COVID-19 vaccination-related adverse events among autoimmune disease patients: results from the COVAD study

What rheumatologists need to know about mRNA vaccines: current status and future of mRNA vaccines in autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases

Messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines as a novel vaccine platform offer new tools to effectively combat both emerging and existing pathogens which were previously not possible. The 'plug and play' feature of mRNA vaccines enables swift design and production of vaccines targeting complex antigens and rapid incorporation of new vaccine constituents as needed. This feature makes them likely to be adopted for widespread clinical use in the future.Currently approved mRNA vaccines include only those against SARS-CoV-2 virus. These vaccines demonstrate robust immunogenicity and offer substantial protection against severe disease. Numerous mRNA vaccines against viral pathogens are in the early to late phase of development. Several mRNA vaccines for influenza are tested in clinical trials, with some already in phase 3 studies. Other vaccines in the early and late phases of development include those targeting Cytomegalovirus, varicella zoster virus, respiratory syncytial virus and Epstein-Barr virus. Many of these vaccines will likely be indicated for immunosuppressed populations including those with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD). This review focuses on the mechanism, safety and efficacy of mRNA in general and summarises the status of mRNA vaccines in development for common infectious diseases of particular interest for patients with AIIRD.

Understanding patient perspectives on vaccine decision making in adults with autoimmune bullous diseases: a qualitative study

Patients with autoimmune bullous diseases are at an increased risk of infection, both from the underlying skin disease and from immunosuppressive treatments. Limited information is available on vaccine beliefs and behaviors in dermatology patients and adults with autoimmune bullous diseases in particular. To understand vaccine decision making, identify perceived risks and benefits of vaccinations, and discuss individual experiences in patients with autoimmune bullous diseases in the United States. A qualitative study was performed utilizing semi-structured interviews, and analysis was conducted on NVivo. Patterns were identified in the coded data, and representative quotations were recorded for each major theme. Interviews were conducted between February 15, 2022 and September 15, 2022. Twenty patients with a diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid, mucous membrane pemphigoid, pemphigus vulgaris, or pemphigus foliaceous were interviewed. Of the 20 participants, 14 (70%) were female, with a mean (SD, range) age of 64.8 (13.2, 34-83) years. Key themes that emerged from qualitative analysis of the interviews included patient concerns regarding their increased susceptibility to infection, potential exacerbation of skin disease following vaccination, and the effect of immunosuppressive medications on humoral response to vaccines. Lack of appointment availability, difficulty accessing vaccines, and cost were commonly identified barriers to vaccination. These findings provide valuable knowledge for dermatologists in regard to providing counseling specific to patient concerns and to improve communication surrounding vaccination in the dermatology setting.

Autoimmune disorders reported following COVID-19 vaccination: A disproportionality analysis using the WHO database

PURPOSE

Owing to adverse event following immunization (AEFI) related to autoimmune disorders and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines sharing common biological mechanisms, identifying the risk of AEFIs associated with COVID-19 vaccines remains a critical unmet need. We aimed to assess the potential safety signals for 16 AEFIs and explore co-reported adverse events (AEs) and drugs using the global database of the World Health Organization, VigiBase.

METHODS

We assessed the occurrence of 16 AEFIs following COVID-19 vaccination through the Standardized MedDRA Queries group "Immune-mediated/Autoimmune Disorders" from MedDRA and performed a disproportionality analysis using reporting odds ratio (ROR) and information component (IC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

We identified 25,219 events associated with COVID-19 vaccines in VigiBase. Although rare, we detected four potential safety signals related to autoimmune disorders following COVID-19 vaccination, including ankylosing spondylitis or psoriatic arthritis (ROR 1.86; 95% CI 1.53-2.27), inflammatory bowel disease (ROR 1.77; 95% CI 1.60-1.96), polymyalgia rheumatica (ROR 1.42; 95% CI 1.30-1.55), and thyroiditis (ROR 1.40; 95% CI 1.30-1.50), with positive IC025 values. The top co-reported AEs were musculoskeletal disorders, and immunosuppressants were the most representative co-reported drugs.

CONCLUSION

In addressing the imperative to comprehend AEFI related to autoimmune disorders following COVID-19 vaccination, our study identified four potential safety signals. Thus, our research underscores the importance of proactive safety monitoring for the identification of the four AEFIs following COVID-19 vaccination, considering the associated advantages.

Safety and Efficacy of Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Patients with Rheumatic Diseases and Serum Antibody Changes Post-Omicron Variant Infection

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine has a similar effectiveness and safety profile in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) and healthy controls (HCs).

