The antibody response of haematological malignancies to COVID-19 infection and vaccination

Effective Neutralizing Antibody Response Against SARS-CoV-2 Virus and Its Omicron BA.1 Variant in Fully Vaccinated Hematological Patients

SARS-CoV-2 and its variants cause CoronaVIrus Disease 19 (COVID-19), a pandemic disease. Hematological malignancies increase susceptibility to severe COVID-19 due to immunosuppression. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies protect against severe COVID-19. This retrospective real-life study aimed to evaluate seropositivity and neutralizing antibody rates against SARS-CoV-2 and its Omicron BA.1 variant in hematological patients. A total of 106 patients with different hematologic malignancies, who have mostly received three or more vaccine doses (73%), were included in this study. Serum was collected between May and June 2022. The primary endpoint was anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response against ancestral (wild type; wt) and Omicron BA.1 virus, defined as a neutralizing antibody titer ≥ 1:10. Adequate neutralizing antibody response was observed in 75 (71%) and 87 (82%) of patients for wt and Omicron BA.1 variants, respectively.However, patients with B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders and/or those treated with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies in the prior 12 months showed a lower seropositivity rate compared to other patients against both Omicron BA.1 variant (73% vs 91%; P = 0.02) and wt virus (64% vs 78%; P = 0.16). Our real-life experience confirmed that full vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 induces adequate neutralizing antibody protection for both the wt virus and Omicron BA.1 variants, even in hematological frail patients. However, protective measures should be maintained in hematological patients, especially those with B-cell lymphoproliferative diseases treated with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, because these subjects could have a reduced neutralizing antibody production.

A pan-SARS-CoV-2-specific soluble angiotensin-converting enzyme 2-albumin fusion engineered for enhanced plasma half-life and needle-free mucosal delivery

Immunocompromised patients often fail to raise protective vaccine-induced immunity against the global emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants. Although monoclonal antibodies have been authorized for clinical use, most have lost their ability to potently neutralize the evolving Omicron subvariants. Thus, there is an urgent need for treatment strategies that can provide protection against these and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants to prevent the development of severe coronavirus disease 2019. Here, we report on the design and characterization of a long-acting viral entry-blocking angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) dimeric fusion molecule. Specifically, a soluble truncated human dimeric ACE2 variant, engineered for improved binding to the receptor-binding domain of SARS-CoV-2, was fused with human albumin tailored for favorable engagement of the neonatal fragment crystallizable receptor (FcRn), which resulted in enhanced plasma half-life and allowed for needle-free transmucosal delivery upon nasal administration in human FcRn-expressing transgenic mice. Importantly, the dimeric ACE2-fused albumin demonstrated potent neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 immune escape variants.

Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab as Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis against COVID-19 for Multiple Myeloma Patients: A Prospective Study in the Omicron Era

Background: tixagevimab/cilgavimab, distributed under the name "Evusheld", was the first available pre-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 other than vaccination. It received an EUA from the FDA after sufficient trial data showed efficacy in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections and subsequent severe disease. Its potential benefits for high-risk immunocompromised patients generated a lot of interest. Individuals with multiple myeloma fall into this category, as they are characterized by attenuated immune responses and, in some cases, vaccines have limited efficacy. Methods: this single-center, prospective study included consecutive patients with multiple myeloma. All individuals were considered high-risk for COVID-19 due to their underlying disease. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as data regarding COVID-19 infection and antibodies, were collected. Patients were administered two intramuscular 150 mg doses of Evusheld and were monitored during the follow-up period. Results: one hundred and eleven multiple myeloma patients were included in this analysis, with a median age of 64 years (range 58-69) and fifty-three were females (47.7%). Fourteen patients (12.6%) had a prior history of COVID-19 and all patients were vaccinated with either three or four doses of mRNA-based vaccines. An increase was observed in the median neutralizing-antibody levels before and after tixagevimab/cilgavimab administration, from 92.6% to 97.3%. The high levels were sustainable, with a median neutralizing-antibody level of 95.4% at 3 months post Evusheld administration. Overall, nine patients (8.1%) were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the follow-up period, at a median of 31 days. There were no SARS-CoV-2- infection-related hospitalizations or deaths. The monoclonal antibody combination was well tolerated, with no infusion-related reactions or major adverse events, and pain at the injection site only was reported by 33 patients (30%). Conclusions: tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Evusheld) seemed beneficial for patients with multiple myeloma, who presented high neutralizing-antibody levels and a low incidence of COVID-19 during the initial Omicron wave. No new safety concerns emerged. However, novel combinations of monoclonal antibodies against the new circulating variants of SARS-CoV-2 are deemed necessary in view of the emergence of immune tolerance.

