B-cell reconstitution is strongly associated with COVID-19 vaccine responsiveness in rheumatic disease patients treated with rituximab

Microfluidic antibody profiling after repeated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination links antibody affinity and concentration to impaired immunity and variant escape in patients on anti-CD20 therapy

Background

Patients with autoimmune/inflammatory conditions on anti-CD20 therapies, such as rituximab, have suboptimal humoral responses to vaccination and are vulnerable to poorer clinical outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to examine how the fundamental parameters of antibody responses, namely, affinity and concentration, shape the quality of humoral immunity after vaccination in these patients.

Methods

We performed in-depth antibody characterisation in sera collected 4 to 6 weeks after each of three vaccine doses to wild-type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 in rituximab-treated primary vasculitis patients (n = 14) using Luminex and pseudovirus neutralisation assays, whereas we used a novel microfluidic-based immunoassay to quantify polyclonal antibody affinity and concentration against both WT and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variants. We performed comparative antibody profiling at equivalent timepoints in healthy individuals after three antigenic exposures to WT SARS-CoV-2 (one infection and two vaccinations; n = 15) and in convalescent patients after WT SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 30).

Results

Rituximab-treated patients had lower antibody levels and neutralisation titres against both WT and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants compared to healthy individuals. Neutralisation capacity was weaker against Omicron versus WT both in rituximab-treated patients and in healthy individuals. In the rituximab cohort, this was driven by lower antibody affinity against Omicron versus WT [median (range) KD: 21.6 (9.7-38.8) nM vs. 4.6 (2.3-44.8) nM, p = 0.0004]. By contrast, healthy individuals with hybrid immunity produced a broader antibody response, a subset of which recognised Omicron with higher affinity than antibodies in rituximab-treated patients [median (range) KD: 1.05 (0.45-1.84) nM vs. 20.25 (13.2-38.8) nM, p = 0.0002], underpinning the stronger serum neutralisation capacity against Omicron in the former group. Rituximab-treated patients had similar anti-WT antibody levels and neutralisation titres to unvaccinated convalescent individuals, despite two more exposures to SARS-CoV-2 antigen. Temporal profiling of the antibody response showed evidence of affinity maturation in healthy convalescent patients after a single SARS-CoV-2 infection, which was not observed in rituximab-treated patients, despite repeated vaccination.

Discussion

Our results enrich previous observations of impaired humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 in rituximab-treated patients and highlight the significance of quantitative assessment of serum antibody affinity and concentration in monitoring anti-viral immunity, viral escape, and the evolution of the humoral response.

COVID-19 vaccination in patients with rheumatic diseases leads to a high seroconversion rate and reduced self-imposed isolation and shielding behaviour

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the effect of a two-dose messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccine on antibody levels against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and patient behaviour and shielding concerning fear of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus or rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

Three hundred and three patients and 44 blood donors were included. All patients received two doses of an mRNA vaccine and had total antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 measured before vaccination and 2 and 9 weeks after the second vaccination. Further, patients answered an electronic questionnaire before and after vaccination concerning behaviour, anxiety, and symptoms of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9).

RESULTS

Significantly fewer patients (90%) had measurable antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 compared to blood donors (100%) after the second vaccination (P < .001). Treatment with rituximab was the strongest predictor of an unfavourable vaccine response, as only 27% had measurable antibodies. Nearly all patients (97%) not treated with rituximab experienced seroconversion. Prednisone and methotrexate had a negative effect on seroconversion, but no effect of age or comorbidity was observed. Patients experienced significant improvement after vaccination in 10 out of 12 questions regarding behaviour and fear of COVID-19, while no change in Patient Health Questionnaire-9 or anxiety was observed.

CONCLUSION

We find a very high seroconversion rate among rheumatic patients and reduced self-imposed isolation and shielding after COVID-19 vaccination.

Optimal time for COVID-19 vaccination in rituximab-treated dermatologic patients

Background

By depleting circulating B lymphocytes, rituximab time-dependently suppresses coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines’ humoral immunogenicity for a prolonged period. The optimal time to vaccinate rituximab-exposed immune-mediated dermatologic disease (IMDD) patients is currently unclear.

