Serologic Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination in Patients With Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Duration of Postvaccination Neutralizing Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and Medication Effects: Results from the Safety and Immunogenicity of COVID-19 Vaccination in Systemic Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

In the face of the ongoing circulation of SARS-CoV-2, the durability of neutralization post-COVID-19 vaccination in immune-mediated inflammatory disease (IMID) is a key issue, as are the effects of medications.

METHODS

Adults (n = 112) with inflammatory bowel disease, psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, spondylarthritis, and systemic lupus were recruited from participating Canadian medical centers from 2021 to 2023. We focused on log-transformed neutralization (lentivirus methods) as a continuous outcome, with separate models for wild-type and Omicron strains BA.1 and BA.5.

RESULTS

Compared with 30 to 120 days postvaccination, subsequent periods were associated with greater neutralization in unadjusted models for wild-type, BA.1, and BA.5 strains and against the BA.1 strain in adjusted models. Rituximab was associated with lower neutralization for the BA.1 strain in adjusted models, with a similar trend for BA.5. In methotrexate users, there were trends for less neutralization of BA.1 and BA.5 in all unadjusted models, whereas in adjusted models, there was significantly lower neutralization only for the wild type. Three or more doses and Omicron-specific vaccines were both independently associated with better neutralization ability for all three strains. A COVID-19 infection within six months before sampling was associated with higher neutralization of wild type and BA.1 in adjusted analyses. Anti-tumor necrosis factor agents were associated with lower neutralization ability for BA.5 in adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSION

Neutralization responses in immunosuppressed individuals with IMID were durable over time and were augmented by more than three doses and Omicron-specific vaccines. Less neutralization was seen with certain medications. Our work clarifies the joint effects of vaccine history, infection, and medications on COVID-19 immunity.

Immunogenicity, Effectiveness, and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines among Patients with Immune-Mediated Dermatological Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Immunocompromised individuals, primarily attributable to using immunosuppressants, face heightened COVID-19 risks. Despite the proven efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, their impact on patients with immune-mediated dermatological diseases remains unclear. This study aims to thoroughly examine vaccine immunogenicity, effectiveness, and safety in immune-mediated dermatological disease patients. Clinical studies in adults that compared vaccinated immune-mediated dermatological disease patients with vaccinated healthy controls or unvaccinated immune-mediated dermatological disease patients in terms of vaccine immunogenicity, COVID-19 infection, adverse events, or exacerbation of immune-mediated dermatological diseases were searched via electronic databases. Seventeen studies (1,348,690 participants) were included. Seroconversion rates between immune-mediated dermatological disease patients and healthy controls were not different. However, among individuals aged ≤55 years, immune-mediated dermatological disease patients had lower mean anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels. Immunosuppressed immune-mediated dermatological disease patients also had lower titres and were less likely to achieve T-cell response. In terms of safety, the risk of adverse events was higher in atopic dermatitis patients, but those with psoriasis had a reduced risk. Additionally, immunosuppressed patients had fewer adverse events. Vaccinated immune-mediated dermatological disease patients had a lower risk of COVID-19 infection than unvaccinated patients but a higher risk than healthy controls; however, disease exacerbation may be induced. In conclusion, immune-mediated dermatological diseases showed a reduced vaccine response in our meta-analysis, yet vaccination remained effective against COVID-19 infection and well tolerated.

Impact of immunosuppressive therapy on SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine effectiveness in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: a Danish nationwide cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Patients receiving immunosuppressives have been excluded from trials for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine efficacy. Investigation of immunosuppressants' impact on effectiveness of vaccines, particularly in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID), is therefore required.

DESIGN

We performed a nationwide cohort study to assess the risk of COVID-19 infection in vaccinated patients with IMID exposed to immunosuppressives compared with IMID unexposed to immunosuppressives. Exposure to immunosuppressives in the 120 days before receiving the second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination was assessed. Patients were followed from date of second vaccination and weighted Cox models were used to estimate the risk of infection associated with immunosuppressives. Secondary outcomes included hospitalisation and death associated with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Risk of infection by immunosuppressant drug class was also analysed.

SETTING

This study used population-representative data from Danish national health registries in the period from 1 January to 30 November 2021.

RESULTS

Overall, 152 440 patients were followed over 19 341 person years. Immunosuppressants were associated with a significantly increased risk of infection across IMID (HR: 1.4, 95% CI 1.2 to 1.5), in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (HR: 1.6, 95% CI 1.4 to 1.9) and arthropathy (HR: 1.3, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.4) but not psoriasis (HR: 1.1, 95% CI 0.9 to 1.4). Immunosuppressants were also associated with an increased risk of hospitalisation across IMID (HR: 1.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.0), particularly in IBD (HR: 2.1, 95% CI 1.0 to 4.1). No significantly increased risk of death in immunosuppressant exposed patients was identified. Analyses by immunosuppressant drug class showed increased COVID-19 infection and hospitalisation with anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF), systemic corticosteroid, and rituximab and other immunosuppressants in vaccinated patients with IMID.

CONCLUSION

Immunosuppressive therapies reduced effectiveness of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination against infection and hospitalisation in patients with IMID. Anti-TNF, systemic corticosteroids, and rituximab and other immunosuppressants were particularly associated with these risks.

Outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection in individuals with and without inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a Danish nationwide cohort study

OBJECTIVE

In a setting with an extensive SARS-CoV-2 test strategy and availability of effective vaccines, we aimed to investigate if patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) face greater risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 and have a worse prognosis of increased risk of hospitalisation, assisted ventilation and death compared with the general population.

METHODS

This was a nationwide, population-based register study that compared outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Danish patients with IRD (n=66 840) with matched population controls (n=668 400). The study period was from March 2020 to January 2023. Cox regression analyses were used to calculate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for SARS-CoV-2-related outcomes.

RESULTS

We observed a difference in time to first and second positive SARS-CoV-2 test in patients with IRD compared with the general population (IRR 1.06, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.07) and (IRR 1.21, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.27). The risks of hospital contact with COVID-19 and severe COVID-19 were increased in patients with IRD compared with population controls (IRR 2.11, 95% CI 1.99 to 2.23) and (IRR 2.18, 95% CI 1.94 to 2.45). The risks of assisted ventilation (IRR 2.33, 95% CI 1.89 to 2.87) and COVID-19 leading to death were increased (IRR 1.98, 95% CI 1.69 to 2.33). Patients with IRD had more comorbidities compared with the general population. A third SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was associated with a reduced need for hospitalisation with COVID-19 and reduced the risk of death.