Factors associated with timely COVID-19 vaccination in a population-based cohort of patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

In many jurisdictions, cancer patients were prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination because of increased risk of infection and death. To understand sociodemographic disparities that affected timely receipt of COVID-19 vaccination among cancer patients, we undertook a population-based study in Ontario, Canada.

METHODS

Patients older than 18 years and diagnosed with cancer January 2010 to September 2020 were identified using administrative data; vaccination administration was captured between approval (December 2020) up to February 2022. Factors associated with time to vaccination were evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 356 535 patients, the majority of whom had solid tumor cancers (85.9%) and were not on active treatment (74.1%); 86.8% had received at least 2 doses. The rate of vaccination was 25% lower in recent (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.72 to 0.76) and nonrecent immigrants (HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.79 to 0.81). A greater proportion of unvaccinated patients were from neighborhoods with a high concentration of new immigrants or self-reported members of racialized groups (26.0% vs 21.3%, standardized difference = 0.111, P < .001), residential instability (27.1% vs 23.0%, standardized difference = 0.094, P < .001), or material deprivation (22.1% vs 16.8%, standardized difference = 0.134, P < .001) and low socioeconomic status (20.9% vs 16.0%, standardized difference = 0.041, P < .001). The rate of vaccination was 20% lower in patients from neighborhoods with the lowest socioeconomic status (HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.81 to 0.84) and highest material deprivation (HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.78 to 0.81) relative to those in more advantaged neighborhoods.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite funding of vaccines and prioritization of high-risk populations, marginalized patients were less likely to be vaccinated. Differences are likely due to the interplay between systemic barriers to access and cultural or social influences affecting uptake.

Clinical usefulness of testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibodies

In the COVID-19 pandemic era, antibody testing against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has proven an invaluable tool and herein we highlight some of the most useful clinical and/or epidemiological applications of humoral immune responses recording. Anti-spike circulating IgGs and SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies can serve as predictors of disease progression or disease prevention, whereas anti-nucleocapsid antibodies can help distinguishing infection from vaccination. Also, in the era of immunotherapies we address the validity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody monitoring post-infection and/or vaccination following therapies with the popular anti-CD20 monoclonals, as well as in the context of various cancers or autoimmune conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis. Additional crucial applications include population immunosurveillance, either at the general population or at specific communities such as health workers. Finally, we discuss how testing of antibodies in cerebrospinal fluid can inform us on the neurological complications that often accompany COVID-19.

Antibody response and intra-host viral evolution after plasma therapy in COVID-19 patients pre-exposed or not to B-cell-depleting agents

Administration of plasma therapy may contribute to viral control and survival of COVID-19 patients receiving B-cell-depleting agents that impair humoral immunity. However, little is known on the impact of anti-CD20 pre-exposition on the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. Here, we evaluated the relationship between anti-spike immunoglobulin G (IgG) kinetics and the clinical status or intra-host viral evolution after plasma therapy in 36 eligible hospitalized COVID-19 patients, pre-exposed or not to B-cell-depleting treatments. The majority of anti-CD20 pre-exposed patients (14/17) showed progressive declines of anti-spike IgG titres following plasma therapy, contrasting with the 4/19 patients who had not received B-cell-depleting agents (p = 0.0006). Patients with antibody decay also depicted prolonged clinical symptoms according to the World Health Organization (WHO) severity classification (p = 0.0267) and SARS-CoV-2 viral loads (p = 0.0032) before complete virus clearance. Moreover, they had higher mutation rates than patients able to mount an endogenous humoral response (p = 0.015), including three patients with one to four spike mutations, potentially associated with immune escape. No relevant differences were observed between patients treated with plasma from convalescent and/or mRNA-vaccinated donors. Our study emphasizes the need for an individualized clinical care and follow-up in the management of COVID-19 patients with B-cell lymphopenia.

