Seroconversion rate after vaccination against COVID-19 in cancer patients-a systematic review

Immune response against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in cancer patients after COVID-19 vaccination during the Omicron wave: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients often have weakened immune systems, resulting in a lower response to vaccines, especially those receiving immunosuppressive oncological treatment (OT). We aimed to assess the impact of OT on the humoral and T-cell response to the B.1 lineage and Omicron variant following COVID-19 vaccination in patients with solid and hematological neoplasms.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study on cancer patients, stratified into OT and non-OT groups, who received a two-dose series of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine and a booster six months later. The outcomes measured were the humoral (anti-SARS-CoV-2 S IgG titers and ACE2-S interaction inhibition capacity) and cellular (SARS-CoV-2 S-specific T-cell spots per million PBMCs) responses against the B.1 lineage and Omicron variant. These responses were evaluated four weeks after the second dose (n = 98) and eight weeks after the booster dose (n = 71).

RESULTS

The humoral response after the second vaccine dose against the B.1 lineage and Omicron variant was significantly weaker in the OT group compared to the non-OT group (q-value<0.05). A booster dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine significantly improved the humoral response in the OT group, making it comparable to the non-OT group. The mRNA-1273 vaccine, designed for the original Wuhan strain, elicited a weaker humoral response against the Omicron variant compared to the B.1 lineage, regardless of oncological treatment or vaccine dose. In contrast, T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2, including the Omicron variant, were already present after the second vaccine dose and were not significantly affected by oncological treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer patients, particularly those receiving immunosuppressive oncological treatments, should require booster doses and adapted COVID-19 vaccines for new SARS-CoV-2 variants like Omicron. Future studies should evaluate the durability of the immune response and the efficacy of individualized regimens.

Managing and treating COVID-19 in patients with hematological malignancies: a narrative review and expert insights

Patients with hematologic malignancies (HMs) are at a significantly higher risk of contracting COVID-19 and experiencing severe outcomes compared to individuals without HMs. This heightened risk is influenced by various factors, including the underlying malignancy, immunosuppressive treatments, and patient-related factors. Notably, immunosuppressive regimens commonly used for HM treatment can lead to the depletion of B cells and T cells, which is associated with increased COVID-19-related complications and mortality in these patients. As the pandemic transitions into an endemic state, it remains crucial to acknowledge and address the ongoing risk for individuals with HMs. In this review, we aim to summarize the current evidence to enhance our understanding of the impact of HMs on COVID-19 risks and outcomes, identify particularly vulnerable individuals, and emphasize the need for specialized clinical attention and management. Furthermore, the impaired immune response to COVID-19 vaccination observed in these patients underscores the importance of implementing additional mitigation strategies. This may include targeted prophylaxis and treatment with antivirals and monoclonal antibodies as indicated. To provide practical guidance and considerations, we present two illustrative cases to highlight the real-life challenges faced by physicians caring for patients with HMs, emphasizing the need for individualized management based on disease severity, type, and the unique circumstances of each patient.

Vaccination of Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To guide the vaccination of adults with solid tumors or hematologic malignancies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and nonrandomized studies on the efficacy and safety of vaccines used by adults with cancer or their household contacts. This review builds on a 2013 guideline by the Infectious Disease Society of America. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2013, to February 16, 2023. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of 102 publications were included in the systematic review: 24 systematic reviews, 14 RCTs, and 64 nonrandomized studies. The largest body of evidence addressed COVID-19 vaccines.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The goal of vaccination is to limit the severity of infection and prevent infection where feasible. Optimizing vaccination status should be considered a key element in the care of patients with cancer. This approach includes the documentation of vaccination status at the time of the first patient visit; timely provision of recommended vaccines; and appropriate revaccination after hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, or B-cell-depleting therapy. Active interaction and coordination among healthcare providers, including primary care practitioners, pharmacists, and nursing team members, are needed. Vaccination of household contacts will enhance protection for patients with cancer. Some vaccination and revaccination plans for patients with cancer may be affected by the underlying immune status and the anticancer therapy received. As a result, vaccine strategies may differ from the vaccine recommendations for the general healthy adult population vaccine.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Chemotherapy and COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Gastrointestinal Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

Multiple doses of vaccines against the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) provide patients with cancer the opportunity to continue cancer treatment. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer and the optimal timing of vaccination during chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 131 patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer who received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine were included in this study. This study combined two cohorts: an evaluation cohort of 79 patients receiving chemotherapy and a control cohort of 52 patients under follow-up after radical surgery. None of the patients had any history of COVID-19. Treatment- and vaccine-related adverse events (AEs) were recorded through outpatient interviews and self-reports.

RESULTS

In the evaluation cohort, 62 patients (78.4%) experienced vaccine-related AEs after the first dose, and 62 patients (78.4%) experienced vaccine-related AEs with an increased rate of fever and fatigue after the second dose. In the control cohort, vaccine-related AEs occurred in 28 (53.8%) patients after the first dose and in 37 (71.2%) patients after the second dose, with increased fever and fatigue after the second dose. Of the 79 patients, 49 received chemotherapy before vaccination. Twelve patients (24.5%) changed their treatment schedule: four for safety reasons, four for myelosuppression, and four for convenience. Three patients discontinued the treatment because of disease progression.

CONCLUSION

Systemic chemotherapy in patients with GI cancer does not have a markedly negative effect on COVID-19 vaccination, resulting in manageable vaccine-related AEs, and minimizing the need for treatment schedule changes.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Survival and safety analysis of COVID-19 vaccine in Chinese patients with non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 disease (COVID-19) has caused a worldwide challenging and threatening pandemic. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) patients.

METHODS

Patient self-reported adverse events related to vaccines were recorded by follow-up through a uniform questionnaire. Survival analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method. A multivariate analysis was performed by the Cox proportional hazard regression model to determine the effect of each variable on the survival of lung cancer patients.

RESULTS

A total of 860 patients with NSCLC on treatment were enrolled. Mean age was 57 years in patients with early stage group and 62 years in advanced stage group. The vaccination rate was 71.11% for early-stage patients and 19.48% for advanced-stage patients; most of them (86.5%) received the COVID-19 inactivated virus (Vero cell) vaccine (Coronavac; Sinovac). The most common systemic adverse reaction was weakness. The main reason for vaccine refusal in those unvaccinated patients was concern about the safety of vaccination in the presence of a tumor and undergoing treatment (56.9% and 53.4%). The 1-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 100% for vaccinated and 97.4% for unvaccinated early-stage patients. Then we compared the progression-free survival (PFS) of vaccinated (median PFS 9.0 months) and unvaccinated (median PFS 7.0 months) advanced stage patients (p = 0.815). Advanced NSCLC patients continued to be divided into groups receiving radio-chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy, with no statistical difference in PFS between the groups (p > 0.05). The median overall survival (OS) of vaccinated patients was 20.5 months, and that of unvaccinated patients was 19.0 months (p = 0.478) in advanced NSCLC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccination is safe for Chinese NSCLC patients actively receiving different antitumor treatments without increasing the incidence of adverse reactions, and vaccination does not affect cancer patient survival.

A semi-quantitative visual lateral flow immunoassay for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection for the follow-up of immune response to vaccination or recovery

The lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) technique is largely employed for the point-of-care detection of antibodies especially for revealing the immune response in serum. Visual LFIAs usually provide the qualitative yes/no detection of antibodies, while quantification requires some equipment, making the assay more expensive and complicated. To achieve visual semi-quantification, the alignment of several lines (made of the same antigen) along a LFIA strip has been proposed. The numbering of the reacting lines has been used to correlate with the quantity of some biomarkers in serum. Here, we designed the first semiquantitative LFIA for detecting antibodies and applied it to classify the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 raised by vaccination or natural infection. We used a recombinant spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) as the specific capture reagent to draw two test lines. The detection reagent was selected among three possible ligands that are able to bind to anti-spike human antibodies: the same RBD, staphylococcal protein A, and anti-human immunoglobulin G antibodies. The most convenient detector, adsorbed on gold nanoparticles, was chosen based on the highest correlation with an antibody titre of 171 human sera, measured by a reference serological method, and was the RBD (Spearman's rho = 0.84). Incorporated into the semiquantitative LFIA, it confirmed the ability to discriminate high- and low-titre samples and to classify them into two classes (Dunn's test, P < 0.05). The proposed approach enabled the semiquantification of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 by the unaided eye observation, thus overcoming the requirement of costly and complicated equipment, and represents a general strategy for the development of semiquantitative serological LFIAs.

COVID-19 in cancer patients: patient characteristics and outcomes in the post-COVID-19 vaccination period

Background/aim

It wasaimed herein to investigate coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in cancer patients and compare hematological and solid organ cancer patients in terms of the course and outcome of this disease.

Materials and methods

Data from cancer patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection were analyzed retrospectively. Risk factors for poor prognosis and the effect of vaccination on the clinical outcomes of the patients were evaluated.

Results

A total of 403 cancer patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 1st, 2021, and November 30th, 2022, were included, of whom 329 (81.6%) had solid and 74 (18.4%) had hematological cancers. Hospitalization and intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates were significantly higher in the hematological cancer patients compared to the solid organ cancer patients (73.0% vs. 35.9%, p< 0.001 and 25.7% vs. 14.0%, p= 0.013, respectively). The COVID-19-related case fatality rate (CFR) was defined as 15.4%, and it was higher in the hematologicalcancer patientsthan inthe solid organ cancer patients (23.0% vs. 13.7%, p= 0.045) and was higher in patients with metastatic/advanced disease compared to the other cancer stages (p< 0.001). In the solid organ cancergroup, hospitalization, ICU admission, and the COVID-19 CFR were higher in patients with respiratory and genitourinary cancers (p< 0.001). A total of 288 (71.8%) patients had receivedCOVID-19 vaccination; 164 (56.94%) had≤2 doses and 124 (43.06%) had≥3 doses. The hospitalization rate was higher in patients with ≤2 doses of vaccine compared to those with ≥3 doses (48.2% vs. 29.8%,p= 0.002). Patients with COVID-19-related death had higher levels of leucocyte, neutrophil, D-dimer, troponin, C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, and ferritin and lower levels of lymphocyte than the survivors. In the logistic regression analysis,the risk of COVID-19-related mortality was higher in the hematological cancer patients(OR:1.726), those who were male (OR:1.757), and with the Pre-Delta/Delta variants (OR:1.817).

Conclusion

This study revealed that there is an increased risk of COVID-19-related serious events (hospitalization, ICU admission, or death) in patients with hematological cancerscompared with those who have solid organ cancers. It wasalso shown that receiving ≥3 doses of COVID-19 vaccine is more protective against severe illness and the need for hospitalization than ≤2 doses.

Outcomes of breakthrough COVID-19 infections in patients with hematologic malignancies

Patients with hematologic malignancies have both an increased risk for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections and higher morbidity/mortality. They have lower seroconversion rates after vaccination, potentially leading to inferior coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes, despite vaccination. We consequently evaluated the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 infections in 243 vaccinated and 175 unvaccinated patients with hematologic malignancies. Hospitalization rates were lower in the vaccinated group when compared with the unvaccinated group (31.3% vs 52.6%). However, the rates of COVID-19-associated death were similar at 7.0% and 8.6% in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients, respectively. By univariate logistic regression, females, older patients, and individuals with higher modified Charlson Comorbidity Index scores were at a higher risk of death from COVID-19 infections. To account for the nonrandomized nature of COVID-19 vaccination status, a propensity score weighting approach was used. In the final propensity-weighted model, vaccination status was not significantly associated with the risk of death from COVID-19 infections but was associated with the risk of hospitalization. The predicted benefit of vaccination was an absolute decrease in the probability of death and hospitalization from COVID-19 infections by 2.3% and 22.9%, respectively. In conclusion, COVID-19 vaccination status in patients with hematologic malignancies was associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization but not associated with a decreased risk of death from COVID-19 infections in the pre-Omicron era. Protective strategies, in addition to immunization, are warranted in this vulnerable patient population.

Effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with oncological diseases: State-of-the-art

Although the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was declared to be no longer “a public health emergency of international concern” with its wide range of clinical manifestations and late complications, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection proved to be a serious threat, especially to the elderly and patients with comorbidities. Patients with oncologic diseases are vulnerable to severe infection and death. Indeed, patients with oncohematological diseases have a higher risk of severe COVID-19 and impaired post-vaccination immunity. Unfortunately, cancer patients are usually excluded from vaccine trials and investigations of post-vaccinal immune responses and the effectiveness of the vaccines. We aimed to elucidate to what extent patients with cancer are at increased risk of developing severe COVID-19 and what is their overall case fatality rate. We also present the current concept and evidence on the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines, including boosters, in oncology patients. In conclusion, despite the considerably higher mortality in the cancer patient group than the general population, countries with high vaccination rates have demonstrated trends toward improved survival of cancer patients early and late in the pandemic.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHOD

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

RESULT

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

CONCLUSION

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

COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Cancer and Patients Receiving HSCT or CAR-T Therapy: Immune Response, Real-World Effectiveness, and Implications for the Future

Patients with cancer demonstrate an increased vulnerability for infection and severe disease by SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19. Risk factors for severe COVID-19 include comorbidities, uncontrolled disease, and current line of treatment. Although COVID-19 vaccines have afforded some level of protection against infection and severe disease among patients with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies, decreased immunogenicity and real-world effectiveness have been observed among this population compared with healthy individuals. Characterizing and understanding the immune response to increasing doses or differing schedules of COVID-19 vaccines among patients with cancer is important to inform clinical and public health practices. In this article, we review SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility and immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with solid tumors, hematologic malignancies, and those receiving hematopoietic stem cell transplant or chimeric-antigen receptor T-cell therapy.

Trends in Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and vaccine antibody prevalence in a multi-ethnic inner-city antenatal population: A cross-sectional surveillance study

OBJECTIVE

To determine severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) seroprevalence in pregnancy in an inner-city setting and assess associations with demographic factors and vaccination timing.

DESIGN

Repeated cross-sectional surveillance study.

SETTING

London maternity centre.

SAMPLE

A total of 906 pregnant women attending nuchal scans, July 2020-January 2022.

METHODS

Blood samples were tested for IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S) proteins. Self-reported vaccination status and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection were recorded. Multivariable regression models determined demographic factors associated with seroprevalence and antibody titres.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Immunoglobulin G N- and S-protein antibody titres.

RESULTS

Of the 960 women, 196 (20.4%) were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive from previous infection. Of these, 70 (35.7%) self-reported previous infection. Among unvaccinated women, women of black ethnic backgrounds were most likely to be SARS-CoV-2 seropositive (versus white adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.88, 95% CI 1.35-2.61, p < 0.001). Women from black and mixed ethnic backgrounds were least likely to have a history of vaccination with seropositivity to S-protein (versus white aRR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.84, p = 0.004; aRR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34-0.92, p = 0.021, respectively). Double vaccinated, previously infected women had higher IgG S-protein antibody titres than unvaccinated, previously infected women (mean difference 4.76 fold-change, 95% CI 2.65-6.86, p < 0.001). Vaccination timing before versus during pregnancy did not affect IgG S-antibody titres (mean difference -0.28 fold-change, 95% CI -2.61 to 2.04, p = 0.785).

CONCLUSIONS

This cross-sectional study demonstrates high rates of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with women of black ethnic backgrounds having higher infection risk and lower vaccine uptake. SARS-CoV-2 antibody titres were highest among double-vaccinated, infected women.

Updated COVID-19 clearance time among patients with cancer in the Delta and Omicron waves

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 infection delays therapy and in-person evaluation for oncology patients, but clinic clearance criteria are not clearly defined.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of oncology patients with COVID-19 at a tertiary care center during the Delta and Omicron waves and compared clearance strategies.

RESULTS

Median clearance by two consecutive negative tests was 32.0 days (Interquartile Range [IQR] 22.0-42.5, n = 153) and was prolonged in hematologic malignancy versus solid tumors (35.0 days for hematologic malignancy, 27.5 days for solid tumors, p = 0.01) and in patients receiving B-cell depletion versus other therapies. Median clearance by single negative test was reduced to 23.0 days (IQR 16.0-33.0), with recurrent positive rate 25.4% in hematologic malignancy versus 10.6% in solid tumors (p = 0.02). Clearance by a predefined waiting period required 41 days until an 80% negative rate.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 clearance remains prolonged in oncology patients. Single-negative test clearance can balance delays in care with risk of infection in patients with solid tumors.

Pediatric cancer care management during the COVID-19 pandemic: a review of the literature and a single-centre real-life experience of an Italian pediatric oncology unit

INTRODUCTION

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 pandemic significantly affected clinical practice, also in pediatric oncology units. Cancer patients needed to be treated with an adequate dose density despite the SARS-CoV-2 infection, balancing risks of developing severe COVID-19 disease.

AREAS COVERED

Although the pandemic spread worldwide, the prevalence of affected children was low. The percentage of children with severe illness was approximately 1-6%. Pediatric cancer patients represent a prototype of a previously healthy immune system that is hampered by the tumor itself and treatments, such as chemotherapy and steroids. Through a review of the literature, we reported the immunological basis of the response to SARS-CoV-2 infection, the existing antiviral treatments used in pediatric cancer patients, and the importance of vaccination. In conclusion, we reported the real-life experience of our pediatric oncology unit during the pandemic period.

EXPERT OPINION

Starting from the data available in literature, and our experience, showing the rarity of severe COVID-19 disease in pediatric patients with solid tumors, we recommend carefully tailoring all the oncological treatments (chemotherapy/targeted therapy/stem cell transplantation/radiotherapy). The aim is the preservation of the treatment's timing, balanced with an evaluation of possible severe COVID-19 disease.

A Three-Dose mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine Regime Produces Both Suitable Immunogenicity and Satisfactory Efficacy in Patients with Solid Cancers

BACKGROUND

The recommended booster third dose of vaccination against COVID-19 in cancer patients seems reasonable to protect them against a severe disease course. A prospective study was designed to assess the immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in this cohort.

METHODS

Patients with solid malignancies on active treatment were followed up after the primary course and booster third dose of vaccination to assess their anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG levels, efficacy in the case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and safety.

RESULTS

Out of 125 patients receiving the primary course of vaccination, 66 patients received a booster third dose of mRNA vaccine, with a 20-fold increase in median anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG levels compared to Ab levels six months post-primary course of vaccination (p < 0.0001). After the booster third dose, anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG levels were comparable to healthy controls (p = 0.113). There was a decline in Ab levels 3 (p = 0.0003) and 6 months (p < 0.0001) post-third booster dose. No patients had either a severe disease course or a lethal outcome in the case of SARS-CoV-2 infection after the third booster dose.

CONCLUSION

The third booster vaccination dose against COVID-19 in solid cancer patients triggers substantial immunogenicity and is safe and effective for preventing a severe COVID-19 disease course.

To Get Vaccinated or Not? The Vaccination Decision-Making by Healthcare Professionals Working in Haematology: A Qualitative Study

Haematological patients are more susceptible to infections. Vaccination has always been the most effective primary prevention strategy, even during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the efficacy of vaccines for some haematological patients is low. Although vaccination of Healthcare Workers (HCWs) could protect patients from vaccine-preventable diseases, there is evidence of a high level of hesitation among healthcare workers in Italy. The aim of this study was to explore the attitudes towards vaccination of HCWs caring for haematology patients. Qualitative descriptive design was conducted. Twenty-one HCWs were interviewed. Content analysis was applied to the qualitative data. The following themes were generated from the analysis: "Trust", "Decision-making process focusing on individual health", "Decision-making process focusing on community health", "Changing opinion", and "Two sides of vaccination commitment". The most hesitant HCWs were oriented towards individual health. They perceived a lack of benefit from vaccines, feared side effects, or were influenced by negative experiences of others. In contrast, community-health-oriented HCWs showed more positive attitudes towards vaccination. Some hesitant HCWs changed their opinion on vaccination because they began to reflect on the importance of vaccination for the community. The change in opinion of some HCWs interviewed provided insight into the importance of focusing organisational efforts on collective responsibility.

Timely course of SARS-CoV-2 infections and vaccinations in patients with hemato-oncological diseases: analysis of a real-life cohort

BACKGROUND

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has particularly impacted patients with hemato-oncological malignancies, as they showed not only a higher propensity for severe courses but also weaker immune responses after vaccination. Still, data on the influence of pandemic waves and vaccinations on outcomes are rare. This study aimed to analyze the timely course of infections and vaccinations in a real-life cohort of patients with hemato-oncological diseases.

METHODS

In this cohort study, 1817 patients with hemato-oncological diseases from 1 February 2020 to 15 December 2022 at the 'Franz Tappeiner' Hospital in Merano/Meran, Italy, were followed for SARS-CoV-2 infections and vaccinations.

RESULTS

Of 1817 patients with hemato-oncological malignancies, 735 (40.5%) were infected at least once with SARS-CoV-2, and 1614 (88.8%) received one or more doses of the approved vaccinations. Patients receiving antineoplastic treatment had a lower SARS-CoV-2 infection rate [35.1% versus 41.0%; odds ratio (OR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64-0.95], but higher risk of hospitalization (13.4% versus 6.9%; OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.25-3.69) compared with untreated patients. Overall, the case fatality rate (CFR) was 3.4%. Unvaccinated patients were more prone to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) courses requiring hospitalization (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.25-4.36) and had a higher CFR (7.3% versus 1.6%; OR 4.98, 95% CI 2.16-12.98) than their vaccinated counterparts. In the Delta wave, patients with two vaccinations had a lower infection risk (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.10-0.35) and tendentially lower hospitalization rates (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.05-1.29) than unvaccinated patients. In the Omicron wave, 345/1198 (28.8%) patients with three or more vaccinations had breakthrough infections, resulting in a similar risk for infection (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.60-1.30) but numerically lower risk for hospitalization (24/345, 7.0%) than unvaccinated individuals (4/40, 10.0%). Scheduled visits were postponed in 128/335 (38.2%) patients due to COVID-19, and deferrals correlated with pandemic wave (P = 0.002) and vaccination status (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 infections and outcomes differ between distinct phases of the pandemic. Vaccination with variant-specific vaccines should be prioritized as general protective measures are increasingly lifted.

The Scottish COVID Cancer Immunity Prevalence Study: A Longitudinal Study of SARS-CoV-2 Immune Response in Patients Receiving Anti-Cancer Treatment

BACKGROUND

Cancer and anti-cancer treatment (ACT) may be risk factors for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and limited vaccine efficacy. Long-term longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate these risks. The Scottish COVID cancer immunity prevalence (SCCAMP) study characterizes the incidence and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in patients with solid tumors undergoing ACT. This preliminary analysis includes 766 patients recruited since May 2020.

METHODS

Patients with solid-organ cancers attending secondary care for active ACT consented to the collection of routine electronic health record data and serial blood samples over 12 months. Blood samples were tested for total SARS-CoV-2 antibody.

RESULTS

A total of 766 participants were recruited between May 28, 2020 and October 31, 2021. Most received cytotoxic chemotherapy (79%). Among the participants, 48 (6.3%) were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR. Infection rates were unaffected by ACT, largely aligning with the local population. Mortality proportion was not higher with a recent positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR (10.4% vs 10.6%). Multivariate analysis revealed lower infection rates in vaccinated patients regardless of chemotherapy (HR 0.307 [95% CI, 0.144-0.6548]) or immunotherapy (HR 0.314 [95% CI, 0.041-2.367]) treatment. A total of 96.3% of patients successfully raised SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after >2 vaccines. This was independent of the treatment type.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest on-going longitudinal real-world dataset of patients undergoing ACT during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. This preliminary analysis demonstrates that patients with solid tumors undergoing ACT have high protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection following COVID-19 vaccination. The SCCAMP study will evaluate long-term COVID-19 antibody trends, focusing on specific ACTs and patient subgroups.

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.

Antibody responses to second doses of COVID-19 vaccination in lung cancer patients undergoing treatment

BACKGROUND

Several reports have revealed that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection tends to have more severe outcomes in cancer patients. Although vaccination reduces the risk of severe disease, data on antibody titers achieved by vaccination is scarce in cancer patients.

METHODS

We collected 79 blood samples (69 lung cancer patients and 10 control individuals) and conducted an anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay to compare the antibody titer achieved with current treatment. Sixty-eight patients (86%) received the BNT162 mRNA vaccine and 11 (14%) received the mRNA-1273 vaccine. They were categorized according to the current treatment: control individuals without cancer (cohort A), lung cancer patients who were treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy (cohort B), immunotherapy (cohort C), combination of cytotoxic chemotherapy and immunotherapy (cohort D), tyrosine kinase inhibitors (cohort E), and radiation therapy (cohort F).

RESULTS

Among 69 lung cancer patients (cohort B-F), 57 (83%) had adenocarcinoma, and 66 (96%) had advanced-stage cancer. In the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay, the antibody titer was significantly lower in lung cancer patients than in control individuals (p = 0.01). The median antibody titers were 161 AU/ml in control individuals and 59.9 AU/ml in lung cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibody titers after the second vaccination were lower in cancer patients than those in healthy individuals. Our findings provide essential information for understanding the benefits and necessity of additional vaccination to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in lung cancer patients.

Prophylactic treatment with oral azithromycin in cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic (OnCoVID): a randomized, single-blinded, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer are at high risk for severe courses of COVID-19. Based on (pre-)clinical data suggesting a potential protective effect due to the immunomodulating properties of azithromycin, we have initiated a prospective randomized trial.

METHODS

This randomized, single-center, single-blinded, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial included adult patients with cancer undergoing systemic treatment. Patients were 1:1 randomized to oral azithromycin (1500 mg once weekly for 8 weeks) or placebo. The primary endpoint was the cumulative number of SARS-CoV-2 infections 12 weeks after treatment initiation.

RESULTS

In total, 523 patients were screened, 68 patients were randomized, and 63 patients received at least one dose of the study drug. Due to low acceptance and a lack of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the study cohort, the study was prematurely closed. With no reported grade III-IV possibly treatment-related adverse events, azithromycin was generally well tolerated. Overall survival (OS) rates after 12 months were 83.5% and 70.3% in the azithromycin and placebo group, respectively (p = 0.37). Non-SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred in 4/32 (12.5%) in the azithromycin and 3/31 (9.7%) in the placebo group (p = 1). No emergence of azithromycin-resistant S. aureus strains could be observed. According to treatment group, longitudinal alterations in systemic inflammatory parameters were detected for neutrophil/lymphocyte and leukocyte/lymphocyte ratios.

CONCLUSION

Although efficacy could not be assessed due to premature closure and low incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections, azithromycin was associated with a favorable side effect profile in patients with cancer. As other prophylactic treatments are limited, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination remains a high priority in oncological patients.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov registration number and date (dd/mm/yyyy): NCT04369365, 30/04/2020.

Scientific Integrity Requires Publishing Rebuttals and Retracting Problematic Papers

Recently, an article by Seneff et al. entitled "Innate immunosuppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs" was published in Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT). Here, we describe why this article, which contains unsubstantiated claims and misunderstandings such as "billions of lives are potentially at risk" with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, is problematic and should be retracted. We report here our request to the editor of FCT to have our rebuttal published, unfortunately rejected after three rounds of reviewing. Fighting the spread of false information requires enormous effort while receiving little or no credit for this necessary work, which often even ends up being threatened. This need for more scientific integrity is at the heart of our advocacy, and we call for large support, especially from editors and publishers, to fight more effectively against deadly disinformation.

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and risk of hospital admission and death among infected cancer patients: A population-based study in northern Italy

BACKGROUND

The risks of hospital admission for COVID-19-related conditions and all-cause death of SARS-CoV-2 infected cancer patients were investigated according to vaccination status.

METHODS

A population-based cohort study was carried out on 9754 infected cancer patients enrolled from January 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022. Subdistribution hazard ratio (SHRs) or hazard ratios (HRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for sex, age, comorbidity index, and time since cancer incidence, were computed to assess the risk of COVID-19 hospital admission or death of unvaccinated vs. patients with at least one dose of vaccine (i.e., vaccinated).

RESULTS

2485 unvaccinated patients (25.5 %) were at a 2.57 elevated risk of hospital admission (95 % CI: 2.13-2.87) and at a 3.50 elevated risk of death (95 % CI: 3.19-3.85), as compared to vaccinated patients. Significantly elevated hospitalizations and death risks emerged for both sexes, across all age groups and time elapsed since cancer diagnosis. For unvaccinated patients, SHRs for hospitalization were particularly elevated in those with solid tumors (SHR = 2.69 vs. 1.66 in patients with hematologic tumors) while HRs for the risk of death were homogeneously distributed. As compared to boosted patients, SHRs for hospitalization and HRs for death increased with decreasing number of doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings stress the importance of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to reduce hospital admission and death risk in cancer patients.

Clinical efficacy and long-term immunogenicity of an early triple dose regimen of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in cancer patients

Introduction: Three doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines have been recommended for cancer patients to reduce the risk of severe disease. Anti-neoplastic treatment, such as chemotherapy, may affect long-term vaccine immunogenicity. Method: Patients with solid or haematological cancer were recruited from 2 hospitals between July 2021 and March 2022. Humoral response was evaluated using GenScript cPASS surrogate virus neutralisation assays. Clinical outcomes were obtained from medical records and national mandatory-reporting databases. Results: A total of 273 patients were recruited, with 40 having haematological malignancies and the rest solid tumours. Among the participants, 204 (74.7%) were receiving active cancer therapy, including 98 (35.9%) undergoing systemic chemotherapy and the rest targeted therapy or immunotherapy. All patients were seronegative at baseline. Seroconversion rates after receiving 1, 2 and 3 doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination were 35.2%, 79.4% and 92.4%, respectively. After 3 doses, patients on active treatment for haematological malignancies had lower antibodies (57.3%±46.2) when compared to patients on immunotherapy (94.1%±9.56, P<0.05) and chemotherapy (92.8%±18.1, P<0.05). SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in 77 (28.2%) patients, of which 18 were severe. No patient receiving a third dose within 90 days of the second dose experienced severe infection. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the benefit of early administration of the third dose among cancer patients. Keywords: Cancer, oncology, SARS-CoV-2, third dose, vaccination

Cancer Patients during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mini-Review

Since its emergence, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected the entire world and all commerce and industries, including healthcare systems. COVID-19 adversely affects cancer patients because they are immunocompromised. Increased COVID-19 infection and shortage of medical supplies, beds and healthcare workers in hospitals affect cancer care. This paper includes a description of the existing research that shows the impact of COVID-19 on the management of cancer patients. Aged people with various chronic conditions such as cancer and comorbidities face more challenges as they have a greater risk of disease severity. COVID-19 has affected care delivery, including patient management, and has been responsible for increased mortality among cancer patients. Cancer patients with severe symptoms require regular therapies and treatment; therefore, they have a higher risk of exposure. Due to the risk of transmission, various steps were taken to combat this disease; however, they have affected the existing operational efficiency. Herein, we present the changing priorities during COVID-19, which also affected cancer care, including delayed diagnosis, treatment, and surgeries.

Potent high-avidity neutralizing antibodies and T cell responses after COVID-19 vaccination in individuals with B cell lymphoma and multiple myeloma

Individuals with hematologic malignancies are at increased risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet profound analyses of COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity are scarce. Here we present an observational study with expanded methodological analysis of a longitudinal, primarily BNT162b2 mRNA-vaccinated cohort of 60 infection-naive individuals with B cell lymphomas and multiple myeloma. We show that many of these individuals, despite markedly lower anti-spike IgG titers, rapidly develop potent infection neutralization capacities against several severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants of concern (VoCs). The observed increased neutralization capacity per anti-spike antibody unit was paralleled by an early step increase in antibody avidity between the second and third vaccination. All individuals with hematologic malignancies, including those depleted of B cells and individuals with multiple myeloma, exhibited a robust T cell response to peptides derived from the spike protein of VoCs Delta and Omicron (BA.1). Consistently, breakthrough infections were mainly of mild to moderate severity. We conclude that COVID-19 vaccination can induce broad antiviral immunity including ultrapotent neutralizing antibodies with high avidity in different hematologic malignancies.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis and treatment of onco-hematologic patients: a discussion paper

We do not know the precise figure for solid organ tumors diagnosed each year in Spain and it is therefore difficult to calculate whether there has been a decrease in cancer diagnoses as a consequence of the pandemic. Some indirect data suggest that the pandemic has worsened the stage at which some non-hematological neoplasms are diagnosed. Despite the lack of robust evidence, oncology patients seem more likely to have a poor outcome when they contract COVID-19. The antibody response to infection in cancer patients will be fundamentally conditioned by the type of neoplasia present, the treatment received and the time of its administration. In patients with hematological malignancies, the incidence of infection is probably similar or lower than in the general population, due to the better protective measures adopted by the patients and their environment. The severity and mortality of COVID-19 in patients with hematologic malignancies is clearly higher than the general population. Since the immune response to vaccination in hematologic patients is generally worse than in comparable populations, alternative methods of prevention must be established in these patients, as well as actions for earlier diagnosis and treatment. Campaigns for the early diagnosis of malignant neoplasms must be urgently resumed, post-COVID manifestations should be monitored, collaboration with patient associations is indisputable and it is urgent to draw the right conclusions to improve our preparedness to fight against possible future catastrophes.

Immunogenicity and risks associated with impaired immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and booster in hematologic malignancy patients: an updated meta-analysis

Patients with hematologic malignancies (HM) have demonstrated impaired immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Factors associated with poor immunogenicity remain largely undetermined. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and medRxiv databases to identify studies that reported humoral or cellular immune responses (CIR) following complete SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The primary aim was to estimate the seroconversion rate (SR) following complete SARS-CoV-2 vaccination across various subtypes of HM diseases and treatments. The secondary aims were to determine the rates of development of neutralizing antibodies (NAb) and CIR following complete vaccination and SR following booster doses. A total of 170 studies were included for qualitative and quantitative analysis of primary and secondary outcomes. A meta-analysis of 150 studies including 20,922 HM patients revealed a pooled SR following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination of 67.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.8-70.4%; I² = 94%). Meta-regression analysis showed that patients with lymphoid malignancies, but not myeloid malignancies, had lower seroconversion rates than those with solid cancers (R² = 0.52, P < 0.0001). Patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CART), B-cell targeted therapies or JAK inhibitors were associated with poor seroconversion (R² = 0.39, P < 0.0001). The pooled NAb and CIR rates were 52.8% (95% CI; 45.8-59.7%, I² = 87%) and 66.6% (95% CI, 57.1-74.9%; I² = 86%), respectively. Approximately 20.9% (95% CI, 11.4-35.1%, I² = 90%) of HM patients failed to elicit humoral and cellular immunity. Among non-seroconverted patients after primary vaccination, only 40.5% (95% CI, 33.0-48.4%; I² = 87%) mounted seroconversion after the booster. In conclusion, HM patients, especially those with lymphoid malignancies and/or receiving CART, B-cell targeted therapies, or JAK inhibitors, showed poor SR after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. A minority of patients attained seroconversion after booster vaccination. Strategies to improve immune response in these severely immunosuppressed patients are needed.

The correlation between serum 25-hydroxy-vitamin D levels and anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG and neutralizing antibody levels among cancer patients receiving COVID-19 vaccines

Introduction

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, vitamin D has been established as an immune-modulator that reduces pro-inflammatory damage which effectively diminish the severity of COVID-19. Vitamin D also has a significant effect against influenza and dengue and increase the seroconversion following influenza vaccination. To date, the role of vitamin D in optimizing the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines remains unclear. This study aimed to analyze the correlation between serum 25-hydroxy-cholecalciferol or 25(OH)D levels and anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG and neutralizing antibody levels among cancer patients.

Methodology

A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted among solid and hematologic cancer patients who were vaccinated with two doses of the same types of COVID-19 vaccines (either mRNA, non-replicating viral vector, or inactivated) within 6 months.

Result

The median serum 25(OH)D level in 119 cancer patients was 36.36 [IQR = 30.30] ng/mL. The seropositivity of S-RBD IgG and NAb reached 93.3 and 94.1%, respectively. The S-RBD IgG level was significantly higher in the sufficient group (median = 414.07 [1,441.83] AU/mL) than in the deficient group (median = 91.56 [652.00] AU/mL) (p-value = 0.049). Among non-chemotherapy subjects, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG levels had a significant positive correlation with 25(OH)D levels (p-value = 0.03; R = 0.588). The NAb levels also showed significantly positive correlation with 25(OH)D level (p-value = 0.005; R = 0.561). The 25(OH)D levels were positively correlated with S-RBD IgG levels among subjects younger than 60 years old (p-value = 0.047; R = 0.136). However, serum 25 (OH)D levels showed no such correlation with S-RBD IgG levels among subjects older than 60 years old (p-value = 0.933; R = 0.136).

Conclusion

Both anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG and NAb levels developed moderate correlation with 25(OH)D levels among subjects treated without chemotherapy. The S-RBD IgG levels also had positive correlation with 25(OH)D levels among subjects younger than 60 years old. Thus, we recommended cancer patients to maintain serum 25(OH)D levels above 30 ng/mL (75 nmol/L) to enhance the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines.

Immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccine in lung cancer patients receiving anticancer treatment: A prospective multicenter cohort study

This study assessed the immunogenicity and safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in lung cancer patients receiving anticancer treatment. We enrolled lung cancer patients receiving anticancer treatment and non-cancer patients; all participants were fully vaccinated with the BNT162b2 vaccine. Blood samples were collected before the first and second vaccinations and 4 ± 1 weeks after the second vaccination. Anti-severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein S1 subunit receptor-binding domain antibody titers were measured using the Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant and Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assays. Fifty-five lung cancer patients and 38 non-cancer patients were included in the immunogenicity analysis. Lung cancer patients showed significant increase in the geometric mean antibody concentration, which was significantly lower than that in the non-cancer patients after the first (30 vs. 121 AU/mL, p < .001 on Architect; 4.0 vs 1.2 U/mL, p < .001 on Elecsys) and second vaccinations (1632 vs. 3472 AU/mL, p = .005 on Architect; 213 vs 573 A/mL, p = .002 on Elecsys). The adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for seroprotection was significantly lower (p < .05) in lung cancer patients than that in non-cancer patients. Analysis of the anticancer treatment types showed that the aOR for seroprotection was significantly lower (p < .05) in lung cancer patients receiving cytotoxic agents. They showed no increase in adverse reactions. BNT162b2 vaccination in lung cancer patients undergoing anticancer treatment significantly increased (p < .05) antibody titers and showed acceptable safety. Immunogenicity in these patients could be inadequate compared with that in non-cancer patients.

COVID-19 vaccine response and safety in patients with cancer: An overview of systematic reviews

Background

To date, the COVID-19 pandemic does not appear to be overcome with new variants continuously emerging. The vaccination against COVID-19 has been the trend, but there are multiple systematic reviews on COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cancer, resulting in redundant and sub-optimal systematic reviews. There are still some doubts about efficacy and safety of the COVID-19 vaccine in cancer patients.

Purpose

To identify, summarize and synthesize the available evidence of systematic reviews on response and COVID-19 vaccine safety in patients with cancer.

Methods

Multiple databases were searched from their inception to May 1, 2022 to fetch the relevant articles. Study quality was assessed by AMSTAR2. The protocol of this study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022327931).

Results

A total of 18 articles were finally included. The seroconversion rates after first dose were ranged from 37.30-54.20% in all cancers, 49.60-62.00% in solid cancers and 33.30-56.00% in hematological malignancies. The seroconversion rates after second dose were ranged from 65.30-87.70% in all cancers, 91.60-96.00% in solid cancers and 58.00-72.60% in hematological malignancies. Cancer types and types of therapy could influence vaccine response. COVID-19 vaccines were safe and well-tolerated.

Conclusions

This study suggests COVID-19 vaccine response is significantly lower in cancer patients. Number of received doses, cancer types and treatment strategies could influence response of COVID-19 vaccine in cancer patients. COVID-19 vaccines are safe and well-tolerated. Considering the emergence of several new variants of SARS-CoV-2 with potential influence on ongoing vaccination programs, there is a need for booster doses to increase the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022327931, identifier CRD42022327931.

Inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and BA.4 Variants After Fourth Vaccination or Tixagevimab and Cilgavimab Administration in Patients With Cancer

This cohort study assesses the capacity of passive immunization and tixagevimab and cilgavimab to inhibit interaction between receptor-binding domains and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 in patients with hemato-oncologic diseases.

Antibody response to a third booster dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in adults with haematological and solid cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patients living with cancer are at a significantly increased risk of morbidity and mortality after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). This systematic review aims to investigate the current available evidence about the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccines in patients living with cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken for studies published until March 1, 2022. A systematic narrative review was undertaken to include all studies that evaluated the efficacy of booster vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with cancer.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies encompassing 1205 patients with cancer were included. We found that a booster vaccine dose induced a higher response in patients with solid cancer as compared to haematological malignancies. Recent systemic anticancer therapy does not appear to affect seroconversion in solid organ malignancies, however, there is an association between B-cell depleting therapies and poor seroconversion in haematological patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Third booster vaccination induces an improved antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in adults with haematological and solid cancer, relative to patients who only receive two doses. Access to vaccination boosters should be made available to patients at risk of poor immunological responses, and the provision of fourth doses may be of benefit to this vulnerable population.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO number CRD42021270420.

The role of B cells in COVID-19 infection and vaccination

B cells secrete antibodies and mediate the humoral immune response, making them extremely important in protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2, which caused the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In this review, we summarize the positive function and pathological response of B cells in SARS-CoV-2 infection and re-infection. Then, we structure the immunity responses that B cells mediated in peripheral tissues. Furthermore, we discuss the role of B cells during vaccination including the effectiveness of antibodies and memory B cells, viral evolution mechanisms, and future vaccine development. This review might help medical workers and researchers to have a better understanding of the interaction between B cells and SARS-CoV-2 and broaden their vision for future investigations.

Six-month humoral and cellular immune response to the third dose of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in the patients with solid tumors: a longitudinal cohort study with a focus on the variants of concern

Background

The role and the durability of the immunogenicity of the third dose of vaccine against COVID-19 variants of concern in cancer patients have to be elucidated.

Patients and methods

We have prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity of the third dose of the SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine in triggering both humoral and cell-mediated immune response in patients with solid tumors undergoing active treatment 6 months after the booster. Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titers and total anti-spike immunoglobulin G concentrations were measured in serum. Heparinized whole blood samples were used for the SARS-CoV-2 interferon-γ release assay (IGRA).

Results

Six months after the third dose only two patients (2.4%) showed negative spike-specific immunoglobulin G antibody levels (<33.8 BAU/ml). The median level of SARS-CoV-2 NT Abs decreased and only 39/83 (47%) subjects showed maximum levels of NT Abs. T-cellular positive response was observed in 38/61 (62.3%) patients; the highest median level of response was observed 21 days after the third dose (354 mIU/ml, interquartile range 83.3-846.3 mIU/ml). The lowest median level of NT Ab response was observed against the Omicron variant (1 : 10, interquartile range 1 : 10-1 : 40) with a significant reduced rate of responder subjects with respect to the wild-type strain (77.5% versus 95%; P = 0.0022) and Delta variant (77.5% versus 93.7%; P = 0.0053). During the follow-up period, seven patients (8%) had a confirmed post-vaccination infection, but none of them required hospitalization or oxygen therapy.

Conclusions

Our work highlights a significant humoral and cellular immune response among patients with solid tumors 6 months after the third BNT162b2 vaccine dose, although a reduction in neutralizing activity against Omicron was observed.

•

Only two patients (2.4%) showed negative spike-specific IgG antibody levels (<33.8 BAU/ml)

•

Only 39/83 (47%) subjects showed maximum level of neutralizing antibodies (NT Abs).

•

T-cellular positive response was observed in 38/61 (62.3%) analyzed patients.

•

The lowest median level of NT Ab response was observed against the Omicron variant.

•

Seven patients (8%) had a post-vaccination infection; none of them required hospitalization or oxygen therapy.

Immune response to anti-SARS-CoV-2 prime-vaccination in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the immune response to anti-SARS-CoV-2 prime-vaccination in patients with cancer.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature search using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library until 28/09/2021, and conference proceedings from ASCO and ESMO 2021 annual meetings. We screened for observational or interventional studies including subjects ≥ 16 years old with cancer diagnosis who were vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Prime-vaccination was defined as one dose of Ad26.COV2-S vaccine or two doses of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, ChAdOx1-S or inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. The outcomes were humoral and adaptive immune responses (proportion of subjects with positive titers of antibody anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and anti-SARS-CoV-2 cellular responses, respectively).

Results

We included 89 records reporting data from 30,183 subjects. The overall seropositive rate within the first month after complete anti-SARS-CoV-2 prime-vaccination was 80% [95% confidence interval (CI), 72–86%], 60% (95%CI, 53–67%) in patients with hematological malignancies (HM) versus 94% (95%CI, 88–97%) in patients with solid malignancies (SM). The diagnosis of HM was significantly associated with a lower seropositive rate on multivariate meta-regression (odds ratio 0.35, 95% CI 0.18–0.69, HM versus both, p = 0.002). The overall humoral response was 49% (95% CI, 42–56%) after incomplete prime-vaccination and 79% (95% CI, 70–86%) at 2 months after complete prime-vaccination. These responses were also lower in patients with HM at these time points. The overall cellular response rate at any time after vaccination was 61% (95% CI, 44–76%).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis provides compelling evidence of humoral and adaptive immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with cancer, which last for at least 2 months following complete prime-vaccination.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00432-022-04185-w.

Impaired serological response to COVID-19 vaccination following anti-cancer therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Owing to the high coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19)‐related morbidity and fatality rate among patients with cancer, the introduction of COVID‐19 vaccines is of profound significance in this fragile population. Accumulating data suggested that oncologic patients, especially those with anticancer therapy have an impaired immune response to COVID‐19 vaccination. However, the exact effect of anticancer treatments on postvaccination response has not been elucidated yet. We, therefore, conducted a meta‐analysis to evaluate the impact of treatments on response to COVID‐19 vaccination in patients with cancer. A total of 39 studies were finally included comprising 11 075 oncologic patients. Overall, we found the humoral response was significantly decreased in patients undergoing anticancer treatments (odds ratio [OR] = 2.55, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.04–3.18) compared with those without active treatment. The seroconversion rates were significantly lower in patients with chemotherapy (OR = 3.04, 95% CI: 2.28–4.05), targeted therapy (OR = 4.72, 95% CI: 3.18–7.01) and steroid usage (OR = 2.19, 95% CI: 1.57–3.07), while there was no significant association between immunotherapy or hormonal therapy and seroconversion after vaccination. Subgroup analyses showed therapies with anti‐CD20 antibody (OR = 11.28, 95% CI: 6.40–19.90), B‐cell lymphoma 2 inhibitor (OR = 5.76, 95% CI: 3.64–9.10), and Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (OR = 6.86, 95% CI: 4.23–11.15) were significantly correlated with the risk of negative humoral response to vaccination. In conclusion, our results demonstrated that specific oncologic therapies may significantly affect serological response to COVID‐19 vaccines in patients with cancer. Thus, an adapted vaccination strategy taking the influence of active treatment into account is in need, and further research on the effect of the third dose of vaccine and the role of postvaccination cellular response in oncologic patients is also needed.

Solid cancer patients achieve adequate immunogenicity and low rate of severe adverse events after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

Background: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in cancer patients is crucial to prevent severe COVID-19 disease course. Methods: This study assessed immunogenicity of cancer patients on active treatment receiving mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine by detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG antibodies in serum, before, after the first and second doses and 3 months after a complete primary course of vaccination. Results were compared with healthy controls. Results: Of 112 patients, the seroconversion rate was 96%. A significant reduction in antibody levels was observed 3 months after vaccination in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors versus control participants (p < 0.001). Adverse events were mostly mild. Conclusion: Immunogenicity after mRNA-based vaccine in cancer patients is adequate but influenced by the type of anticancer therapy. Antibody levels decline after 3 months, and thus a third vaccination is warranted.

Booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines for patients with haematological and solid cancer: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis

Importance

Patients with cancer have an increased risk of severe disease and mortality from COVID-19, as the disease and antineoplastic therapy cause reduced vaccine immunogenicity. Booster doses have been proposed to enhance protection, and efficacy data are emerging from several studies.

Objective

To evaluate the proportion of COVID-19 primary vaccination non-responders with cancer who seroconvert after a booster dose.

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL and medRxiv were searched from 1st January 2021 to 10th March 2022. Quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal checklist.

Results

After the eligibility assessment, 22 studies were included in this systematic review and 17 for meta-analysis of seroconversion in non-responders, pooling a total of 849 patients with haematological cancer and 82 patients with solid cancer. Haematological cancer non-responders exhibited lower seroconversion at 44% (95% CI 36–53%) than solid cancer at 80% (95% CI 69–87%). Individual patient data meta-analysis found the odds of having a meaningful rise in antibody titres to be significantly associated with increased duration between the second and third dose (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00–1.03, P ≤ 0.05), age of patient (OR 0.960, 95% CI 0.934–0.987, P ≤ 0.05) and cancer type. With patients with haematological cancer as a reference, patients with lung cancer had 16.8 times the odds of achieving a meaningful increase in antibody titres (OR 16.8, 95% CI 2.95–318, P ≤ 0.05) and gastrointestinal cancer patients had 25.4 times the odds of achieving a meaningful increase in antibody titres (OR 25.4, 95% CI 5.26–492.21, P ≤ 0.05).

Conclusions

administration of a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose is effective in improving seroconversion and antibody levels. Patients with haematological cancer consistently demonstrate poorer response to booster vaccines than patients with solid cancer.

Predictors of poor serologic response to COVID-19 vaccine in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Backgrounds

Patients with cancer presented a lower probability to obtain seroconversion after a complete course of COVID-19 vaccination. However, little was known on the factors that predict poor seroconversion in this frail population.

Methods

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases for all articles within a range of published years from 2019 to 2022 on the predictors of response to COVID-19 vaccine in patients with cancer (last search was updated on 2st March 2022). The odds ratio corresponding to the 95% confidence interval was used to assess the outcome. The statistical heterogeneity among studies was assessed with the Q-test and I² statistics. The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022315687) and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

Results

Twenty cohort studies met the inclusion criteria for this study, with 5,499 patients with cancer. We found that advanced age, male patients, and metastatic disease increased negative seropositivity to COVID-19 vaccine. Immunoglobulin heavy chain variable mutation status, high concentration of Ig G, Ig M, and Ig A were correlated with seropositivity. Relating to cancer treatment strategy, anti-CD20 therapy within recent 12 months and chemotherapy were negatively correlated with seroconversion. Meta-analysis found no significant difference associated with targeted treatment, immunotherapy, and endocrine treatment.

Conclusions

Our meta-analysis assessed the factors that predict poor seroconversion in order to plan better prevention strategies in this frail population. The results proposed that enhanced vaccination strategies would be beneficial for the special patients such as advanced male, or patients receiving active chemotherapy, and carefully prevention should be emphasised even after a complete course of vaccination.

Vaccination for the Prevention of Infection among Immunocompromised Patients: A Concise Review of Recent Systematic Reviews

Vaccination is crucial for avoiding infection-associated morbidity and mortality among immunocompromised patients. However, immunocompromised patients respond less well to vaccinations compared to healthy people, and little is known about the relative efficacy of various vaccines among different immunocompromised states. A total of 54 systematic reviews (22 COVID-19; 32 non-COVID-19) published within the last 5 years in Pubmed® were reviewed. They demonstrated similar patterns within three seroconversion response categories: good (about >60% when compared to healthy controls), intermediate (~40−60%), and poor (about <40%). Good vaccine responses would be expected for patients with chronic kidney disease, human immunodeficiency virus infection (normal CD4 counts), immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, post-splenectomy states, and solid tumors. Intermediate vaccine responses would be expected for patients with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 therapy, hematologic cancer, and human immunodeficiency virus infection (low CD4 counts). Poor vaccine responses would be expected for patients with B-cell-depleting agents (e.g., anti-CD20 therapy), hematopoietic stem-cell transplant, solid organ transplant, and liver cirrhosis. For all vaccine response categories, vaccination should be timed when patients are least immunosuppressed. For the intermediate and poor vaccine response categories, high-dose vaccine, revaccination when patients are less immunosuppressed, checking for seroconversion, additional booster doses, and long-acting monoclonal antibodies may be considered, supplemented by shielding measures.

[Vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) : Efficacy comparison, safety aspects, and current challenges]

Several RNA-, vector-, and protein-based coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently available in order to achieve high titers of neutralizing antibodies against the spike protein as well as strongly activated CD4+- and CD+ T‑cells. However, there are formulation-specific advantages and disadvantages with regard to physicochemical stability, spectrum of adverse effects, need for adjuvants or adaptability to potentially novel viral variants. Whereas children and pregnant women now have access to COVID-19 vaccines, it often remains difficult to achieve sufficient cellular and humoral immunity in heavily immunocompromised patients. As a consequence, innovative vaccines need to be developed for these patients. Undoubtedly, reports addressing, e.g. vaccine-associated myocarditis or thrombotic thrombocytopenia have led to uncertainties; however, vaccination remains the most important cornerstone in containing the pandemic.

Limited T cell response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine among patients with cancer receiving different cancer treatments

INTRODUCTION

Patients with cancer (PC) are at high risk of acquiring COVID-19 and can develop more serious complications. Deeper understanding of vaccines immunogenicity in this population is crucial for adequately planning vaccines programs. The ONCOVac study aimed to comprehensively assess the immunogenicity of mRNA-1273 vaccine in terms of humoral and cellular response.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, single-center study including patients with solid tumours treated with cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i), immunotherapy (IT) or chemotherapy (CT). Patients were enrolled previously to vaccination with mRNA-1273. We also involved health care workers (HCW) to serve as a control group. We took blood samples before first dose administration (BL), after first dose (1D), and after second dose (2D). The primary objective was to compare the rate and magnitude of T cell response after second dose whereas safety and humoral response were defined as secondary objectives. We also collected patient reported outcomes after both the first and second vaccine dose and a six-month follow-up period to diagnose incident COVID-19 cases was planned.

RESULTS

The rate of specific anti-S serologic positivity (anti-S IgG cut-off point at 7,14 BAU/mL) was significantly higher in HCW compared to PC after 1D (100% versus 83.8%; p = 0.04), but similar after 2D (100% versus 95.8%; p = 0.5). This difference after 1D was driven by PC treated with CT (100% versus 64.5%; p = 0.001). Cellular response after 2D was significantly lower in PC than in HCW for both CD4+ (91.7% versus 59.7%; p = 0.001) and CD8+ (94.4% versus 55.6%; p < 0.001) T cells. We found a difference on pre-existing CD4+ T cell response in HCW comparing to PC (36% and 17%, p = 0.03); without difference in pre-existing CD8+ T cell response (31% and 23%, p = 0.5). After excluding patients with pre-existing T cell response, PC achieved even lower CD4+ (50.9% versus 95.5%, p < 0.001) and CD8+ (45.5% versus 95.5%, p < 0.001) T cell response compared with HCW. Regarding safety, PC reported notably more adverse events than HCW (96.6% versus 69.2%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated that PC showed a similar humoral response but a lower T cell response following two doses of mRNA-1273 vaccination. Further studies are needed to complement our results and determine the implication of low T cell response on clinical protection of PC against COVID-19.

Assessment of Seroconversion after SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Patients with Lung Cancer

Background: SARS-CoV-2 mortality rates are significantly higher in patients with lung cancer compared with the general population. However, little is known on their immunization status after vaccination. Methods: To evaluate the humoral response (seroconversion) of patients with lung cancer following vaccination against SARS-COV-2 (Group A), we obtained antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein both at baseline and at different time points after the first dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (two to three weeks [T1], six weeks ± one week [T2], 12 weeks ± three weeks [T3], and 24 weeks ± three weeks [T4]). Antibodies were also acquired from a control cohort of non-lung cancer patients (Group B) as well as a third cohort containing healthy controls (Group C) at all time points and at T4, respectively, to make comparisons with Group A. Analysis of antibody response at different time points, association with clinicopathologic parameters, and comparisons with control groups were performed. Results: A total of 125 patients with lung cancer were included in the analysis (96 males [74.3%], median age of 68 years [46−91]. All study participants received two vaccine doses (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222). Analysis of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S antibody titers showed minimal response at T1 (0.4 [0.4−48.6] IU/mL). Antibody response peaked at T2 (527.0 [0.4−2500] IU/mL) and declined over T3 (323.0 [0.4−2500] IU/mL) and T4 (141.0 [0.4−2500] IU/mL). Active smokers had lower antibody titers at T2 (p = 0.04), T3 (p = 0.04), and T4 (p < 0.0001) compared with former or never smokers. Peak antibody titers were not associated with any other clinicopathologic characteristic. No significant differences were observed compared with Group B. However, lung cancer patients exhibited significantly decreased antibody titers compared with Group C at T4 (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Lung cancer patients demonstrate sufficient antibody response six weeks after the first dose of vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 when vaccinated with two-dose regimens. Rapidly declining antibody titers six weeks after the first dose underline the need for a third dose three months later, in patients with lung cancer, and especially active smokers.