METHODS

Between August 10, 2021 and September 30, 2021, 134 HCs and 269 patients with RMDs were recruited. All participants who tested negative for COVID-19 were vaccinated with SARS-CoV-2 inactivated vaccine. Next, 150 patients with RMDs and 30 HCs infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant within the previous 12 weeks were recruited between February 20, 2023 and March 1, 2023. Serum samples were collected from each participant, and the serum immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 were determined using a chemiluminescence assay.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was found in the titer of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibodies, or in the incidence of vaccination-related adverse events between the RMD and HC groups (P = 0.183, P = 0.903, and P = 0.27, respectively). Serum IgG titers of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies were significantly higher in patients who received two or more doses of inactivated vaccine than in patients who were unvaccinated or had received one dose of vaccine (244.36 ± 109.79 vs. 66.20 ± 82.50; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 inactivated vaccines have similar protective effects in HCs and patients with RMDs, with an appreciable safety profile. Fully vaccinated patients with RMDs infected with the Omicron variant were able to produce effective neutralizing antibody concentrations.

Type 1 diabetes, COVID-19 vaccines and short-term safety: Subgroup analysis from the global COVAD study

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations have been proven to be generally safe in healthy populations. However, the data on vaccine safety in patients with type 1 diabetes are scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the frequency and severity of short-term (<7-day) adverse vaccination events (AEs) and their risk factors among type 1 diabetes patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study analyzed data from the COVID-19 vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) survey database (May to December 2021; 110 collaborators, 94 countries), comparing <7-day COVID-19 vaccine AE among type 1 diabetes patients and healthy controls (HCs). Descriptive statistics; propensity score matching (1:4) using the variables age, sex and ethnicity; and multivariate analyses were carried out.

RESULTS

This study analyzed 5,480 completed survey responses. Of all responses, 5,408 were HCs, 72 were type 1 diabetes patients (43 females, 48.0% white European ancestry) and Pfizer was the most administered vaccine (39%). A total of 4,052 (73.9%) respondents had received two vaccine doses. Patients with type 1 diabetes had a comparable risk of injection site pain, minor and major vaccine AEs, as well as associated hospitalizations to HCs. However, type 1 diabetes patients had a higher risk of severe rashes (3% vs 0.4%, OR 8.0, 95% confidence interval 1.7-36), P = 0.007), although reassuringly, these were rare (n = 2 among type 1 diabetes patients).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccination was safe and well tolerated in patients with type 1 diabetes with similar AE profiles compared with HCs, although severe rashes were more common in type 1 diabetes patients.

Vaccine hesitancy decreases in rheumatic diseases, long-term concerns remain in myositis: a comparative analysis of the COVAD surveys

OBJECTIVE

COVID-19 vaccines have a favorable safety profile in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) such as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs); however, hesitancy continues to persist among these patients. Therefore, we studied the prevalence, predictors and reasons for hesitancy in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the two international COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) e-surveys.

METHODS

The first and second COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analysed using regression models in different groups.

RESULTS

We analysed data from 18 882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) (OR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.30, P < 0.001). However, concerns/fear over long-term safety had increased (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 2.9, 4.6, P < 0.01). We noted with concern greater skepticism over vaccine science among patients with IIMs than AIRDs (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.08, 3.2, P = 0.023) and HCs (OR: 4; 95% CI: 1.9, 8.1, P < 0.001), as well as more long-term safety concerns/fear (IIMs vs AIRDs - OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2, 2.9, P = 0.001; IIMs vs HCs - OR: 5.4 95% CI: 3, 9.6, P < 0.001). Caucasians [OR 4.2 (1.7-10.3)] were likely to be more hesitant, while those with better PROMIS physical health score were less hesitant [OR 0.9 (0.8-0.97)].

CONCLUSION

Vaccine hesitancy has decreased from 2021 to 2022, long-term safety concerns remain among patients with IIMs, particularly in Caucasians and those with poor physical function.

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

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

High fatigue scores in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: a multigroup comparative study from the COVAD e-survey

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) confer a significant risk of disability and poor quality of life, though fatigue, an important contributing factor, remains under-reported in these individuals. We aimed to compare and analyze differences in visual analog scale (VAS) scores (0-10 cm) for fatigue (VAS-F) in patients with IIMs, non-IIM systemic autoimmune diseases (SAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs). We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the data from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) international patient self-reported e-survey. The COVAD survey was circulated from December 2020 to August 2021, and details including demographics, COVID-19 history, vaccination details, SAID details, global health, and functional status were collected from adult patients having received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Fatigue experienced 1 week prior to survey completion was assessed using a single-item 10 cm VAS. Determinants of fatigue were analyzed in regression models. Six thousand nine hundred and eighty-eight respondents (mean age 43.8 years, 72% female; 55% White) were included in the analysis. The overall VAS-F score was 3 (IQR 1-6). Patients with IIMs had similar fatigue scores (5, IQR 3-7) to non-IIM SAIDs [5 (IQR 2-7)], but higher compared to HCs (2, IQR 1-5; P < 0.001), regardless of disease activity. In adjusted analysis, higher VAS-F scores were seen in females (reference female; coefficient -0.17; 95%CI -0.21 to -13; P < 0.001) and Caucasians (reference Caucasians; coefficient -0.22; 95%CI -0.30 to -0.14; P < 0.001 for Asians and coefficient -0.08; 95%CI -0.13 to 0.30; P = 0.003 for Hispanics) in our cohort. Our study found that patients with IIMs exhibit considerable fatigue, similar to other SAIDs and higher than healthy individuals. Women and Caucasians experience greater fatigue scores, allowing identification of stratified groups for optimized multidisciplinary care and improve outcomes such as quality of life.

