% of patients at T2, 47% were still non-responsive. Sero-positivity was significantly stronger in patients who presented with weak, but detectable IgGs already prior to the booster (T1), when compared to those with no detectable response at T1. Multivariable analysis identified age > 55 years, a period since transplantation < 2 years, a reduced glomerular filtration rate, a triple immunosuppressive regimen, and the use of tacrolimus and of mycophenolate as independent risk factors for lack of humoral response.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data indicate that a lack of immunogenicity is linked to the type and extent of maintenance immunosuppression. The necessity of the cumulative immunosuppressive regimen might individually be questioned and possibly be reduced to enhance the chance of an immune response following an additional booster dose.

Considerations for Pharmacologic Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis in the COVID-19 Era: a Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the impact of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on COVID-19 severity and vaccine immunogenicity and to discuss COVID-19 outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

RECENT FINDINGS

Rituximab is associated with severe COVID-19 and impaired vaccine immunogenicity via its B cell-depleting mechanism. JAK inhibitors and glucocorticoids have been modestly associated with severe COVID-19 and impaired vaccine immunogenicity. TNF inhibitors may have a protective effect against severe COVID-19 and do not appear to affect vaccine immunogenicity. Clinical trials have shown improved seroconversion and antibody titers when methotrexate is held around vaccine doses, but this may yield increased risk of RA flare. Patients with RA are also impacted by DMARD disruption, RA flares, and post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 after COVID-19 infection. Given the risks of COVID-19, rituximab should be used with caution in RA. Holding methotrexate doses around COVID-19 vaccination improves immunogenicity but may increase RA flare risk.

Efficacy of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines in patients with rheumatic diseases

Objectives

In this study, we report the immune response to the BNT162b2 vaccine and CoronaVac vaccine after a two-dose vaccination and the effects of conventional drugs, immunosuppressive drugs, and new-generation therapies on vaccine responses in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

Patients and methods

This is a prospective observational study conducted with 94 patients (65 males, 29 females; mean age: 42.7±12.1 years; range, 19 to 69 years) between May 2021 and January 2022. The immunogenicity of the two-dose regimens of the BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccines in adult patients with RMD was analyzed according to disease and treatments. Serum immunoglobulin G antibody levels against SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) spike proteins were measured four weeks after the second dose of vaccines.

Results

Patients on regimens including mycophenolate, rituximab, and steroids were less likely to develop an antibody response (p=0.001, p=0.06, and p=0.001, respectively). Impairment of vaccine response by other conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and by anti-tumor necrosis factor treatments was not shown. Younger participants appeared more likely to develop an antibody response. The CoronaVac vaccine was less likely to develop an antibody response compared to the BNT162b2 vaccine (p=0.002). Systemic lupus erythematosus and vasculitis had the lowest antibody titers compared to other RMDs.

Conclusion

Patients receiving mycophenolate mofetil, rituximab, and steroids should be warned about the risk of a suboptimal vaccine response. If possible, vaccination strategies should be changed, and the dose modification of drugs should be made during the vaccination. Further studies are required to determine the responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and optimization of vaccine response in patients with RMDs.

Effectiveness of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and the need for alternative preventative approaches in immunocompromised individuals: a narrative review of systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

Vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), including administration of booster doses, continues to be the most effective method for controlling COVID-19-related complications including progression to severe illness and death.However, there is mounting evidence that more needs to be done to protect individuals with compromised immune function.

AREAS COVERED

Here, we review the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in immunocompromised patients, including those with primary immunodeficiencies, HIV, cancer (including hematological malignancies), solid organ transplant recipients and chronic kidney disease, as reported in systematic reviews/meta-analyses published over a 12-month period in PubMed. Given the varied responses to vaccination patients with compromised immune function, a major goal of this analysis was to try to identify specific risk-factors related to vaccine failure.

EXPERT OPINION

COVID-19 remains a global problem, with new variants of concern emerging at regular intervals. There is an ongoing need for optimal vaccine strategies to combat the pandemic. In addition, alternative treatment approaches are needed for immunocompromised patients who may not mount an adequate immune response to current COVID-19 vaccines. Identification of high-risk patients, and the introduction of newer antiviral approaches such as monoclonal antibodies, will offer physicians therapeutic options for such vulnerable individuals.

How do COVID-19 vaccines affect rheumatic diseases?

Objectives: This study aims to investigate the effects of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines administered in Türkiye on disease activity and the side effects in the patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease (IRD).

Patients and methods: Between September 2021 and February 2022, a total of 536 patients with IRD (225 males, 311 females; mean age: 50.5±12.6 years; range, 18 to 93 years) who were vaccinated against COVID-19 and followed in the outpatient setting were included in the study. Vaccination status of the patients and whether they had COVID-19 were questioned. All patients were asked to rate their anxiety about the vaccination on a scale of 0-10 before and after the shots. They were asked whether they experienced any side effects and an increase in IRD complaints after vaccination.

Results: A total of 128 (23.9%) patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 before the first vaccination. Totally, 180 (33.6%) patients were vaccinated with CoronaVac (Sinovac) and 214 (39.9%) patients with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech). Also, 142 (26.5%) patients were given both vaccines. When the anxiety level of the patients before the first vaccination was questioned, 53.4% reported that they had no anxiety. The rate of patients without any anxiety after vaccination was 67.9%. Comparison of pre- (median Q3=6) and post-vaccine (median Q3=1) anxiety values showed a statistically significant difference (p<0.001). A total of 283 (52.8%) patients reported side effects after vaccination. When both vaccines were compared with each other, the rate of the side effects was higher in the BNT162b2 group (p<0.001) and also in the CoronaVac plus BNT162b2 group (p=0.022). There was no statistically significant difference between BNT162b2 and CoronaVac plus BNT162b2 in terms of side effects (p=0.066). Forty-five (8.4%) patients had increased rheumatic complaints after vaccination.

Conclusion: The lack of a significant increase in disease activity after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with IRD and the absence of serious side effects requiring hospitalization support the safety of vaccines in this patient group.

Physicians' Agreement on and Implementation of the 2019 European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology Vaccination Guideline: An International Survey

Objective

To evaluate the perspective of healthcare professionals towards the 2019 European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) vaccination guideline in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD).

Methods

Healthcare professionals who care for patients with AIIRD were invited to participate in an online survey regarding their perspective on the 2019 update of the EULAR recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with AIIRD. Level of agreement and implementation of the 6 overarching principles and 9 recommendations were rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1~5).

Results

Survey responses of 371 healthcare professionals from Asia (42.2%) and North America (41.6%), Europe (13.8%), and other countries were analyzed. Only 16.3% of participants rated their familiarity with the 2019 EULAR guideline as 5/5 ("very well"). There was a high agreement (≥4/5 rating) with the overarching principles, except for the principles applying to live-attenuated vaccines. There was a high level of agreement with the recommendations regarding influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations; implementation of these recommendations was also high. Participants also reported a high level of agreement with the remaining recommendations but did not routinely implement these recommendations.