Objective

To estimate the vaccination timeframe that equalized the occurrence of humoral immunogenicity outcomes between rituximab-exposed and rituximab-naïve IMDD patients.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study recruited rituximab-exposed and age-matched rituximab-naïve subjects tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific immunity post-vaccination. Baseline clinical and immunological data (i.e., immunoglobulin levels, lymphocyte immunophenotyping) and SARS-CoV-2-specific immunity levels were extracted. The outcomes compared were the percentages of subjects who produced neutralizing antibodies (seroconversion rates, SR) and SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG levels among seroconverters. The outcomes were first analyzed using multiple regressions adjusted for the effects of corticosteroid use, steroid-spearing agents, and pre-vaccination immunological status (i.e., IgM levels, the percentages of the total, naïve, and memory B lymphocytes) to identify rituximab-related immunogenicity outcomes. The rituximab-related outcome differences with a 95% confidence interval (CI) between groups were calculated, starting by including every subject and then narrowing down to those with longer rituximab-to-vaccination intervals (≥3, ≥6, ≥9, ≥12 months). The desirable cut-off performances were &lt;25% outcome inferiority observed among rituximab-exposed subgroups compared to rituximab-naïve subjects, and the positive likelihood ratio (LR+) for the corresponding outcomes ≥2.

Findings

Forty-five rituximab-exposed and 90 rituximab-naive subjects were included. The regression analysis demonstrated a negative association between rituximab exposure status and SR but not with SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG levels. Nine-month rituximab-to-vaccination cut-off fulfilled our prespecified diagnostic performance (SR difference between rituximab-exposed and rituximab-naïve group [95%CI]: -2.6 [-23.3, 18.1], LR+: 2.6) and coincided with the repopulation of naïve B lymphocytes in these patients.

Conclusions

Nine months of rituximab-to-vaccination interval maximize the immunological benefits of COVID-19 vaccines while avoiding unnecessary delay in vaccination and rituximab treatment for IMDD patients.

Low Peripheral B-Cell Counts in Patients With Systemic Rheumatic Diseases Due to Treatment With Belimumab and/or Rituximab Are Associated With Low Antibody Responses to Primary COVID-19 Vaccination

Background: Immunosuppressive agents inhibit COVID-19 vaccine antibody (Ab) responses in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases. Rituximab may fully block Ab responses when B cells become undetected. The effect of detected but low number of B cells due to treatment with a B-cell agent (belimumab and/or rituximab) has not been established. Purpose: We sought to examine whether there is an association between a low number of B cells due to treatment with belimumab and/or rituximab and impaired primary COVID-19 vaccination spike Ab responses in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases. Methods: We retrospectively examined Ab responses to COVID-19 vaccinations, especially in relation to B-cell counts after treatment with belimumab and/or rituximab, in 58 patients with systemic rheumatic diseases: 22 on and 36 not on B-cell agents. We used Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests for comparison of Ab values between the groups and Fisher exact test for relative risk calculations. Results: Median (interquartile range) postvaccination Ab responses were lower in patients on versus those not on B-cell agents: 3.91 (0.77–20.00) versus 20.00 (14.32–20.00), respectively. Among patients on belimumab and/or rituximab, Ab responses of less than 25% of the assay’s upper limit were exclusively observed in those with B-cell counts lower than 40/µL. Patients with B-cell counts lower than 40/µL exhibit a relative risk of 6.092 (95% CI: 2.75–14.24) for Ab responses of less than 25% of the upper limit compared with patients not on B-cell agents. This relative risk remained significant, even after excluding patients with undetected B cells. Conclusion: This retrospective study found an association between low B-cell counts (less than 40/µL) and decreased Ab responses to primary COVID-19 vaccination in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases treated with belimumab and/or rituximab. Despite the small number of patients studied, these findings add to the accumulating evidence on the importance of B-cell count in predicting spike Ab responses to COVID-19 vaccination.