CONCLUSION

Patients with IRD have a risk of SARS-CoV-2, which nearly corresponds to the general population but had a substantial increased risk of hospitalisation with COVID-19, severe COVID-19, requiring assisted ventilation and COVID-19 leading to death, especially in patients with comorbidities.

Trajectory analyses to identify persistently low responders to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a prospective multicentre controlled study, J-COMBAT

BACKGROUND

The degree of immune response to COVID-19 vaccination in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients based on actual changes in anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titres over time is unknown.

METHODS

Data were prospectively acquired at four predetermined time points before and after two vaccine doses in a multicentre observational controlled study. The primary outcome was humoral immune response and vaccination safety in IBD patients. We performed trajectory analysis to identify the degree of immune response and associated factors in IBD patients compared with controls.

RESULTS

Overall, 645 IBD patients and 199 control participants were analysed. At 3 months after the second vaccination, the seronegative proportions were 20.3% (combination of anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF]α and thiopurine) and 70.0% (triple combination including steroids), despite that 80.0% receiving the triple combination therapy were seropositive at 4 weeks after the second vaccination. Trajectory analyses indicated three degrees of change in immune response over time in IBD patients: high (57.7%), medium (35.6%), and persistently low (6.7%). In the control group, there was only one degree, which corresponded with IBD high responders. Older age, combined anti-TNFα and thiopurine (odds ratio [OR], 37.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.64-251.54), steroids (OR, 21.47; 95%CI, 5.47-84.26), and tofacitinib (OR, 10.66; 95%CI, 1.49-76.31) were factors associated with persistently low response. Allergy history (OR, 0.17; 95%CI, 0.04-0.68) was a negatively associated factor. Adverse reactions after the second vaccination were significantly fewer in IBD than controls (31.0% vs 59.8%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Most IBD patients showed a sufficient immune response to COVID-19 vaccination regardless of clinical factors. Assessment of changes over time is essential to optimize COVID-19 vaccination, especially in persistently low responders.

Efficacy of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines in patients with rheumatic diseases

Objectives

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

Patients and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Susceptibility to COVID-19 and Immunologic Response to Vaccination in Patients With Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are a highly heterogeneous group of diseases that share a common etiology of immune dysregulation, such as rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, and psoriasis, among others. It is estimated that the prevalence of IMIDs ranges between 5% and 7% in developed countries. As current management of IMIDs includes the use of immunomodulatory medications, the resulting weakened immune response can increase the risk of infection, including with SARS-CoV-2 (the causative agent of COVID-19) and reduce response to vaccination, placing these individuals at continued risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19. In this article, we summarize the current literature related to COVID-19 outcomes and the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination among patients with rheumatologically dominated IMIDs, as well as the effect of immunomodulatory therapies on these outcomes. We conclude by providing current COVID-19 vaccination recommendations for individuals with IMID.

Humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease on immunosuppressive medication: association to serum drug levels and disease type

OBJECTIVES

Immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are not well characterized. The aims of this study were to explore the serological response associated with IBD, and immunosuppressive medications including serum concentrations of biologics and thiopurine metabolites.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, observational study included adult patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD), and healthy controls. Antibodies to the receptor-binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins, and serum concentrations of ongoing biologic and immunomodulatory medications were assessed prior to, and 2-5 weeks after the second vaccine dose. Serologic response was defined as anti-Spike antibodies ≥70 AU/ml.

RESULTS

In 958 IBD patients (380 UC, 578 CD) and 323 healthy controls, the median (Q1; Q3) anti-Spike antibody level (AU/ml) was lower in patients (618 (192; 4370)) compared to controls (3355 (896; 7849)) (p < 0.001). The antibody levels were lower in CD (439 (174; 3304)) compared to UC (1088 (251; 5975)) (p < 0.001). No associations were demonstrated between antibody levels and serum drug concentrations for TNF inhibitor (TNFi), vedolizumab and ustekinumab. Patients receiving TNFi + thiopurines with a subtherapeutic 6-thioguanine nucleotide (6-TGN) level had higher response rate (93%) compared to patients with 6-TGN within the therapeutic range (53%) (p = 0.003). A diagnosis of UC, mRNA-1273 vaccine, and other treatments than TNFi + thiopurines were associated with humoral response.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with CD had an attenuated humoral response to SARS-COV-2 vaccination as compared to patients with UC. The lack of association between serum levels of biologics and serologic response indicates vaccination regardless of proximity to drug administration.

Immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety of CoronaVac and Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccines in patients with psoriasis receiving systemic therapies: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Evidence of immune response to COVID-19 vaccine in psoriasis patients on biological agents is lacking. This study aimed to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels following vaccination with CoronaVac or Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA in patients using biological agents or methotrexate, high-titer antibody levels achievement rate, and impact of medications on immunogenicity.

METHODS

This noninterventional, prospective cohort study included 89 patients and 40 controls vaccinated with two doses of inactivated (CoronaVac) or Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccines. Anti-spike and neutralising antibodies were analysed before and three to six weeks after the second dose. Adverse effects and symptomatic COVID-19 were assessed.

RESULTS

Median anti-spike and neutralising antibody titers after CoronaVac were significantly lower in patients than controls (57.92 U/mL vs 125.4 U/mL, and 1/6 vs 1/32, respectively, p < 0.05). Patients were less likely to achieve high-titer anti-spike antibody levels (25.6 % vs 50 %). Infliximab was associated with attenuated vaccine response. Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine induced comparable median anti-spike (2,080 U/mL vs 2,976.5 U/mL,) and neutralising antibody levels (1/96 vs 1/160) in patients and controls, respectively (p > 0.05). High-titer anti-spike and neutralising antibodies development rates were comparable among patients and controls (95.2 % vs 100 %, and 30.4 % vs 50.0 %, respectively, p > 0.05). Nine (10.1 %) COVID-19 cases- all mild - were identified. Psoriasis flare was seen in 6.74 %, mostly after Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.