Conclusion

The 2019 update of EULAR recommendations for the vaccination of adult patients with AIIRD is generally thought to be important by healthcare professionals, although implementation of adequate vaccination is often lacking. Better education of healthcare providers may be important to optimize the vaccination coverage for patients with AIIRD.

Rheumatic disease patient decision-making about COVID-19 vaccination: a qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Although patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) are at increased risk for adverse outcomes of COVID-19 illness compared to healthy controls, they also have lower rates of willingness to be vaccinated. Previous research has identified reasons for vaccine hesitancy among patients with RMDs (such as concerns about side effects and flares), but little is known about what these reasons mean in the context of patients' lives, or how vaccine decision making is experienced from a patient perspective. Our objective was to describe decision-making about COVID-19 vaccination among RMD patients.

METHODS

Participants in a RMD registry were invited to complete monthly online surveys regarding COVID-19 vaccination from March-June 2021. We qualitatively analyzed comments from two open-ended survey questions reporting general experiences with vaccination and side effects. Comments were coded for attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine access, rheumatologic medication management around vaccination, and vaccine side effects. Themes were identified for the process and context of COVID-19 vaccine decisions, patient motivations for receiving or avoiding vaccination, and consistency of peri-vaccine medication management with current ACR guidelines.

RESULTS

We analyzed 710 comments from 537 respondents. Commenting respondents had a mean age of 64 years, were 87% female, 94% white, and 93% received/intended to receive ≥ 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Desire for protection and a return to normal routines motivated some commenters to get vaccinated, while concerns about vaccine side effects motivated others to delay or avoid vaccination. Several commenters reported disease flares following vaccination. Some commenters did not consult their providers about vaccination and failed to withhold immunomodulatory medications during vaccination, while others withheld medications more conservatively than recommended by current ACR guidelines, either on their own or directed by their provider.

CONCLUSIONS

While most commenters were vaccine-accepting, challenges to COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the RMD population may include fears of side effects, including worsened RMD symptoms, and perceptions that vaccination is unnecessary. Addressing these concerns and beliefs may be critical for promoting vaccination in this population.

Humoral and cellular immune response to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 vaccine in adolescents with rheumatic diseases

BACKGROUND

Data about safety and efficacy of the mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in adolescents with rheumatic diseases (RD) is scarce and whether these patients generate a sufficient immune response to the vaccine remains an outstanding question.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate safety and humoral and cellular immunity of the BNT162b2 vaccine in adolescents 12 to 18 years with RD and immunosuppressive treatment compared with a healthy control group.

METHODS

Adolescents from 12 to 18 years with RD followed at Hospital La Paz in Madrid (n = 40) receiving the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination were assessed 3 weeks after complete vaccination. Healthy adolescents served as controls (n = 24). Humoral response was measured by IgG antiSpike antibodies, and cellular response by the quantity of IFN-γ and IL-2 present in whole blood stimulated with SARS-CoV-2 Spike and M proteins.

RESULTS

There were no differences in spike-specific humoral or cellular response between groups (median IFN-γ response to S specific protein; 528.80 pg/ml in controls vs. 398.44 in RD patients, p 0.78, and median IL-2 response in controls: 635.68 pg/ml vs. 497.30 in RD patients, p 0.22. The most frequent diagnosis was juvenile idiopathic arthritis (26/40, 65%) followed by Lupus (6/40, 15%). 60% of cases (23/40) received TNF inhibitors and 35% (14/40) methotrexate. 40% of patients (26/64) had previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, 9 in the control group and 17 in the RD patients without differences. Of note, 70% of infections were asymptomatic. A higher IFN-γ production was found in COVID-19 recovered individuals than in naive subjects in both groups (controls: median 859 pg/ml in recovered patients vs. 450 in naïve p 0.017, and RD patients: 850 in recovered vs. 278 in naïve p 0.024). No serious adverse events or flares were reported following vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that standard of care treatment for adolescents with RD including TNF inhibitors and methotrexate did not affect the humoral and the cellular immunity to BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination compared to a healthy control group. The previous contact with SARS-CoV-2 was the most relevant factor in the immune response.

Response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease depends on immunosuppressive regimen: a matched, prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the humoral response to messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine of patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD) and the effect of immunosuppressive medication in a matched cohort study.

METHODS

Patients with SARD were enrolled and matched 1:1 for sex and age with healthy control (HC) subjects. Differences in humoral response to two doses of an mRNA vaccine in terms of seroconversion rate (SCR) and SARS-CoV-2 antibody level between the two groups and the impact of treatment within patients with SARD were assessed.

RESULTS

We enrolled 82 patients with SARD and 82 matched HC. SCR after the first dose was lower among the patient group than that of HC (65% compared with 100% in HC, p<0.0001) but levelled up after the second dose (94% vs 100%). After the second dose, SCR was lower for patients on combination disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy compared with all other groups (81% compared with 95% for monotherapy, p=0.01; 100% for both no DMARD therapy and HC, both p<0.0001). In addition, antibody levels after both doses were lower in patients compared with HC. We found that vaccination response was determined primarily by the number of DMARDs and/or glucocorticoids received, with patients receiving combination therapy (dual and triple therapy) showing the poorest response.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with SARD showed a good response after the second vaccination with an mRNA vaccine. However, the choice of immunosuppressive medication has a marked effect on both SCR and overall antibody level, and the number of different immunomodulatory therapies determines vaccination response.

Predictors of Immunogenic Response to the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Autoimmune Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases Treated with Rituximab

Treatment with rituximab (RTX) blunts SARS-CoV-2 vaccination-induced humoral response. We sought to identify predictors of a positive immunogenic response to the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD) treated with RTX (AIIRD-RTX). We analyzed 108 AIIRD-RTX patients and 122 immunocompetent controls vaccinated with BNT162b2 mRNA participating in a multicenter vaccination study. Immunogenicity was defined by positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG. We used a stepwise backward multiple logistic regression to identify predicting factors for a positive immunogenic response to vaccination and develop a predicting calculator, further validated in an independent cohort of AIIRD-RTX BNT162b2 mRNA vaccinated patients (n = 48). AIIRD-RTX patients who mounted a seropositive immunogenic response significantly differed from patients who did not by a lower number of RTX courses (median (range) 3 (1–10) vs. 5 (1–15), p = 0.007; lower cumulative RTX dose (mean ± SD) 6943.11 ± 5975.74 vs. 9780.95 ± 7240.12 mg, p = 0.033; higher IgG level prior to last RTX course (mean ± SD), 1189.78 ± 576.28 vs. 884.33 ± 302.31 mg/dL, p = 0.002), and extended interval between RTX treatment and vaccination, 469.82 ± 570.39 vs. 162.08 ± 160.12 days, p = 0.0009, respectively. Patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis and inflammatory myositis had a low likelihood of a seropositive immunogenic response compared to patients with rheumatoid arthritis, odds ratio (OR) 0.209, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.046–0.96, p = 0.044 and OR 0.189, 95% CI 0.036–0.987, p = 0.048, respectively. Based on these findings, we constructed a calculator predicting the probability of a seropositive immunogenic response following BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination which performed with 90.5% sensitivity, 59.3% specificity, and 63.3% positive and 88.9% negative predictive values. In summary, the predicting calculator could guide clinicians for optimal timing of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination in AIIRD-RTX patients.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccines and disease flares after vaccines in children with rheumatic disease