Real-World Third COVID-19 Vaccine Dosing and Antibody Response in Patients With Hematologic Malignancies

Purpose

This study sought to describe the changes in immune response to a third dose of either Pfizer's or Moderna's COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (3V) among patients with hematologic malignancies, as well as associated characteristics.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study analyzed pre-3V and post-3V data on 493 patients diagnosed with hematologic malignancies across a large Midwestern health system between August 28, 2021, and November 1, 2021. For antibody testing, S1 spike antigen of the SARS-CoV-2 virus titer was used to determine serostatus.

Results

Among 493 participants, 274 (55.6%) were seropositive both pre- and post-3V (+/+) while 115 (23.3%) seroconverted to positive from prior negative following the third dose (-/+). The remaining 104 (21.1%) were seronegative both before and after 3V (-/-). No participant was seropositive pre-3V and seronegative post-3V (+/-). Results showed a statistically significant increase in the proportion of seropositivity after receiving a third COVID-19 vaccine (P<0.00001). Response to 3V was significantly associated with the 3V vaccine type (P=0.0006), previous COVID-19 infection (P=0.0453), and malignancy diagnosis (P<0.0001). Likelihood of seroconversion (-/+) after 3V was higher in the group of patients with multiple myeloma or related disorders compared to patients with lymphoid leukemias (odds ratio: 8.22, 95% CI: 2.12-31.79; P=0.0008).

Conclusions

A third COVID-19 vaccination is effective in producing measurable seroconversion in many patients with hematologic malignancies. Oncologists should actively encourage all their patients, especially those with multiple myeloma, to receive a 3V, given the high likelihood of seroconversion.

Patient and health practitioner views and experiences of a cancer trial before and during COVID-19: qualitative study

Background

Understanding patient and health practitioner perspectives on clinical trials can inform opportunities to enhance trial conduct and design, and therefore patient experience. Patients with haematological cancers have faced additional risk and uncertainty during the pandemic but it is unclear how they and practitioners have experienced cancer trials during this period. In the context of a haemato-oncology trial (PETReA), we compared patient and practitioner views and experiences of PETReA before and during COVID-19.

Methods

Qualitative study embedded within PETReA. Semi-structured interviews (N=41) with patients and practitioners from 16 NHS sites before (n=17) and during the first wave of COVID-19 (n=24). Analysis drew on the framework approach.

Results

Practitioners acknowledged the need for the trial to continue during the pandemic but their treatment preferences altered, becoming more pronounced for patients who had a favourable response to induction treatment, while staying unchanged for patients with a less favourable response. Practitioners commented that COVID-19 meant the evidence base for the trial arms was lacking or mixed, but that it likely increased the risks of maintenance treatment for patients with a favourable response to induction treatment. While only one participant interviewed withdrew from PETReA during the pandemic, others said they would consider withdrawing if information that they were at increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19 became available. During COVID-19, patients described less frequent contact with the trial team, which left some feeling less clear about their trial pathway. However, several described having in-depth, collaborative discussions with practitioners about the risks and benefits of randomisation in the context of COVID-19. Patients valued these discussions and were reassured by the emphasis practitioners placed on patients being free to withdraw if circumstances changed, and this helped patients feel comfortable about continuing in PETReA.

Conclusions

The findings point to ways trial communication can support patients to feel comfortable about continuing in a trial during uncertain times, including adopting a more in-depth, collaborative exploration of the risks and benefits of trial arms with patients and emphasising voluntariness. The results are relevant to trialists recruiting patients who are clinically extremely vulnerable or are at increased risk of poor COVID-19 outcomes despite being vaccinated.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06453-z.