CONCLUSION

Psoriasis patients treated with biological agents and methotrexate developed similar response to mRNA vaccine but weaker response to inactivated vaccine. Infliximab reduced response to the inactivated vaccine. Adverse effects were more frequent with mRNA vaccine, but none was severe.

Humoral immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with coeliac disease and other noncoeliac enteropathies compared to healthy controls

OBJECTIVES

Data are lacking on the immunogenicity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines in patients affected by coeliac disease, Whipple's disease and other noncoeliac enteropathies (NCE), characterised by primary or drug-related immunosuppression. We aimed to assess humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in these patients compared to controls.

METHODS

Between December 2021 and January 2022, IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies were measured in serum samples of coeliac disease, Whipple's disease and NCE patients attending our gastroenterology outpatient clinic for follow-up, who had received their first SARS-CoV-2 vaccination dose 3-6-9 (±1) months prior. Humoral response was compared with healthy controls (vaccinated healthcare workers undergoing serological screening), matched for gender, age, and time from first vaccine dose at sample collection.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients [107 coeliac disease; 10 Whipple's disease; 2 common-variable immunodeficiency (CVID); 1 idiopathic villous atrophy; 77 F, 42 ± 16 years] and 240 matched controls (154 F, 43 ± 14 years) were enrolled. At 3, 6 and 9 months, humoral response in coeliac patients was not impaired compared to controls. Inadequate humoral response to vaccination was significantly more common among Whipple's disease patients than controls ( P  < 0.001). Patients on immunosuppressive therapy had markedly lower IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titres (median 14 vs. 520 BAU/mL, P  < 0.001). As expected, patients with CVID showed no humoral response to vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Humoral immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines was not reduced in coeliac disease patients compared to controls, although it was in Whipple's disease and CVID patients. Post-vaccination humoral response should be monitored in patients with Whipple's disease and chronic enteropathies on immunosuppressive therapy in order to schedule vaccine booster doses.

A bibliometric analysis of inflammatory bowel disease and COVID-19 researches

Background

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) often require immunosuppressive therapy and are hence susceptible to various opportunistic viral and bacterial infections. In this regard, many studies on IBD and COVID-19 have been conducted. However, no bibliometric analysis has been performed. This study provides a general overview of IBD and COVID-19.

Methods

Publications about IBD and COVID-19 from 2020 to 2022 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database. Bibliometric analysis was performed using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and HistCite.

Results

A total of 396 publications were retrieved and considered in this study. The maximum number of publications were from the United States, Italy, and England, and the contributions of these countries were significant. Kappelman ranked first in article citations. The Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and Inflammatory Bowel Diseases were the most prolific affiliation and journal, respectively. The most influential research topics were "management", "impact", "vaccination", and "receptor". The following keywords represented research frontiers: "depression", "the quality of life of IBD patients", "infliximab", "COVID-19 vaccine", and "second vaccination".

Conclusions

Over the past 3 years, most studies on IBD and COVID-19 have focused on clinical research. In particular, topics such as "depression", "the quality of life of IBD patients", "infliximab", "COVID-19 vaccine", and "second vaccination" were noted to have received much attention recently. Future research should focus on our understanding of the immune response to COVID-19 vaccination in biologically treated patients, the psychological impact of COVID-19, IBD management guidelines, and the long-term impact of COVID-19 in IBD patients. This study will provide researchers with a better understanding of research trends on IBD during COVID-19.

Efficacy of mRNA and Inactivated Whole Virus Vaccines Against COVID-19 in Patients with Chronic Respiratory Diseases

Background

While different COVID-19 vaccines have been developed, there has been lack of data on the efficacy comparison between mRNA and inactivated whole virus vaccine among patients with chronic respiratory diseases, including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and bronchiectasis.

Methods

This was a retrospective case control study on the efficacy of BNT162b2 (mRNA vaccine) and CoronaVac (inactivated whole virus vaccine) against COVID-19 in patients with chronic respiratory diseases. A total of 327 patients were included, with 109 patients infected with COVID-19 matched with 218 patients without COVID-19. The co-primary outcomes were vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19, COVID-19-related hospitalization and COVID-19-related respiratory failure. Vaccine effectiveness was calculated using the formula (1-adjusted odds ratio) x 100.

Results

Patients who received at least 2 doses of CoronaVac had lower risk of being hospitalized for COVID-19 and developing respiratory failure than those who did not have vaccination, with adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.189 (95% CI = 0.050-0.714, p = 0.014) and 0.128 (95% CI = 0.026-0.638, p = 0.012) respectively. Patients who received at least 2 doses of BNT162b2 had lower risk of being hospitalized for COVID-19 and developing respiratory failure than those who did not have vaccination with adjusted OR of 0.207 (95% CI = 0.043-0.962, p = 0.050) and 0.093 (95% CI = 0.011-0.827, p = 0.033) respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the risks of being hospitalized for COVID-19 and developing respiratory failure between patients who received at least 2 doses of CoronaVac or BNT162b2.

Conclusion

BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccines are effective in preventing hospitalization for COVID-19 and respiratory failure complicating COVID-19 among patients with chronic respiratory diseases. Patients with chronic respiratory diseases should be encouraged to have COVID-19 vaccination.

Humoral and Cellular Response of Transplant Recipients to a Third Dose of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High rates of nonresponse to 2 doses of mRNA severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine have been reported in transplant recipients. Several studies have investigated the efficacy of a third dose in this population. However, efficacy remains unclear, as response rates vary across studies. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of a third dose of any mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in transplant recipients.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis reporting guidelines (PROSPERO:CRD42021281498) were followed. Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to December 2, 2021, without restrictions. All full-text studies reporting on the efficacy of a third dose of any mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in pediatric and adult transplant recipients were included. The National Institutes of Health quality assessment tool for case series and the Cochrane risk of bias tool determined study quality. Meta-analysis was performed via the DerSimonian-Laird random-effect model.