OBJECTIVES

Wide spread availability of safe and effective vaccines for COVID-19 in all countries is the best hope to end the COVID-19 pandemic. However, in developing countries, the hesitancy of the society about vaccination is an important problem in terms of public health. This study aimed to investigate the acceptability and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccines in the pediatric population diagnosed with rheumatic disease, as well as the attitudes towards these vaccines.

METHODS

This is an observational, cross sectional, single center study. Pediatric patients with at least one diagnosis of rheumatic disease were included in this study to investigate patient and family acceptability and safety of COVID-19 vaccines.

RESULTS

A total of 228 patients with rheumatic disease were included in this study. Ninety nine (43.4%) of the patients were juvenile idiopathic arthritis. One hundred and five (46%) of the patients were using biological agent treatment for their rheumatic disease, whereas 123 (54%) of the patients were not. No serious adverse effect related to the COVID-19 vaccine were observed in any of the patients. No disease activation was observed in any of them.

CONCLUSION

There are only a few studies evaluating of the safety and disease flare of COVID-19 vaccines in children with rheumatic disease. Although this study has some limitations, such as the small sample size of patients with different diagnoses, it appears that there is no increase in COVID-19 vaccination-related harms in the patients with rheumatic disease.

Antibody response to the COVID-19 ChAdOx1nCov-19 and BNT162b vaccines after temporary suspension of DMARD therapy in immune-mediated inflammatory disease (RESCUE)

OBJECTIVE

To assess the antibody response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy after the first and second dose of the ChAdOx1nCov-19 (AstraZeneca (AZ)) and BNT162b (Pfizer) vaccines in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease (IMID) compared with controls and if withholding therapy following the first vaccination dose has any effect on seroconversion and SARS-CoV-2 antibody (Ab) levels.

METHODS

A multicentre three-arm randomised controlled trial compared the immunogenicity of the Pfizer and AZ vaccines in adult patients on conventional synthetic (csDMARD), biologic (bDMARD) or targeted synthetic (tsDMARD) therapy for IMID (n=181) with a control group (n=59). Patients were randomised to continue or withhold DMARD therapy for 1-2 weeks post first dose vaccination only. Serum SARS-CoV-2 IgG detection (IgG ≥1.0 U/mL) and titres against the S1/S2 proteins were measured at baseline, 3-4 weeks post first vaccination and 4 weeks post second vaccination.

RESULTS

AZ vaccination was given to 47.5%, 41.5% and 52.5% in the continue, withhold and control groups, respectively while Pfizer vaccination was given to 52.5%, 58.5% and 47.5% among the continue, withhold and control groups, respectively. Seroconversion rates following the first dose in the AZ and Pfizer groups were only 27.3% vs 79.2% (p=0.000) and 64.58% vs 100% (p=0.000), respectively in the IMID groups who continued therapy compared with the AZ and Pfizer controls, respectively. Withholding DMARD therapy following the first vaccination dose resulted in higher seroconversion to 67.7% and 84.1% in the AZ and Pfizer groups, respectively. Following the second AZ and Pfizer vaccinations when all DMARDs were continued, despite a slightly lower seroconversion rate (83.7% vs 100%, p=0.000 and 95.9% vs 100%, p=0.413), respectively, the mean SARS-CoV2 IgG Ab titres were not significantly different in the csDMARD and bDMARD groups compared with the controls regardless of hold while it was significantly lower in patients taking tsDMARD (12.88 vs 79.49 U/mL, p=0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

Following the first vaccination dose, antibody responses were lower in IMID on DMARD therapy, however the final responses were excellent regardless of hold with the exception of the tsDMARD group where withholding therapy is recommended. At least 2 vaccinations are therefore recommended preferably with an messenger RNA vaccine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ANZCTR: 12621000661875.

Methotrexate significantly reduces the humoral vaccination response against SARS-CoV-2 in older but not younger patients with rheumatoid arthritis

To assess the humoral response to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with methotrexate (MTX). In total, 142 fully vaccinated individuals were included at 6 ± 1 weeks after their second vaccination [BioNTech/Pfizer (70.4%), AstraZeneca (20.4%), and Moderna (9.2%)]. The primary goal was to assess the humoral immune response as measured by titres of neutralising antibodies against the S1 antigen of SARS-CoV-2. In a cross-sectional, single-centre study, titres were compared between patient subgroups with (n = 80) and without (n = 62) methotrexate exposure. MTX patients showed a significantly reduced humoral response to vaccination in the oldest patient subgroup (> 70 years: P = 0.038), whereas titres of neutralising antibodies were not significantly different between MTX and non-MTX patients in patients less than 70 years of age (< 56 years: P = 0.234; 56–70 years: P = 0.446). In patients > 70 years, non-MTX patients showed a maximum immune response in 76.5% of cases, whereas this percentage was reduced to 53.7% in study participants on MTX medication (effect size d = 0.21). Older age in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in combination with methotrexate results in a significantly reduced humoral response after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Our data underline the importance of age regarding the humoral response and may support the temporary cessation of methotrexate, particularly in elderly patients in the context of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2.

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

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

Gout and the risk of COVID-19 diagnosis and death in the UK Biobank: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data on outcomes for people with gout and COVID-19. We aimed to assess whether gout is a risk factor for diagnosis of COVID-19 and COVID-19-related death, and to test for sex- and drug-specific differences in risk.

METHODS

We used data from the UK Biobank, which included 15 871 people with gout. We used multivariable-adjusted logistic regression in the following analyses using a case-control study design: to test for an association between gout and COVID-19 diagnosis in the entire UK Biobank cohort (n=459 837); to test for an association between gout and COVID-19-related death in people who were known to have died or survived with COVID-19 (n=15 772); to test for an association between gout and COVID-19-related death in the entire UK Biobank cohort (n=459 837); and to assess risk of COVID-19-related death in a subset of patients from the UK Biobank cohort with prescription data, stratified by prescription of urate-lowering therapy and colchicine (n=341 398). Models 1 and 2 were adjusted for age group, sex, ethnicity, Townsend deprivation index, BMI, and smoking status. Model 2 was also adjusted for diagnosis of 16 other diseases that are established comorbidities of gout or established risk factors for COVID-19-related death.

FINDINGS

Gout was associated with diagnosis of COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR] 1·20, 95% CI 1·11-1·29) but not with risk of COVID-19-related death in the cohort of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (1·20, 0·96-1·51). In the entire cohort, gout was associated with COVID-19-related death (1·29, 1·06-1·56); women with gout had an increased risk of COVID-19-related death (1·98, 1·34-2·94), whereas men with gout did not (1·16, 0·93-1·45). We found no significant differences in the risk of COVID-19-related death according to prescription of urate-lowering therapy or colchicine. When patients with gout were stratified by vaccination status, the risk of diagnosis with COVID-19 was significant in the non-vaccinated group (1·21, 1·11-1·30) but not the vaccinated group (1·09, 0·65-1·85).

INTERPRETATION

Gout is a risk factor for COVID-19-related death in the UK Biobank cohort, with an increased risk in women with gout, which was driven by risk factors independent of the metabolic comorbidities of gout.

FUNDING

Health Research Council of New Zealand.

Humoral and Cellular Immunogenicity and Safety of Five Different SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Patients With Autoimmune Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases in Remission or With Low Disease Activity and in Healthy Controls: A Single Center Study

Background

Vaccine-induced immunity is essential for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Data on humoral and cellular immunogenicity and safety of different SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with autoimmune rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) are limited.

Methods

A single center observational study evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of the two-dose regimen of the BBIBP-CorV inactivated, Gam-COVID-Vac and AZD1222 adenovirus-based, and BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 mRNA-based vaccines in patients with RMDs (n = 89) compared with healthy controls (n = 74). Neutralizing anti-RBD (receptor binding domain) specific antibodies and SARS-CoV-2 specific T-cell response were measured one and four months after the second vaccine dose in parallel with vaccination efficacy and safety.

Results

Disease-specific comparison showed that antibody response at four months was higher in spondylarthropathies compared to rheumatoid arthritis and autoimmune RMDs. Risk factors for reduced immunogenicity included longer disease duration, positive immunoserological profile and anti-CD20 therapy of patients. The rate of positive anti-RBD antibody response for healthy controls versus patients after 4 months post vaccination was 69% vs. 55% for the inactivated viral vaccine BBIBP-CorV, 97% vs. 53% for the pooled data of adenovirus vector-based vaccines Gam-COVID-Vac and AZD1222, or 100% vs. 81% for the pooled data of mRNA vaccines BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively. Patients who received the Gam-COVID-Vac or mRNA-1273 vaccines had a higher proportion of TNF-α producing CD4+ T-cells upon SARS-CoV-2 antigen stimulation compared to the inactivated viral vaccine.

Conclusion

All five investigated vaccines were immunogenic in the majority of patients and healthy controls with variable antibody and T-cell response and an acceptable safety profile.

Increment of immunogenicity after third dose of a homologous inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in a large population of patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases

Objective

To determine the immunogenicity of the third dose of CoronaVac vaccine in a large population of patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) and the factors associated with impaired response.

Methods

Adult patients with ARD and age-balanced/sex-balanced controls (control group, CG) previously vaccinated with two doses of CoronaVac received the third dose at D210 (6 months after the second dose). The presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG and neutralising antibodies (NAb) was evaluated previously to vaccination (D210) and 30 days later (D240). Patients with controlled disease suspended mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) for 7 days or methotrexate (MTX) for 2 weekly doses after vaccination.

Results

ARD (n=597) and CG (n=199) had comparable age (p=0.943). Anti-S1/S2 IgG seropositivity rates significantly increased from D210 (60%) to D240 (93%) (p<0.0001) in patients with ARD. NAb positivity also increased: 38% (D210) vs 81.4% (D240) (p<0.0001). The same pattern was observed for CG, with significantly higher frequencies for both parameters at D240 (p<0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analyses in the ARD group revealed that older age (OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.0, p=0.024), vasculitis diagnosis (OR=0.24, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.53, p<0.001), prednisone ≥5 mg/day (OR=0.46, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.77, p=0.003), MMF (OR=0.30, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.61, p<0.001) and biologics (OR=0.27, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.46, p<0.001) were associated with reduced anti-S1/S2 IgG positivity. Similar analyses demonstrated that prednisone ≥5 mg/day (OR=0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.90, p=0.011), abatacept (OR=0.39, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.74, p=0.004), belimumab (OR=0.29, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.67, p=0.004) and rituximab (OR=0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.30, p<0.001) were negatively associated with NAb positivity. Further evaluation of COVID-19 seronegative ARD at D210 demonstrated prominent increases in positivity rates at D240 for anti-S1/S2 IgG (80.5%) and NAb (59.1%) (p<0.0001).

Conclusions

We provide novel data on a robust response to the third dose of CoronaVac in patients with ARD, even in those with prevaccination COVID-19 seronegative status. Drugs implicated in reducing immunogenicity after the regular two-dose regimen were associated with non-responsiveness after the third dose, except for MTX.

Trial registration numberNCT04754698.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and practical points in psoriasis patients: a narrative review

SARS‐CoV2 vaccines were approved without long‐term monitoring due to emergent situations. This has raised some issues about timing and protocol of receiving vaccines in specific situations including patients with chronic inflammatory disorders such as psoriasis. Here, we present different aspects of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and vaccination in psoriasis patients and aim to provide solutions to overcome the potential challenges. In brief, the benefits of vaccination outweigh the potential risk; vaccine‐triggered de novo or flares of psoriasis is uncommon. As such, all psoriasis patients, especially those receiving systemic treatments including anti tumor necrosis factor agents, are strongly recommended to get SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccines. It is recommended that new immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapies be initiated at least 1 week after the second SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine dose, if possible. In addition, in severe and active forms of psoriasis, it is better to delay vaccination until stabilization of the disease.

Modulation of immunosuppressant drug treatment to improve SARS-CoV-2 vaccine efficacy in mice

The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically demonstrated the need for improved vaccination strategies and therapeutic responses to combat infectious diseases. However, the efficacy of vaccines has not yet been demonstrated in combination with commonly used immunosuppressive drug regimens. We sought to determine how common pharmaceutical drugs used in autoimmune disorders can alter immune responses to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein vaccination. We treated mice with five immunosuppressant drugs (cyclophosphamide, leflunomide, methotrexate, methylprednisolone, and mycophenolate mofetil), each with various mechanisms of action prior to and following immunization with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. We assessed the functionality of antibody responses to spike protein and compared immune cell populations in mice that received no treatment with those that received continuous or temporarily suspended immune suppressive therapy. All tested immunosuppressants significantly reduced the antibody titers in serum and functional antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in immunized mice. Temporarily halting selected immunosuppressants (methylprednisolone and methotrexate, but not cyclophosphamide) improved antibody responses significantly. Through proof-of-principle experiments utilizing a mouse model, we demonstrated that immune suppression in autoimmune disorders through pharmaceutical treatments may impair vaccine response to SARS-CoV-2, and temporary suspension of immunosuppressant treatment may be necessary to mount an effective antibody vaccine response. This work provides feasibility for future clinical assessment of the impact of immunosuppressants on vaccine efficacy in humans.