COVID-19 in patients with B cell immune deficiency

This article aims to describe the clinical manifestations and management of COVID-19 in patients with primary and secondary B cell deficient states. We describe the epidemiologic and clinical features as well as unique management paradigm including isolation precautions with COVID-19. We then focus upon primary and secondary preventive approaches including vaccination and pre- as well as post-exposure prophylaxis. Further, we elaborate upon the important disease specific risk factors in these patients and the need to conduct prospective clinical trials to develop individualized management strategies in this population.

Response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients receiving B-cell modulating antibodies for renal autoimmune disease

Background

Effective SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients receiving treatment with B-cell depleting agents is challenging. Information on vaccination responses in these patients are a valuable tool to develop efficient vaccination regimens.

Methods

In this single-center retrospective observational study, we report the humoral and cellular response in 34 patients receiving anti-CD20 antibody treatment for renal immune disease.

Results

After base immunization with SARS-CoV-2-vaccines, 92.0% developed a cellular, 32.4% a humoral response. Humoral immunity correlated with B-cell counts and the timespan between anti-CD20 antibody treatment and vaccination. All patients with > 21/µl B-cells, or > 197 days after treatment showed humoral response.

Conclusions

Adequate timing of SARS-CoV-2-vaccinations after anti-CD20 antibody treatment and CD19 measurements are crucial to generate immunity. Awaiting partial B-cell recovery by postponing regularly scheduled anti-CD20 treatment should be considered in patients with stable immune disease.

Trial registration: This study has been retrospectively registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00027049) on 29/10/2021.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07722-7.

Immunogenicity and safety of a fourth COVID-19 vaccination in rituximab-treated patients: an open-label extension study

OBJECTIVES

Patients under rituximab therapy are at high risk for a severe COVID-19 disease course. Humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are vastly diminished in B-cell-depleted patients, even after a third vaccine dose. However, it remains unclear whether these patients benefit from a fourth vaccination and whether continued rituximab therapy affects antibody development.

METHODS

In this open-label extension trial, 37 rituximab-treated patients who received a third dose with either a vector or mRNA-based vaccine were vaccinated a fourth time with an mRNA-based vaccine (mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2). Key endpoints included the humoral and cellular immune response as well as safety after a fourth vaccination.

RESULTS

The number of patients who seroconverted increased from 12/36 (33%) to 21/36 (58%) following the fourth COVID-19 vaccination. In patients with detectable antibodies to the spike protein's receptor-binding domain (median: 8.0 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL (quartiles: 0.4; 13.8)), elevated levels were observed after the fourth vaccination (134.0 BAU/mL (quartiles: 25.5; 1026.0)). Seroconversion and antibody increase were strongly diminished in patients who received rituximab treatment between the third and the fourth vaccination. The cellular immune response declined 12 weeks after the third vaccination, but could only be slightly enhanced by a fourth vaccination. No unexpected safety signals were detected, one serious adverse event not related to vaccination occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

A fourth vaccine dose is immunogenic in a fraction of rituximab-treated patients. Continuation of rituximab treatment reduced humoral immune response, suggesting that rituximab affects a second booster vaccination. It might therefore be considered to postpone rituximab treatment in clinically stable patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

2021-002348-57.

Immunogenicity, breakthrough infection, and underlying disease flare after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among individuals with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases

Many patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs) require immunosuppression to reduce disease activity, but this also has important possible detrimental impacts on immune responses following vaccination. The phase III clinical trials for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines did not include those who are immunosuppressed. Fortunately, we now have a clearer idea of how immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination has for the immunosuppressed, with much of the data being within a year of its introduction. Here, we summarize what is known in this rapidly evolving field about the impact immunosuppression has on humoral immunogenicity including waning immunity and additional doses, breakthrough infection rates and severity, disease flare rates, along with additional considerations and remaining unanswered questions.

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.

B cells: deplete, repopulate, vaccinate

In addition to the time since rituximab treatment, new results show that B cell reconstitution is important for response to vaccination in patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease.