Antibody prevalence after three or more COVID-19 vaccine doses in individuals who are immunosuppressed in the UK: a cross-sectional study from MELODY

Immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cirrhosis: A meta-analysis

The immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with liver cirrhosis remains largely unknown. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cirrhosis and compare the humoral and cellular immune responses following complete COVID-19 vaccination between cirrhosis patients and healthy controls. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science from 1 January 2020 to 22 August 2023. Sixteen studies with 2127 cirrhosis patients were included. The pooled seroconversion rate in patients with cirrhosis following complete COVID-19 vaccination was 92.4% (95% CI, 86.2%-96%, I2 = 90%) with significant between-study heterogeneity. Moreover, COVID-19 vaccination elicited a higher humoral immune response in patients of compensated cirrhosis as compared with decompensated cirrhosis (RR = 1.069, 95% CI, 1.011-1.131, I2 = 17%, p = .019). Additionally, 10 studies were included for comparison analysis of seroconversion rate between cirrhosis patients and healthy controls. The results showed that the seroconversion rate in patients with cirrhosis was slightly lower compared with healthy controls (RR = 0.972, 95% CI, 0.955-0.989, I2 = 66%, p = .001). Meanwhile, the pooled RR of cellular immune response rate for cirrhosis patients vs. healthy controls was 0.678 (95% CI, 0.563-0.817, I2 = 0, p < .0001). Our meta-analysis demonstrated that COVID-19 vaccination elicited diminished humoral and cellular immune responses in patients of cirrhosis. Patients with cirrhosis particularly decompensated cirrhosis who have completed full-doses of COVID-19 vaccination should receive continuous attention and preemptive measures.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Plasma Antibody and Nucleocapsid Antigen Status Predict Outcomes in Outpatients With Coronavirus Disease 2019

BACKGROUND

Reliable biomarkers of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes are critically needed. We evaluated associations of spike antibody (Ab) and plasma nucleocapsid antigen (N Ag) with clinical outcomes in nonhospitalized persons with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

METHODS

Participants were nonhospitalized adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 enrolled in ACTIV-2 between January and July 2021 and randomized to placebo. We used quantitative assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 spike Ab and N Ag in blood and determined numbers of hospitalization/death events within 28 days and time to symptom improvement.

RESULTS

Of 209 participants, 77 (37%) had quantifiable spike Ab and 139 (67%) quantifiable N Ag. Median age was 50 years; 111 (53%) were female, 182 (87%) White, and 105 (50%) Hispanic/Latino. Higher risk of hospitalization/death was seen with unquantifiable (22/132 [16.7%]) versus quantifiable (1/77 [1.3%]) spike Ab (risk ratio [RR], 12.83 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.76-93.34]) and quantifiable (22/139 [15.8%]) vs unquantifiable (1/70 [1.4%]) N Ag (RR, 11.08 [95% CI, 1.52-80.51]). Increasing risk of hospitalizations/deaths was seen with increasing N Ag levels. Time to symptom improvement was longer with unquantifiable versus quantifiable spike Ab (median, 14 [interquartile range {IQR}, 8 to >27] vs 8 [IQR, 4-22] days; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.66 [95% CI, .45-.96]) and with quantifiable versus unquantifiable N Ag (median, 12 [7 to >27] vs 10 [5-22] days; aHR, 0.79 [95% CI, .52-1.21]).

CONCLUSIONS

Absence of spike Ab and presence of plasma N Ag predicted hospitalization/death and delayed symptom improvement in COVID-19 outpatients.

COVID-19 vaccine immunogenicity and safety surrounding fourth and subsequent vaccine doses in patients with hematologic malignancies

BACKGROUND

Immune response to COVID-19 vaccine is diminished in patients with hematologic malignancy. There is limited data regarding response to vaccine doses in these patients.

PURPOSE

To quantify the humoral immune response engendered by 4th and subsequent doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination as measured by anti-Spike (anti-S) antibody levels, based on dried blood spot (DBS) testing, in patients with hematologic malignancies. Anti-S binds to the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and is indicative of vaccine immunogenicity.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study of hematologic malignancies between August 2021 and January 2023 at 12 sites across Canada. Participants were followed longitudinally and submitted finger-prick DBS cards at set intervals associated with vaccination. Samples were processed via high throughput ELISA assay to detect serum antibodies against nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S) proteins.

RESULTS

We obtained 3071 samples on 790 unique patients. Of these, 372 unique participants with 1840 samples had anti-S results available post-4th, 5th or 6th COVID-19 vaccine dose and were included for analysis. Three hundred thirty-three patients of the 372 participants submitted a DBS sample post 4th dose. Of these, 257 patients (77.2%) had a positive anti-S antibody. A total of 198 patients had paired samples pre- and post-dose 4, of which 59 (29.7%) had a negative anti-S antibody pre-dose 4. Of these, 20 (33.4%) developed positive anti-S antibody post-dose 4. One hundred forty-nine patients submitted a DBS sample post-dose 5. Of these, 135 patients (90.6%) had positive anti-S antibody. A total of 52 had paired samples pre- and post-dose 5. Six (8.7%) had a negative anti-S antibody pre-dose 5, of which two (33.3%) developed positive anti-S antibody post-dose 5. Of these 372 patients, 123 (34%) reported COVID-19 infection and 4 (1%) had a COVID-19 related hospitalization. There were no reported deaths from COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective cohort study showed that humoral immune response improved with subsequent doses of COVID-19 vaccines.

Effect of Immunosuppression on the Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Vaccination

Immunosuppressive treatment in patients with rheumatic diseases can maintain disease remission but also increase risk of infection. Their response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination is frequently blunted. In this study we evaluated the effect of immunosuppression exposure on humoral and T cell immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in two distinct cohorts of patients; one during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and 3 months later during convalescence, and another prior to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, with follow up sampling 6 weeks after vaccination. Results were compared between rituximab-exposed (in previous 6 months), immunosuppression-exposed (in previous 3 months), and non-immunosuppressed groups. The immune cell phenotype was defined by flow cytometry and ELISA. Antigen specific T cell responses were estimated using a whole blood stimulation interferon-γ release assay. A focused post-vaccine assessment of rituximab-treated patients using high dimensional spectral cytometry was conducted. Acute SARS-CoV-2 infection was characterised by T cell lymphopenia, and a reduction in NK cells and naïve CD4 and CD8 cells, without any significant differences between immunosuppressed and non-immunosuppressed patient groups. Conversely, activated CD4 and CD8 cell counts increased in non-immunosuppressed patients with acute SARS-CoV-2 infection but this response was blunted in the presence of immunosuppression. In rituximab-treated patients, antigen-specific T cell responses were preserved in SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, but patients were unable to mount an appropriate humoral response.

Outpatient treatment with concomitant vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma for patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19

Although severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and hospitalization associated with COVID-19 are generally preventable among healthy vaccine recipients, patients with immunosuppression have poor immunogenic responses to COVID-19 vaccines and remain at high risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and hospitalization. In addition, monoclonal antibody therapy is limited by the emergence of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants that have serially escaped neutralization. In this context, there is interest in understanding the clinical benefit associated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma collected from persons who have been both naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2 and vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 ("vax-plasma"). Thus, we report the clinical outcome of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and who received contemporary COVID-19-specific therapeutics (standard-of-care group) and a subgroup who also received concomitant treatment with very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma (vax-plasma group) with a specific focus on hospitalization rates. The overall hospitalization rate was 2.2% (5 of 225 patients) in the vax-plasma group and 6.2% (10 of 161 patients) in the standard-of-care group, which corresponded to a relative risk reduction of 65% (P = 0.046). Evidence of efficacy in nonvaccinated patients cannot be inferred from these data because 94% (361 of 386 patients) of patients were vaccinated. In vaccinated patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19, the addition of vax-plasma or very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma to COVID-19-specific therapies reduced the risk of disease progression leading to hospitalization.IMPORTANCEAs SARS-CoV-2 evolves, new variants of concern (VOCs) have emerged that evade available anti-spike monoclonal antibodies, particularly among immunosuppressed patients. However, high-titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma continues to be effective against VOCs because of its broad-spectrum immunomodulatory properties. Thus, we report clinical outcomes of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were treated with COVID-19-specific therapeutics and a subgroup also treated with vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma. We found that the administration of vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma was associated with a significantly decreased incidence of hospitalization among immunocompromised COVID-19 outpatients. Our data add to the contemporary data providing evidence to support the clinical utility of high-titer convalescent plasma as antibody replacement therapy in immunocompromised patients.

Immunomodulators and risk for breakthrough infection after third COVID-19 mRNA vaccine among patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A cohort study

Objectives

To investigate COVID-19 breakthrough infection after third mRNA vaccine dose among patients with RA by immunomodulator drug class, and we hypothesized that CD20 inhibitors (CD20i) would have higher risk for breakthrough COVID-19 vs. TNF inhibitors (TNFi).

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study investigating breakthrough COVID-19 among RA patients at Mass General Brigham in Boston, MA, USA. Patients were followed from the date of 3rd vaccine dose until breakthrough COVID-19, death, or end of follow-up (18/Jan/2023). Covariates included demographics, lifestyle, comorbidities, and prior COVID-19. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate breakthrough COVID-19 risk by immunomodulator drug class. We used propensity score (PS) overlap-weighting to compare users of CD20i vs. TNFi.

Results

We analyzed 5781 patients with RA that received 3 mRNA vaccine doses (78.8% female, mean age 64.2 years). During mean follow-up of 12.8 months, 1173 (20.2%) had breakthrough COVID_19. Use of CD20i (adjusted HR 1.74, 95%CI 1.30-2.33) and glucocorticoid monotherapy (adjusted HR 1.47, 95%CI 1.09-1.98) were each associated with breakthrough COVID-19 compared to TNFi use. In the PS overlap-weighted analysis, CD20i users also had higher breakthrough COVID-19 risk than TNFi users (HR 1.62, 95%CI 1.02-2.56). A sensitivity analysis excluding patients with cancer or interstitial lung disease yielded similar findings.

Conclusions

We identified CD20i and glucocorticoid monotherapy as risk factors for breakthrough COVID-19 among patients with RA after a 3rd vaccine dose. This contemporary study highlights the real-world impact of blunted immune responses in these subgroups and the need for effective risk mitigation strategies.