Evaluation of Immune Response and Disease Status in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Patients Following SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate seroreactivity and disease flares after COVID-19 vaccination in a multiethnic/multiracial cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

METHODS

Ninety SLE patients and 20 healthy controls receiving a complete COVID-19 vaccine regimen were included. IgG seroreactivity to the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) and SARS-CoV-2 microneutralization were used to evaluate B cell responses; interferon-γ (IFNγ) production was measured by enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) assay in order to assess T cell responses. Disease activity was measured by the hybrid SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI), and flares were identified according to the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment-SLEDAI flare index.

RESULTS

Overall, fully vaccinated SLE patients produced significantly lower IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike RBD compared to fully vaccinated controls. Twenty-six SLE patients (28.8%) generated an IgG response below that of the lowest control (<100 units/ml). In logistic regression analyses, the use of any immunosuppressant or prednisone and a normal anti-double-stranded DNA antibody level prior to vaccination were associated with decreased vaccine responses. IgG seroreactivity to the SARS-CoV-2 spike RBD strongly correlated with the SARS-CoV-2 microneutralization titers and correlated with antigen-specific IFNγ production determined by ELISpot. In a subset of patients with poor antibody responses, IFNγ production was similarly diminished. Pre- and postvaccination SLEDAI scores were similar in both groups. Postvaccination flares occurred in 11.4% of patients; 1.3% of these were severe.

CONCLUSION

In a multiethnic/multiracial study of SLE patients, 29% had a low response to the COVID-19 vaccine which was associated with receiving immunosuppressive therapy. Reassuringly, severe disease flares were rare. While minimal protective levels remain unknown, these data suggest that protocol development is needed to assess the efficacy of booster vaccination.

Interleukin-1 Inhibitors and Vaccination Including COVID-19 in Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases: A Nonsystematic Review

Newly emerging variants of coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) raise concerns about the spread of the disease, and with the rising case numbers, the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a challenging medical emergency towards the end of the year 2021. Swiftly developed novel vaccines aid in the prevention of the spread, and it seems that a specific cure will not be at hand soon. The prognosis of COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune/autoinflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD) is more severe when compared to the otherwise healthy population, and vaccination is essential. Evidence for both the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in AIIRD under immunosuppression is accumulating, but the effect of Interleukin-1 on vaccination in general and in AIIRD patients is rarely addressed in the current literature. In light of the current literature, it seems that the level of agreement on the timing of COVID-19 vaccination is moderate in patients using IL-1 blockers, and expert opinions may vary. Generally, it may be recommended that patients under IL-1 blockade can be vaccinated without interrupting the anti-cytokine therapy, especially in patients with ongoing high disease activity to avoid disease relapses. However, in selected cases, after balancing for disease activity and risk of relapses, vaccination may be given seven days after the drug levels have returned to baseline, especially for IL-1 blocking agents with long half-lives such as canakinumab and rilonacept. This may help to ensure an ideal vaccine response in the face of the possibility that AIIRD patients may develop a more pronounced and severe COVID-19 disease course.

COVID-19 vaccine safety and nocebo-prone associated hesitancy in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To describe the rate and type of adverse effects (AEs) and the frequency of disease flares after COVID-19 vaccination and to assess the reasons for vaccination hesitancy (non-vaccination) in SRD patients.

METHODS

Telephone interviews were conducted of SRD patients consecutively enrolled (15/06/2021-1/7/2021). Participants were asked about the type of AEs and disease flare after vaccination. Reasons for vaccination hesitancy were recorded. Univariate and mutivariable analyses examined associations of demographic, clinical and other features, with occurrence of AEs, disease flare and non-vaccination. For the latter, association with negative vaccination behaviour (not influenza vaccinated for the last 2 years) and nocebo-prone behaviour (denoting AEs attributed to negative expectations [Q-No questionnaire]) was also tested.

RESULTS

561 out of 580 contacted patients were included in the study. 441/561 (78.6%) patients were vaccinated [90% (Pfizer, Moderna), 10% (Astra-Zeneca)]. AEs were reported by 148/441 (33.6%), with rates being comparable between the three vaccines. AEs were more common in females and those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [OR, 95% CI; females: 2.23 (1.30-3.83); COPD: 3.31 (1.24-8.83)]. Disease flare was reported in 9/441 (2%) patients. For those unvaccinated, fear that the vaccine would be harmful (53.3%), could cause disease flare (24.2%) and/or could cause thrombosis (21.7%) were the main reasons to do so. Multivariable analysis identified as independent variables for non-vaccination: nocebo-prone behaviour (OR; 95% CI, 3.88; 1.76-8.55), negative vaccination behaviour (6.56; 3.21-13.42) and previous COVID-19 infection (2.83; 1.13-7.05). Higher educational status was protective (0.49; 0.26-0.92).

CONCLUSION

No new safety signals for COVID-19 vaccination were observed. Vaccination campaign should target SRD patients with nocebo-prone and negative influenza vaccination behaviour.

The COVID-19 pandemic and ANCA-associated vasculitis - reports from the EUVAS meeting and EUVAS education forum

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic influenced the management of patients with anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis. A paucity of data exists on outcome of patients with vasculitis following COVID-19, but mortality is higher than in the general population and comparable to patients undergoing haemodialysis or kidney transplant recipients (reported mortality rates of 20-25%). Delays in diagnosis have been reported, which are associated with sequelae such as dialysis-dependency. Management of ANCA-associated vasculitis has not changed with the aim to suppress disease activity and reduce burden of disease. The use of rituximab, an important and widely used agent, is associated with a more severe hospital course of COVID-19 and absence of antibodies following severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2 infections, which prone patients to re-infection. Reports on vaccine antibody response are scarce at the moment, but preliminary findings point towards an impaired immune response, especially when patients receive rituximab as part of their treatment. Seropositivity was reported in less than 20% of patients when rituximab was administered within the prior six months, and the antibody response correlated with CD19⁺ B-cell repopulation. A delay in maintenance doses, if disease activity allows, has been suggested using a CD19⁺ B-cell guided strategy. Other immunosuppressive measures, which are used in ANCA-associated vasculitis, also impair humoral and cellular vaccine responses. Regular measurements of vaccine response or a healthcare-policy time-based strategy are indicated to provide additional doses ("booster") of COVID-19 vaccines. This review summarizes a recent educational forum and a recent virtual meeting of the European Vasculitis Society (EUVAS) focusing on COVID-19.

Evaluation of antibody response to BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in patients affected by immune-mediated inflammatory diseases up to 5 months after vaccination

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination with mRNA product BNT162b2 elicited high immunogenicity in healthy subjects in trials. This study aims to better understand the factors that influence the humoral immune response to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). We enrolled patients and healthy healthcare workers control group (HCW) that underwent mRNA BNT162b2 vaccination and measured the serum IgG anti-S-RBD response at booster dose (T1), one month after booster dose (T2) and up to 5 months (T3). Demographic, disease-specific and vaccination data were recorded. Vaccination response of 551 participants naïve to SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in HCW and 102 in the IMID group, analyzing separately those on anti-CD20. At T2 all naïve HCW developed anti-S-RBD-IgG, while 94% of IMID responded (p < 0.001). IMID patients had a significantly different level of IgG than HCW at both T1 (p = 0.031), T2 (p < 0.001), while there was no significant difference at T3. There were no statistically significant differences according to the IMID type or to ongoing treatment with immunosuppressants, corticosteroids or biological drugs other than anti-CD20. The proportion and magnitude of response was significantly lower in IMID treated with anti-CD20 drugs. There was a correlation with age at T1 and at T2 but not at T3, stronger in patients than in HCW. Immune response close after BNT162b2 vaccination is reduced in patients with IMID, but there is no significant difference at 5 months. The measured reduction is related to age and the disease itself rather than treatments, with the exception of anti-CD20 drugs.

Evaluation of antibody response to BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in patients affected by immune-mediated inflammatory diseases up to 5 months after vaccination

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination with mRNA product BNT162b2 elicited high immunogenicity in healthy subjects in trials. This study aims to better understand the factors that influence the humoral immune response to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). We enrolled patients and healthy healthcare workers control group (HCW) that underwent mRNA BNT162b2 vaccination and measured the serum IgG anti-S-RBD response at booster dose (T1), one month after booster dose (T2) and up to 5 months (T3). Demographic, disease-specific and vaccination data were recorded. Vaccination response of 551 participants naïve to SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in HCW and 102 in the IMID group, analyzing separately those on anti-CD20. At T2 all naïve HCW developed anti-S-RBD-IgG, while 94% of IMID responded (p < 0.001). IMID patients had a significantly different level of IgG than HCW at both T1 (p = 0.031), T2 (p < 0.001), while there was no significant difference at T3. There were no statistically significant differences according to the IMID type or to ongoing treatment with immunosuppressants, corticosteroids or biological drugs other than anti-CD20. The proportion and magnitude of response was significantly lower in IMID treated with anti-CD20 drugs. There was a correlation with age at T1 and at T2 but not at T3, stronger in patients than in HCW. Immune response close after BNT162b2 vaccination is reduced in patients with IMID, but there is no significant difference at 5 months. The measured reduction is related to age and the disease itself rather than treatments, with the exception of anti-CD20 drugs.

Effect of Immunosuppression on the Immunogenicity of mRNA Vaccines to SARS-CoV-2 : A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic inflammatory disease (CID) treated with immunosuppressive medications have increased risk for severe COVID-19. Although mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccination provides protection in immunocompetent persons, immunogenicity in immunosuppressed patients with CID is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the immunogenicity of mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with CID.

DESIGN

Prospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

Two U.S. CID referral centers.

PARTICIPANTS

Volunteer sample of adults with confirmed CID eligible for early COVID-19 vaccination, including hospital employees of any age and patients older than 65 years. Immunocompetent participants were recruited separately from hospital employees. All participants received 2 doses of mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 between 10 December 2020 and 20 March 2021. Participants were assessed within 2 weeks before vaccination and 20 days after final vaccination.

MEASUREMENTS

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) IgG⁺ binding in all participants, and neutralizing antibody titers and circulating S-specific plasmablasts in a subset to assess humoral response after vaccination.

RESULTS

Most of the 133 participants with CID (88.7%) and all 53 immunocompetent participants developed antibodies in response to mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, although some with CID developed numerically lower titers of anti-S IgG. Anti-S IgG antibody titers after vaccination were lower in participants with CID receiving glucocorticoids (n = 17) than in those not receiving them; the geometric mean of anti-S IgG antibodies was 357 (95% CI, 96 to 1324) for participants receiving prednisone versus 2190 (CI, 1598 to 3002) for those not receiving it. Anti-S IgG antibody titers were also lower in those receiving B-cell depletion therapy (BCDT) (n = 10). Measures of immunogenicity differed numerically between those who were and those who were not receiving antimetabolites (n = 48), tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (n = 39), and Janus kinase inhibitors (n = 11); however, 95% CIs were wide and overlapped. Neutralization titers seemed generally consistent with anti-S IgG results. Results were not adjusted for differences in baseline clinical factors, including other immunosuppressant therapies.

LIMITATIONS

Small sample that lacked demographic diversity, and residual confounding.

CONCLUSION

Compared with nonusers, patients with CID treated with glucocorticoids and BCDT seem to have lower SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-induced antibody responses. These preliminary findings require confirmation in a larger study.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, Marcus Program in Precision Medicine Innovation, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, and National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases.

Changes to ophthalmic clinical care during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Given the impact that society as a whole, and medicine specifically, has experienced as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, an examination of clinical care changes enacted in the field of ophthalmology is of interest to the specialty.

RECENT FINDINGS

In order to adapt to the reality of the COVID-19 pandemic, measures, such as broadening telehealth capabilities, adopting universal masking, careful sanitation procedures, applying virtual teaching in academic environments, and deferring elective surgeries were put in place. These were aimed at reducing person-to-person spread of SARS-CoV-2. Though best efforts were made at triaging ophthalmic emergencies during these times, unfortunate delays in care were observed in some circumstances. Finally, a prospective study interrogating the risk of spread at slit lamp distances for short periods of time was encouraging, suggesting low risk of transmissibility, though limited by a small case-positive sample size.

SUMMARY

Significant changes have been made in the design and delivery of ophthalmic care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some of these, such as telemedicine, may provide value in a postpandemic world.

Potential Triggers for Thrombocytopenia and/or Hemorrhage by the BNT162b2 Vaccine, Pfizer-BioNTech

Immune thrombocytopenia is an autoimmune disease that can cause bleeding in severe cases. Although available published data do not associate the BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) with the risk of developing thrombocytopenia, the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccine has raised concerns about its potential link with thrombosis and thrombocytopenia. We would like to clarify whether the BNT162b2 vaccine administration may interfere with pre-existing conditions and whether it may cause a risk of thrombocytopenia. Herein, we report three cases of post-vaccine thrombocytopenia among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA); one case in which a causal relationship cannot be ruled out with the BNT162b2 vaccine was officially announced. Furthermore, we reviewed reports of adverse events and death cases with a focus on thrombocytopenia and hemorrhages, following vaccination with BNT162b2 in Japan between February 17, 2021 and July 16, 2021, as reported by the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare within the general population. The three cases in this report share the common features of old age, RA, chronic renal failure or hypertension, and pre-existing mild thrombocytopenia at baseline. A total of 746 death cases were reported during this time period, with death by bleeding accounting for 8.8% of the total deaths, of which 84.8% were cranial and statistically higher in young women than among elderly women. The risk-benefit ratio of the vaccine needs to be reconsidered based on high- and low-risk population types and ethnicity. To do so, the expansion of the pharmacovigilance system for BNT162b2 vaccination is urgently required worldwide.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 Infection and Autoimmunity 1 Year Later: The Era of Vaccines

Impressive efforts have been made by researchers worldwide in the development of target vaccines against the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and in improving the management of immunomodulating agents. Currently, different vaccine formulations, such as viral vector, mRNA, and protein-based, almost all directed toward the spike protein that includes the domain for receptor binding, have been approved. Although data are not conclusive, patients affected by autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs) seem to have a slightly higher disease prevalence, risk of hospitalization, and death from coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) than the general population. Therefore, ARD patients, under immunosuppressive agents, have been included among the priority target groups for vaccine administration. However, specific cautions are needed to optimize vaccine safety and effectiveness in these patients, such as modification in some of the ongoing immunosuppressive therapies and the preferential use of mRNA other than vector-based vaccines. Immunomodulating agents can be a therapeutic opportunity for the management of COVID-19 patients; however, their clinical impact depends on how they are handled. To place in therapy immunomodulating agents in the correct window of opportunity throughout the identification of surrogate markers of disease progression and host immune response is mandatory to optimize patient's outcome.

To Be or Not To Be Vaccinated: That Is a Question in Myasthenia Gravis

Myasthenia gravis (MG) is an autoimmune disease characterized by muscle weakness and abnormal fatigability due to the antibodies against postsynaptic receptors. Despite the individual discrepancy, patients with MG share common muscle weakness, autoimmune dysfunction, and immunosuppressive treatment, which predispose them to infections that can trigger or exacerbate MG. Vaccination, as a mainstay of prophylaxis, is a major management strategy. However, the past years have seen growth in vaccine hesitancy, owing to safety and efficacy concerns. Ironically, vaccines, serving as an essential and effective means of defense, may induce similar immune cross-reactivity to what they are meant to prevent. Herein, we outline the progress in vaccination, review the current status, and postulate the clinical association among MG, vaccination, and immunosuppression. We also address safety and efficacy concerns of vaccination in MG, in relation to COVID-19. Since only a handful of studies have reported vaccination in individuals with MG, we further review the current clinical studies and guidelines in rheumatic diseases. Overall, our reviews offer a reference to guide future vaccine clinical decision-making and improve the management of MG patients.

ImmunosuppressiveTherapies Differently Modulate Humoral- and T-Cell-Specific Responses to COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients

Objective

To assess in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, treated with different immunosuppressive therapies, the induction of SARS-CoV-2-specific immune response after vaccination in terms of anti-region-binding-domain (RBD)-antibody- and T-cell-specific responses against spike, and the vaccine safety in terms of clinical impact on disease activity.

Methods

Health care workers (HCWs) and RA patients, having completed the BNT162b2-mRNA vaccination in the last 2 weeks, were enrolled. Serological response was evaluated by quantifying anti-RBD antibodies, while the cell-mediated response was evaluated by a whole-blood test quantifying the interferon (IFN)-γ-response to spike peptides. FACS analysis was performed to identify the cells responding to spike stimulation. RA disease activity was evaluated by clinical examination through the DAS28crp, and local and/or systemic clinical adverse events were registered. In RA patients, the ongoing therapeutic regimen was modified during the vaccination period according to the American College of Rheumatology indications.

Results

We prospectively enrolled 167 HCWs and 35 RA patients. Anti-RBD-antibodies were detected in almost all patients (34/35, 97%), although the titer was significantly reduced in patients under CTLA-4-inhibitors (median: 465 BAU/mL, IQR: 103-1189, p<0.001) or IL-6-inhibitors (median: 492 BAU/mL, IQR: 161-1007, p<0.001) compared to HCWs (median: 2351 BAU/mL, IQR: 1389-3748). T-cell-specific response scored positive in most of RA patients [24/35, (69%)] with significantly lower IFN-γ levels in patients under biological therapy such as IL-6-inhibitors (median: 33.2 pg/mL, IQR: 6.1-73.9, p<0.001), CTLA-4-inhibitors (median: 10.9 pg/mL, IQR: 3.7-36.7, p<0.001), and TNF-α-inhibitors (median: 89.6 pg/mL, IQR: 17.8-224, p=0.002) compared to HCWs (median: 343 pg/mL, IQR: 188-756). A significant correlation between the anti-RBD-antibody titer and spike-IFN-γ-specific T-cell response was found in RA patients (rho=0.432, p=0.009). IFN-γ T-cell response was mediated by CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Finally, no significant increase in disease activity was found in RA patients following vaccination.

Conclusion

This study showed for the first time that antibody-specific and whole-blood spike-specific T-cell responses induced by the COVID-19 mRNA-vaccine were present in the majority of RA patients, who underwent a strategy of temporary suspension of immunosuppressive treatment during vaccine administration. However, the magnitude of specific responses was dependent on the immunosuppressive therapy administered. In RA patients, BNT162b2 vaccine was safe and disease activity remained stable.

Anti-COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Autoimmune-Autoinflammatory Disorders and Primary/Secondary Immunodeficiencies: The Position of the Task Force on Behalf of the Italian Immunological Societies

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has represented an unprecedented challenge for humankind from health, economic, and social viewpoints. In February 2020, Italy was the first western country to be deeply hit by the pandemic and suffered the highest case/fatality rate among western countries. Brand new anti-COVID-19 vaccines have been developed and made available in <1-year from the viral sequence publication. Patients with compromised immune systems, such as autoimmune-autoinflammatory disorders (AIAIDs), primary (PIDs) and secondary (SIDs) immunodeficiencies, have received careful attention for a long time regarding their capacity to safely respond to traditional vaccines. The Italian Immunological Societies, therefore, have promptly faced the issues of safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy/effectiveness of the innovative COVID-19 vaccines, as well as priority to vaccine access, in patients with AIADs, PIDs, and SIDs, by organizing an ad-hoc Task Force. Patients with AIADs, PIDs, and SIDs: (1) Do not present contraindications to COVID-19 vaccines if a mRNA vaccine is used and administered in a stabilized disease phase without active infection. (2) Should usually not discontinue immunosuppressive therapy, which may be modulated depending on the patient's clinical condition. (3) When eligible, should have a priority access to vaccination. In fact, immunizing these patients may have relevant social/health consequences, since these patients, if infected, may develop chronic infection, which prolongs viral spread and facilitates the emergence of viral variants.

Rheumatology university faculty opinion on coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) vaccines: the vaXurvey study from Egypt

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present work was to explore the perspectives of Egyptian Rheumatology staff members as regards the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) vaccine.

METHODS

The survey is composed of 25 questions. Some questions were adapted from the global rheumatology alliance COVID-19 survey for patients.

RESULTS

187 rheumatology staff members across Egypt from 18 universities and authorizations actively participated with a valid response. The mean time needed to complete the survey was 17.7 ± 13 min. Participants were 159 (85%) females (F:M 5.7:1). One-third agreed that they will be vaccinated once available, 24.6% have already received at least one dose, 29.4% are unsure while 16% will not take it. Furthermore, 70.1% agreed that they will recommend it to the rheumatic diseases (RD) patients once available, 24.1% are not sure while 5.9% will not recommend it. RD priority to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in descending order include SLE (82.9%), RA (55.1%), vasculitis (51.3%), systemic sclerosis (39.6%), MCTD (31.6%), Behcet's disease (28.3%). The most common drugs to be avoided before vaccination included biologics (71.7%), DMARDs (44.4%), biosimilars (26.7%), IVIg (17.1%) and NSAIDs (9.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the study and specifically the low rate of acceptability are alarming to Egyptian health authorities and should stir further interventions to reduce the levels of vaccine hesitancy. As rheumatic disease patients in Egypt were not systematically provided with the vaccine till present, making the vaccine available could as well enhance vaccine acceptance. Further studies to investigate any possible side effects, on a large scale of RD patients are warranted.

Early experience of COVID-19 vaccination in adults with systemic rheumatic diseases: results from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Vaccine Survey

BACKGROUND

We describe the early experiences of adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received the COVID-19 vaccine.

METHODS

From 2 April to 30 April 2021, we conducted an online, international survey of adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received COVID-19 vaccination. We collected patient-reported data on clinician communication, beliefs and intent about discontinuing disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) around the time of vaccination, and patient-reported adverse events after vaccination.

RESULTS

We analysed 2860 adults with systemic rheumatic diseases who received COVID-19 vaccination (mean age 55.3 years, 86.7% female, 86.3% white). Types of COVID-19 vaccines were Pfizer-BioNTech (53.2%), Oxford/AstraZeneca (22.6%), Moderna (21.3%), Janssen/Johnson & Johnson (1.7%) and others (1.2%). The most common rheumatic disease was rheumatoid arthritis (42.3%), and 81.2% of respondents were on a DMARD. The majority (81.9%) reported communicating with clinicians about vaccination. Most (66.9%) were willing to temporarily discontinue DMARDs to improve vaccine efficacy, although many (44.3%) were concerned about rheumatic disease flares. After vaccination, the most reported patient-reported adverse events were fatigue/somnolence (33.4%), headache (27.7%), muscle/joint pains (22.8%) and fever/chills (19.9%). Rheumatic disease flares that required medication changes occurred in 4.6%.

CONCLUSION

Among adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received COVID-19 vaccination, patient-reported adverse events were typical of those reported in the general population. Most patients were willing to temporarily discontinue DMARDs to improve vaccine efficacy. The relatively low frequency of rheumatic disease flare requiring medications was reassuring.

COVID-19 vaccine use in immunocompromised patients: A commentary on evidence and recommendations

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

While COVID-19 vaccine emergency use authorization (EUA) deemed the vaccines to be effective and safe for public use, the phase 3 trials leading to EUA predominantly excluded patients with immunocompromising conditions. Immunocompromised patients make up a significant proportion of the population, and in light of recent mass vaccination efforts, we aim to review current evidence and recommendations of COVID-19 vaccines in 4 patient populations with immunocompromising disorders or conditions: human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, solid organ transplantation, rheumatoid arthritis, and inflammatory bowel disease.

SUMMARY

Given the evolving data on safety and efficacy of the approved COVID-19 vaccines in the immunocompromised population, it is vital that pharmacists and other immunizing providers understand the current data and recommendations and provide the public with accurate information. To date, the only immunocompromised subgroup included in phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine trials have been those with HIV infection. However, recent retrospective trials have provided reassuring safety data of the COVID-19 vaccine in immunocompromised patients, and the interim analysis of the Moderna phase 3 trial produced promising efficacy data on HIV-infected patients. Presently, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, British Society for Immunology, and various other governmental and professional societies and organizations endorse COVID-19 vaccination in the immunocompromised population.

CONCLUSION

While additional data is warranted to determine the effects of immunocompromising medical conditions and immunosuppressing medications on the efficacy of the vaccine, the benefits of the vaccine is anticipated to outweigh theoretical risks. Thus, the COVID-19 vaccine is recommended to be given to immunocompromised patients at this time, and providers should make efforts to decrease vaccine hesitancy in this population through education and reassurance.

Antibody response to inactivated COVID-19 vaccine (CoronaVac) in immune-mediated diseases: a controlled study among hospital workers and elderly

OBJECTIVE

To assess antibody response to inactivated COVID-19 vaccine in patients with immune-mediated diseases (IMD) among hospital workers and people aged 65 and older.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we studied 82 hospital workers with IMD (mean age: 42.2 ± 10.0 years) and 300 (mean age: 41.7 ± 9.9 years) controls. Among + 65 aged population, we studied 22 (mean age: 71.4 ± 4.5 years) patients and 47 controls (mean age: 70.9 ± 4.8 years). All study subjects had a negative history for COVID-19. Sera were obtained after at least 21 days following the second vaccination. Anti-spike IgG antibody titers were measured quantitatively using a commercially available immunoassay method.

RESULTS

Patients with IMD were significantly less likely to have detectable antibodies than healthy controls both among the hospital workers (92.7% vs 99.7%, p < 0.001) and elderly population (77.3% vs 97.9%, p = 0.011). Among patients with IMD, those using immunosuppressive or immune-modulating drugs (64/75, 85.3%) were significantly less likely to have detectable antibodies compared to those off treatment (29/29, 100%) (p = 0.029). Additionally, a negative association between age and the antibody titer categories among patients (r = - 0.352; p < 0.001) and controls (r = - 0.258; p < 0.001) were demonstrated.

CONCLUSIONS

Among hospital workers, the vast majority of patients with IMD and immunocompetent controls developed a significant humoral response following the administration of the second dose of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine. This was also true for the elderly population, albeit with lower antibody titers. Immunosuppressive use, particularly rituximab significantly reduced antibody titers. Antibody titers were significantly lower among those aged ≥ 60 years both in patient and control populations. Whether these individuals should get a booster dose warrants further studies.