RESULTS

Of 84 records, 12 studies totaling 1257 patients met inclusion criteria. One study was a randomized controlled trial, whereas all other studies were observational. Across 7 studies (801 patients), humoral response after 3 doses was observed in 66.1% (95% confidence interval, 62.8%-69.4%; I2 = 0%) of transplant recipients. Triple immunosuppression, mycophenolate, antiproliferatives, and belatacept use were associated with reduced odds of humoral response in studies reporting multivariate analyses. Transplant recipients receiving a third dose displayed higher levels of neutralizing antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 variants (Alpha, Beta, and Delta) compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

A third dose SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine should be strongly considered in transplant recipients. Limitations included lack of controlled studies and clinically relevant thresholds to determine response to vaccination.

SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID19 vaccination across eight immune-mediated inflammatory disorders: A prospective, real-life Belgian cohort study - the BELCOMID study

Background

The risks and impact of COVID19 disease and vaccination in patients with Immune Mediated Inflammatory Diseases (IMID) remain incompletely understood. IMID patients and particularly patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment were excluded from the original, registrational phase-3 COVID19 vaccination efficacy and safety trials. Real-world observational data can help to fill this gap in knowledge. The BELCOMID study aims to explore the interaction between IMIDs, immune-modulating treatment modalities and SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in a real-life patient cohort.

Methods

A multidisciplinary, prospective, observational cohort study was set up. Consecutive patients with IMIDs of the gut, joints and skin followed at two high-volume referral centers were invited. Both patients under conventional treatment or targeted immune modulating therapies were included. Patient data and serological samples were collected at 3 predefined periods (before COVID19 vaccination, before booster vaccination, after booster vaccination). Primary endpoints were positive PCR-test and SARS-CoV-2 serology reflecting previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination. Associations with IMID treatment modality and IMID disease activity were assessed. Results of the first two inclusion periods (before booster vaccination) are reported.

Results

At the first inclusion period data was assessed of 2165 IMID-patients before COVID19 vaccination. At the second inclusion period, data of 2065 patients was collected of whom 1547 had received complete baseline COVID19 vaccination and 222 were partially vaccinated. SARS-CoV-2 infection rate remained low in both groups. No significant increase in IMID flare-up rate was noted in patients with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Multiple logistic regression analyses did not show a significant influence of IMID-treatment modality or IMID activity on SARS-CoV-2 infection risk (based on PCR positivity or N-serology). Patients treated with conventional immunomodulators, systemic steroids, and patients on advanced therapies such as biologics or small molecules, had reduced S-antibody seroconversion. S-antibody response was also lower in patients without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and in active smokers. A subset of patients (4.1%) had no S- nor N-antibody seroconversion following complete baseline vaccination.

Conclusion

The BELCOMID study results confirm the benign course of COVID19 infection and vaccination in a large real-life IMID-population. However, our results underscore the need for repeated vaccination and smoking cessation in patients with IMIDs treated with immune-modulating therapies or systemic steroids during the pandemic.

The effect of immunomodulators on seroconversion after BNT162b2 and AZD1222 vaccines in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Biologic and nonbiologic immunomodulators, used to treat immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), could impair the immune response to COVID-19 vaccines and thus vaccine effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to investigate the association between biologic and nonbiologic immunomodulators and seroconversion following the first and second dose of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with IMIDs.

METHODS

Serum samples were collected following the first or second dose of the BNT162b2 or AZD1222 vaccines from patients receiving biologic and/or nonbiologic immunomodulators for one or more of psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease or systemic lupus erythematosus. Seroconversion was defined as a positive Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (spike protein subunit S1/receptor binding domain) immunoassay (≥ 0.8 U mL-1). Association between immunomodulator exposure and seroconversion was assessed using logistic regression, adjusting for age and sex.

RESULTS

After excluding those with prior COVID-19, post-first vaccine dose samples from 193 participants and post-second dose samples from 312 participants were included in the analysis. Following the first vaccine dose, 17.6% (n = 34) of participants did not seroconvert. Seroconversion was reduced for those on nonbiologic [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12-0.69] or combined nonbiologic and biologic treatment (adjusted OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.045-0.45) compared with those on biologic monotherapy. Subgroup analysis demonstrated reduced odds of seroconversion in those on methotrexate (adjusted OR 0.097, 95% CI 0.19-0.49) or prednisolone treatment (adjusted OR 0.044, 95% CI 0.002-1.00) relative to tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor monotherapy. No participants receiving rituximab (n < 5) seroconverted after the first vaccine dose. Following the second vaccine dose, 1.6% of all participants did not seroconvert. Non-seroconversion was associated with receiving rituximab (n = 3 of 4) compared with those receiving other therapies (n = 2 of 308, P < 0.001). Post hoc analyses demonstrated that non-seroconversion was associated with age [adjusted OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.037-0.93 for those aged 60 years and over (reference category age 18-39 years)], but not sex, ethnicity or vaccine type.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with nonbiologics, particularly methotrexate, is associated with impaired seroconversion following two BNT162b2 or AZD1222 vaccine doses, in patients with IMIDs. These findings are consistent with those of other published studies. While this could indicate reduced protection against COVID-19, the immunological parameters that correlate most closely with vaccine effectiveness need to be defined to reach this conclusion.

The persistence of anti-Spike antibodies following two SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses in patients on immunosuppressive therapy compared to healthy controls-a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The durability of vaccine-induced humoral immunity against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) on immunosuppressive therapy is not known. The aim of this study was to compare the persistence of anti-Spike antibodies following two-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccination between IMID patients and healthy controls and to identify factors associated with antibody decline.

METHODS

IMID patients on immunosuppressive medication enrolled in the prospective observational Nor-vaC study were included. Participants received two-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Serum collected at two time points following vaccination (first assessment within 6-48 days, second within 49-123 days) were analyzed for antibodies binding the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein. Multivariable regression models estimated percent reduction in anti-RBD over 30 days and factors associated with reduction.

RESULTS

A total of 1108 patients (403 rheumatoid arthritis, 195 psoriatic arthritis, 195 spondyloarthritis, 124 ulcerative colitis, 191 Crohn's disease) and 134 controls provided blood samples within the defined intervals (median 19 days [IQR 15-24] and 97 days [87-105] after second vaccine dose). Antibody levels were lower in patients compared to controls at both time points, with median anti-RBD 2806 BAU/ml [IQR 1018-6068] in patients and 6187 BAU/ml [4105-7496] in controls (p<0.001) at first assessment, and 608 BAU/ml [IQR 58-1053] in patients and 1520 BAU/ml [979-3766] in controls (p<0.001) at second assessment. At second assessment, low anti-RBD antibody levels (defined as <200 BAU/ml) were found in 449 (41%) patients, and 6 (5%) controls (p<0.001). The change was - 83% in patients and - 66% in controls (p<0.001). Patients had a greater estimated 30 days percent reduction in anti-RBD levels compared to controls - 4.9 (95% CI - 7.4 to - 2.4), (p<0.05). Among therapies, mono- or combination treatment with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors was associated with the greatest decline.

CONCLUSIONS

Within 4 months after vaccination, antibody levels declined considerably in both IMID patients and controls. Patients had lower initial antibody levels and a more pronounced decline compared to healthy controls and were therefore more likely to decline to low antibody levels. These results support that IMID patients need additional vaccine doses at an earlier stage than healthy individuals.

Response to COVID-19 vaccine is reduced in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, but improved with additional dose

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is recommended for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, suppressed immune responses have been reported for fully vaccinated patients under immunosuppressive therapy, mainly from Western countries. We prospectively analyzed antibody titers of IBD patients in Asia induced by two-dose and additional dose of messengerRNA COVID-19 vaccine.

METHODS

After measuring high-affinity antibody titers, factors associated with antibody titers were identified by multiple regression analyses using the following covariates: sex, age (≥60 or <60 years), disease type (Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis), vaccine type (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273), time from second/third vaccination, molecular-targeted agent (anti-tumor necrosis factor [TNF] agents, ustekinumab, vedolizumab, tofacitinib, or no molecular-targeted agents), thiopurine, steroid, and 5-aminosalicylic acid.

RESULTS

Among 409 patients analyzed, mean titer was 1316.7 U/mL (SD, 1799.3); 403 (98.5%) were judged to be seropositive (≥0.8 U/mL), and 389 (95.1%) had neutralizing antibodies (≥15 U/mL). After the third vaccination, mean titer raised up to 21 123.8 U/mL (SD, 23 474.5); all 179 were seropositive, and 178 (99.4%) had neutralizing antibodies. In 248 patients with genetic data, there was no difference in mean titer after two/third doses between carriers and non-carriers of HLA-A24 associated with severe disease during COVID-19 infection. A multiple regression analyses using covariates revealed that older age, vaccine type (BNT162b2), time from second/third dose, anti-TNF agent, tofacitinib, and thiopurine were independently associated with lower antibody titers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings further support the recommendation for COVID-19 vaccination in patients under immunosuppressive therapy, especially additional third dose for patients receiving anti-TNF agents and/or thiopurine or tofacitinib.

Cohort profile: top the Spread Ottawa (SSO)-a community-based prospective cohort study on antibody responses, antibody neutralisation efficiency and cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination

PURPOSE

To investigate the robustness and longevity of SARS-CoV-2 immune responses conferred by natural infection and vaccination among priority populations such as immunocompromised individuals and people with post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 in a prospective cohort study (Stop the Spread Ottawa-SSO) in adults living in the Ottawa region. In this paper, we describe the study design, ongoing data collection and baseline characteristics of participants.

PARTICIPANTS

Since October 2020, participants who tested positive for COVID-19 (convalescents) or at high risk of exposure to the virus (under surveillance) have provided monthly blood and saliva samples over a 10-month period. As of 2 November 2021, 1026 adults had completed the baseline survey and 976 had attended baseline bloodwork. 300 participants will continue to provide bimonthly blood samples for 24 additional months (ie, total follow-up of 34 months).

FINDINGS TO DATE

The median age of the baseline sample was 44 (IQR 23, range: 18-79) and just over two-thirds (n=688; 67.1%) were female. 255 participants (24.9%) had a history of COVID-19 infection confirmed by PCR and/or serology. Over 600 participants (60.0%) work in high-risk occupations (eg, healthcare, teaching and transportation). 108 participants (10.5%) reported immunocompromising conditions or treatments at baseline (eg, cancer, HIV, other immune deficiency, and/or use of immunosuppressants).

FUTURE PLANS

SSO continues to yield rich research potential, given the collection of pre-vaccine baseline data and samples from the majority of participants, recruitment of diverse subgroups of interest, and a high level of participant retention and compliance with monthly sampling. The 24-month study extension will maximise opportunities to track SARS-CoV-2 immunity and vaccine efficacy, detect and characterise emerging variants, and compare subgroup humoral and cellular response robustness and persistence.

BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is safe in a setting of patients on biologic therapy with inflammatory bowel diseases: a monocentric real-life study

OBJECTIVES

: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease were excluded from trials that led to the approval of anti-COVID-19 vaccines and are worthy of real-life studies providing information on the safety of these vaccines in this clinical setting.

METHODS

: A prospective observational study was performed to estimate BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine local and systemic adverse events (AEs) incidence related to administration in patients with inflammatory bowel disease through a questionnaire administered at the first, second, and third doses. Disease activity by Mayo Partial Score and Harvey-Bradshaw Index was also evaluated.

RESULTS

80 patients with a median age of 47.5 years were initially enrolled. The local AEs rate was 26.25%, 58.75%, and 28.37% at the first, second, and third doses of the vaccine, respectively. In contrast, the systemic AEs rate was 52.2%, 48.75%, and 43.24%. Clinic-demographic predictor variables for AEs were not identified. Vaccination did not affect disease activity and no statistically significant difference in disease activity index scores was observed between the three doses. No serious adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSION

This vaccine is safe in a population of patients with inflammatory bowel disease and, therefore, can be safely administered in this clinical setting.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Serologic Response following Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at greater risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and have attenuated response to vaccinations. In the present meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the serologic response to the COVID-19 vaccine in SOT recipients. A search of electronic databases was conducted to identify SOT studies that reported the serologic response to COVID-19 vaccination. We analyzed 44 observational studies including 6158 SOT recipients. Most studies were on mRNA vaccination (mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2). After a single and two doses of vaccine, serologic response rates were 8.6% (95% CI 6.8–11.0) and 34.2% (95% CI 30.1–38.7), respectively. Compared to controls, response rates were lower after a single and two doses of vaccine (OR 0.0049 [95% CI 0.0021–0.012] and 0.0057 [95% CI 0.0030–0.011], respectively). A third dose improved the rate to 65.6% (95% CI 60.4–70.2), but in a subset of patients who had not achieved a response after two doses, it remained low at 35.7% (95% CI 21.2–53.3). In summary, only a small proportion of SOT recipients achieved serologic response to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, and that even the third dose had an insufficient response. Alternative strategies for prophylaxis in SOT patients need to be developed. Key Contribution: In this meta-analysis that included 6158 solid organ transplant recipients, the serologic response to the COVID-19 vaccine was extremely low after one (8.6%) and two doses (34.2%). The third dose of the vaccine improved the rate only to 66%, and in the subset of patients who had not achieved a response after two doses, it remained low at 36%. The results of our study suggest that a significant proportion of solid organ transplant recipients are unable to achieve a sufficient serologic response after completing not only the two series of vaccination but also the third booster dose. There is an urgent need to develop strategies for prophylaxis including modified vaccine schedules or the use of monoclonal antibodies in this vulnerable patient population.

Serologic response and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in HSCT or CAR T-cell recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Patients receiving hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) or chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR T-cell) therapy are immunocompromised and at high risk of viral infection, including SAR2-CoV-2 infection. However, the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in these recipients is not well characterized. The present meta-analysis evaluated the serologic response and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in these population.

Methods

Literature databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, MedRvix and BioRvix) were searched for original studies with serologic response post COVID-19 vaccination in HSCT or CAR T-cell recipients published until July 14, 2022. The analysis included 27 observational studies with a total of 2899 patients receiving allogeneic HSCT (2506), autologous HSCT (286) or CAR T-cell therapy (107), and 683 healthy participants with serologic response data. Random effects models were used to pool the rate of serologic response to COVID-19 vaccination in HSCT or CAR T-cell recipients and odds ratio comparing with healthy controls.

Results

The pooled seropositivity rates in HSCT and CAR T-cell recipients were 0.624 [0.506–0.729] for one dose, 0.745 [0.712–0.776] for two doses. The rates were significantly lower than those in healthy controls (nearly 100%). In subgroup analysis, CAR T-cell recipients exhibited an even lower seroconversion rate (one dose: 0.204 [0.094–0.386]; two doses: 0.277 [0.190–0.386]) than HSCT counterparts (one dose: 0.779 [0.666–0.862]; two doses: 0.793 [0.762–0.821]). The rates were comparable between autologous and allogeneic HSCT recipients. Other possible impact factors related to seropositivity were time interval between therapy and vaccination, use of immunosuppressive drugs and immune cell counts. Most vaccine-related adverse effects were mild and resolvable, comparable to general population.

Conclusions

This analysis revealed a diminished response to COVID-19 vaccines in HSCT or CAR T-cell recipients. Our findings may inform regular COVID-19 vaccination at appropriate intervals after HSCT or CAR T-cell therapy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40164-022-00299-6.

Electrochemical paper-based antigen sensing platform using plant-derived monoclonal antibody for detecting SARS-CoV-2

The current approaches of diagnostic platforms for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infections mostly relied on adapting the existing technology. In this work, a simple and low-cost electrochemical sensing platform for detecting SAR-CoV-2 antigen was established. The proposed sensor combined the innovative disposable paper-based immunosensor and cost-effective plant-based anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody CR3022, expressed in Nicotiana benthamiana. The cellulose nanocrystal was modified on screen-printed graphene electrode to provide the abundant COOH functional groups on electrode surface, leading to the high ability for antibody immobilization. The quantification of the presence receptor binding domain (RBD) spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 was performed using differential pulse voltammetry by monitoring the changing current of [Fe(CN)₆]^3-/4- redox solution. The current change of [Fe(CN)₆]^3-/4- before and after the presence of target RBD could be clearly distinguished, providing a linear relationship with RBD concentration in the range from 0.1 pg/mL to 500 ng/mL with the minimum limit of detection of 2.0 fg/mL. The proposed platform was successfully applied to detect RBD in nasopharyngeal swab samples with satisfactory results. Furthermore, the paper-based immunosensor was extended to quantify the RBD level in spiked saliva samples, demonstrating the broadly applicability of this system. This electrochemical paper-based immunosensor has the potential to be employed as a point-of-care testing for COVID-19 diagnosis.

Safety and immunogenicity of inactivated COVID-19 vaccination in adult rheumatic patients in South China: a prospective study

Patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) are considered to be a high-risk population for infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). The effectiveness of inactivated COVID-19 vaccinations (ICVs) was described as more effective than 95%. Despite this, no data on the immunogenicity and safety of the ICV in Han race stable RD patients in China. In this study, we sought to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the ICVs in RD patients in South China. A total of 80 adult stable RD patients were recruited. Following 14–35 days of immunization, cheiluminescence immunoassays (CLIA) were utilized to detect antibodies titers. An investigation into the relative parameters on the immunogenicity response to vaccination was carried out using logistic regression analysis. Compared to the HC group, the positive response of IgG and Nab in RD patients were lower than those in healthy control (HC) (P = .040 and P < .0001, respectively) after two doses of ICV were inoculated. The use of methotrexate (P = .016) and prednisolone (P = .018), and the level of red blood cell distribution width-C (RDW-C) (P = .035) and C-reactive protein (P = .015) were independently associated with lower rises in the magnitude of COVID-19 vaccine antibodies. No vaccine-related serious adverse reactions were observed in either group. After receiving two doses of ICVs, the production of protective antibodies in stable RD patients treated with immunosuppressive agents may decrease. It was discovered that ICVs were safe and well tolerated by RD patients.

What is the context?

There are currently no accessible data on the efficacy and safety of inactivated COVID-19 vaccinations in South China RD patients who are receiving immunosuppressive medications.

What is new?

Inactivated COVID-19 vaccinations were immunogenic in stable RD patients in our investigation. No significant adverse reactions to the vaccination were seen in either group. No disease flares were observed in our study.

What is the impact?

Inactivated COVID-19 vaccinations are immunogenic and safe in stable RD patients in China, according to the findings of this study. The use of methotrexate or prednisolone, the RDW-C level, and the CRP level may all have an effect on the development of protective antibodies following vaccination.

Use of Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Antagonists Is Associated With Attenuated IgG Antibody Response Against SARS-CoV-2 in Vaccinated Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Introduction

Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) frequently receive immunomodulating treatment, which may render them at increased risk of an attenuated immune response upon vaccination. In this study, we assessed the effects of different types of commonly prescribed immunosuppressive medications on the serological response after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with IBD.

Methods

In this prospective observational cohort study, IgG antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 were measured 2-10 weeks after completion of standard vaccination regimens in patients with IBD. Clinical characteristics, previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, type of vaccine (mRNA- or vector-based) and medication use were recorded at the time of sampling. Subsequently, a chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay was used for the quantitative determination of IgG antibodies against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the S1 subunit of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2.

Results

Three hundred and twelve (312) patients with IBD were included (172 Crohn’s disease [CD] and 140 ulcerative colitis [UC]). Seroconversion (defined as titer of >50 AU/ml) was achieved in 98.3% of patients. Antibody concentrations were significantly lower in patients treated with TNF-α-antagonists vs. non-users of TNF-α-antagonists (geometric mean [95% confidence interval]: 2204 [1655-2935] vs. 5002 [4089-6116] AU/ml, P<0.001). In multivariable models, use of TNF-α-antagonists (P<0.001), vector vaccines (P<0.001), age (>50 years) (P<0.01) and CD (P<0.05) were independently associated with lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers. In patients who received mRNA vaccines, users of thiopurines (either prescribed as monotherapy or in combination with biologicals) demonstrated significantly lower antibody titers compared to thiopurine non-users (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Despite reassuring findings that most patients with IBD have detectable antibodies after anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, TNF-α-antagonists were found to be strongly associated with an attenuated IgG antibody response after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, independent of vaccine type, the time elapsed after vaccination and blood sampling, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and patient age. Patients treated with thiopurines and receiving mRNA-based vaccines demonstrated lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers compared with non-users.

Recent advances in clinical practice: management of inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has raised considerable concerns that patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), particularly those treated with immunosuppressive therapies, may have an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition, develop worse outcomes following COVID-19, and have suboptimal vaccine response compared with the general population. In this review, we summarise data on the risk of COVID-19 and associated outcomes, and latest guidance on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with IBD. Emerging evidence suggests that commonly used medications for IBD, such as corticosteroids but not biologicals, were associated with adverse outcomes to COVID-19. There has been no increased risk of de novo, or delayed, IBD diagnoses, however, an overall decrease in endoscopy procedures has led to a rise in the number of missed endoscopic-detected cancers during the pandemic. The impact of IBD medication on vaccine response has been a research priority recently. Data suggest that patients with IBD treated with antitumour necrosis factor (TNF) medications had attenuated humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, and more rapid antibody decay, compared with non-anti-TNF-treated patients. Reassuringly, rates of breakthrough infections and hospitalisations in all patients who received vaccines, irrespective of IBD treatment, remained low. International guidelines recommend that all patients with IBD treated with immunosuppressive therapies should receive, at any point during their treatment cycle, three primary doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines with a further booster dose as soon as possible. Future research should focus on our understanding of the rate of antibody decay in biological-treated patients, which patients require additional doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, the long-term risks of COVID-19 on IBD disease course and activity, and the potential risk of long COVID-19 in patients with IBD.

Accelerated waning of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases

BACKGROUNDLimited information is available on the impact of immunosuppressants on COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID).METHODSThis observational cohort study examined the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, or psoriatic disease, with or without maintenance immunosuppressive therapies. Ab and T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2, including neutralization against SARS-CoV-2 variants, were determined before and after 1 and 2 vaccine doses.RESULTSWe prospectively followed 150 subjects, 26 healthy controls, 9 patients with IMID on no treatment, 44 on anti-TNF, 16 on anti-TNF with methotrexate/azathioprine (MTX/AZA), 10 on anti-IL-23, 28 on anti-IL-12/23, 9 on anti-IL-17, and 8 on MTX/AZA. Ab and T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 were detected in all participants, increasing from dose 1 to dose 2 and declining 3 months later, with greater attrition in patients with IMID compared with healthy controls. Ab levels and neutralization efficacy against variants of concern were substantially lower in anti-TNF-treated patients than in healthy controls and were undetectable against Omicron by 3 months after dose 2.CONCLUSIONSOur findings support the need for a third dose of the mRNA vaccine and for continued monitoring of immunity in these patient groups.FUNDINGFunded by a donation from Juan and Stefania Speck and by Canadian Institutes of Health (CIHR)/COVID-Immunity Task Force (CITF) grants VR-1 172711 and VS1-175545 (to THW and ACG), CIHR FDN-143250 (to THW), GA2-177716 (to VC, ACG, and THW), and GA1-177703 (to ACG) and the CIHR rapid response network to SARS-CoV-2 variants, CoVaRR-Net (to ACG).

Safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Risk of adverse effects and flare of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are frequently cited reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched to identify studies reporting the use of COVID-19 vaccine in IBD. We selected studies reporting the incidence of various adverse effects (local or systemic) and flares of IBD after COVID-19 vaccination. The pooled incidence rates for various adverse effects, stratified for the dose and the type of vaccine (adenoviral or mRNA) were estimated.

RESULTS

Nine studies (16 vaccination cohorts) were included. The pooled incidence rate of overall adverse events was 0.55 (95%CI, 0.45-0.64, I²= 95%). The pooled incidence rate of local adverse events was 0.64 (0.47-0.78, I²= 100%). The pooled incidence rates of fatigue, headache, myalgia, fever and chills were 0.30 (0.21-0.40, I²= 99%), 0.23 (0.17-0.30, I²= 99%), 0.18 (0.13-0.24, I²= 99%), 0.10 (0.06-0.17, I²= 98%) and 0.15 (0.06-0.3, I²= 86%), respectively. The pooled incidence rates of severe adverse events, adverse events requiring hospitalization and flares of IBD following COVID-19 vaccination were 0.02 (0.00-0.12, I²= 97%), 0.00 (0.00-0.01, I²= 27%) and 0.01 (0.01-0.03, I²= 45%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccination in patients with IBD appears to be safe with only mild adverse events. Flares of IBD and severe adverse events requiring hospitalization were infrequent.

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.

Evaluation of Humoral and Cellular Immune Responses to the SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Patients With Common Variable Immunodeficiency Phenotype and Patient Receiving B-Cell Depletion Therapy

Introduction

SARS-CoV-2 vaccines' effectiveness is not yet clearly known in immunocompromised patients. This study aims to assess the humoral and cellular specific immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and the predictors of poor response in patients with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) phenotype and in patients treated with B-cell depletion therapies (BCDT), as well as the safety of these vaccines.

Methods

From March to September 2021, we performed a prospective study of all adult patients who would receive the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and were previously diagnosed with (i) a CVID syndrome (CVID phenotype group; n=28) or (ii) multiple sclerosis (MS) treated with B-cell depleting therapies three to six months before vaccination (BCD group; n=24). Participants with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection; or prior SARS-CoV-2 vaccine administration; or use of any immunosuppressant (except BCDT in MS group) were excluded. A group of subjects without any medical condition that confers immunosuppression and who met all study criteria was also assessed (control group; n=14). A chemiluminescence immunoassay was used to determine pre- and post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine anti-S IgG antibodies. T-cell specific response was assessed by analysis of pre- and post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination blood samples with an interferon-gamma release assay. The baseline blood sample also included several biochemical, haematological and immunological analyses.

Results

SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are safe in immunocompromised patients, although their effectiveness was lower than in healthy individuals. CVID phenotype patients showed impaired humoral (29%) and cellular (29%) response, while BCD patients fundamentally presented humoral failure (54%). Low IgA values, low CD19+ peripheral B cells, low switched memory B cells, and a low CD4+/CD8+ ratio were predictors of inadequate specific antibody response in CVID phenotype patients. No factor was found to predict poor cellular response in CVID phenotype patients, nor a defective humoral or cellular response in BCD patients.

Conclusion

The effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in CVID phenotype and BCD patients is lower than in healthy individuals. Knowledge of predictive factors of humoral and cellular response failure in immunocompromised patients could be very useful in clinical practice, and thus, studies in this regard are clearly needed.

Antibody decay, T cell immunity and breakthrough infections following two SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses in inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with infliximab and vedolizumab

Anti tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) drugs increase the risk of serious respiratory infection and impair protective immunity following pneumococcal and influenza vaccination. Here we report SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-induced immune responses and breakthrough infections in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, who are treated either with the anti-TNF antibody, infliximab, or with vedolizumab targeting a gut-specific anti-integrin that does not impair systemic immunity. Geometric mean [SD] anti-S RBD antibody concentrations are lower and half-lives shorter in patients treated with infliximab than vedolizumab, following two doses of BNT162b2 (566.7 U/mL [6.2] vs 4555.3 U/mL [5.4], p <0.0001; 26.8 days [95% CI 26.2 - 27.5] vs 47.6 days [45.5 - 49.8], p <0.0001); similar results are also observed with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination (184.7 U/mL [5.0] vs 784.0 U/mL [3.5], p <0.0001; 35.9 days [34.9 - 36.8] vs 58.0 days [55.0 - 61.3], p value < 0.0001). One fifth of patients fail to mount a T cell response in both treatment groups. Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections are more frequent (5.8% (201/3441) vs 3.9% (66/1682), p = 0.0039) in patients treated with infliximab than vedolizumab, and the risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection is predicted by peak anti-S RBD antibody concentration after two vaccine doses. Irrespective of the treatments, higher, more sustained antibody levels are observed in patients with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to vaccination. Our results thus suggest that adapted vaccination schedules may be required to induce immunity in at-risk, anti-TNF-treated patients.

Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccines among Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Japan

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is recommended for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines has not been sufficiently evaluated in patients with IBD. We aimed to assess the acceptance and hesitancy of COVID-19 vaccination and related factors among these patients. A retrospective cohort study using a self-reported questionnaire was performed among patients with IBD between 22 June 2021 and 30 August 2021. Of the 187 participants, 10.2% (n = 19) were hesitant to be vaccinated. Patients in the vaccine-hesitant group were younger (p = 0.009) and had a shorter disease duration (p = 0.020). Vedolizumab was prescribed more frequently (p = 0.024) and immunomodulators were less frequently used (p = 0.027) in this group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92-1.00, p = 0.042) and the use of immunomodulators (OR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.01-0.66, p = 0.019) as independent significant factors for vaccine hesitancy. The COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy rate in patients with IBD in Japan was 10% in this study. The Japanese COVID-19 vaccination campaign appears to be successful. The risk of COVID-19 among patients with IBD requires adequate measures to ensure that vaccines are accepted by vaccine-hesitant patients. These findings may be helpful in achieving adequate vaccination rates.

Reduced antibody activity against SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 delta virus in serum of mRNA-vaccinated individuals receiving tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Although vaccines effectively prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in healthy individuals, they appear to be less immunogenic in individuals with chronic inflammatory disease (CID) or receiving chronic immunosuppression therapy.

METHODS

Here we assessed a cohort of 77 individuals with CID treated as monotherapy with chronic immunosuppressive drugs for antibody responses in serum against historical and variant severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viruses after immunization with the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine.

FINDINGS

Longitudinal analysis showed the greatest reductions in neutralizing antibodies and Fc effector function capacity in individuals treated with tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors (TNFi), and this pattern appeared to be worse against the B.1.617.2 delta virus. Within 5 months of vaccination, serum neutralizing titers of all TNFi-treated individuals tested fell below the presumed threshold correlate for antibody-mediated protection. However, TNFi-treated individuals receiving a third mRNA vaccine dose boosted their serum neutralizing antibody titers by more than 16-fold.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccine boosting or administration of long-acting prophylaxis (e.g., monoclonal antibodies) will likely be required to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in this susceptible population.

FUNDING

This study was supported by grants and contracts from the NIH (R01 AI157155, R01AI151178, and HHSN75N93019C00074; NIAID Centers of Excellence for Influenza Research and Response (CEIRR) contracts HHSN272201400008C and 75N93021C00014; and Collaborative Influenza Vaccine Innovation Centers [CIVIC] contract 75N93019C00051).