Effects of COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccination on Rheumatic Diseases: Results From a Survey of Patient-Reported Outcomes After Vaccination

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) and disease flares after vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and influenza in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs).

METHODS

Between November 2021 and March 2022, a survey was conducted among patients with ARD who received COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations. The questionnaire included 11 mandatory and closed-ended questions, and the following items were collected: medical history, immunization history, type of vaccine, patient-reported AEs, flare-up of the underlying disease after vaccination, and a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 or influenza. We compared the occurrence of vaccine-related adverse reactions to the COVID-19 and influenza vaccines based on the survey results. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify the factors affecting AEs or disease flares and to compare the post-vaccine response to mixed and matched vaccines.

RESULTS

We analyzed 601 adults with ARD who received the COVID-19 vaccine, with a mean age of 49.6 years (80.5% female). A total of 255 participants (42.4%) received a complete course of primary vaccination, 342 (56.9%) completed the booster dose, and 132 (38.6%) received a mixed vaccine. The frequencies of AEs (188 [52.2%] vs. 21 [5.8%]; P < 0.001) and disease flares (58 [16.2%] vs. 5 [1.4%]; P < 0.001) after COVID-19 vaccination were significantly higher than those after influenza vaccination. In the risk factor analysis, previous allergic reaction to other vaccines (odds ratio, 1.95; confidence interval, 1.07-3.70; P = 0.034) was the only factor associated with the occurrence of AEs. There was no difference in the post-vaccine responses between the mixed and matched vaccines.

CONCLUSION

The results of the survey of patients with ARD revealed that patient-reported AEs and underlying disease flares after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine were significantly higher than those after the influenza vaccine.

Attitudes and concerns regarding booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine among Egyptian patients with autoimmune and rheumatic diseases: a cross-sectional survey study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 booster dose vaccination acceptance and actual vaccination behavior is not known among Egyptian individuals with autoimmune and rheumatic diseases (ARDs). The aim of this study was to investigate the acceptability of booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, as well as the factors that drive and inhibit that acceptance among Egyptian patients diagnosed with ARDs.

METHODS

This interview-based, cross-sectional analytical study was carried out on ARD patients from 20 July to 20 November 2022. A questionnaire was created to assess sociodemographic and clinical data, as well as COVID-19 vaccination status and the intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose, perception of health benefits of it in addition to the perceived barriers and/or concerns.

RESULTS

A total of 248 ARD patients were included, with a mean age of 39.8 years (SD = 13.2), and 92.3% were females. Among them, 53.6% were resistant to the COVID-19 booster dose, whereas 31.9% were acceptant and 14.5% were hesitant. Those who were administering corticosteroids and hydroxychloroquine shown significantly greater booster hesitancy and resistance (p = 0.010 and 0.004, respectively). The primary motivation for taking a booster dose among the acceptant group was own volition (92%). Most acceptants believed that booster dose can prevent serious infection (98.7%) and community spread (96.2%). Among the hesitant and resistant groups, the main concerns for booster dose were fear about its major adverse effects (57.4%) and long-term impact (45.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a low acceptability rate of booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine among Egyptian patients with ARD diseases. Public health workers and policymakers need to make sure that all ARD patients get clear messages about accepting the COVID-19 booster dose.

An insight overview on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines: Advantageous, pharmacology, mechanism of action, and prospective considerations

The worldwide spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has urged scientists to present some novel vaccine platforms during this pandemic to provide a rather prolonged immunity against this respiratory viral infection. In spite of many campaigns formed against the administration of mRNA-based vaccines, those platforms were the most novel types, which helped us meet the global demand by developing protection against COVID-19 and reducing the development of severe forms of this respiratory viral infection. Some societies are worry about the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine administration and the potential risk of genetic integration of inoculated mRNA into the human genome. Although the efficacy and long-term safety of mRNA vaccines have not yet been fully clarified, obviously their application has switched the mortality and morbidity of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study describes the structural features and technologies used in producing of COVID-19 mRNA-based vaccines as the most influential factor in controlling this pandemic and a successful pattern for planning to produce other kind of genetic vaccines against infections or cancers.

Social Media for Research Discourse, Dissemination, and Collaboration in Rheumatology

Social media has become an important venue for rheumatologists, patients, organizations, and other stakeholders to discuss recent research advances in diagnosis and management of rheumatic disorders. In this article, we describe the current state of how social media may enhance dissemination, discourse, and collaboration in rheumatology research. Social media may refer to social platforms like Twitter and Instagram or digital media like podcasts and other websites that are operated for providing as free, open-access medical education (FOAM). Twitter has been one of the most active social media venues and continues to host a vibrant rheumatology community. Examples of research discussions on Twitter include organic user tweets, educational threads ("tweetorials"), live-tweeting academic conferences, and journals posting recently-accepted articles. Some research collaborations have been initiated through social media interactions. Social media may also directly contribute to research by facilitating the recruitment of study participants and the collection of survey-based data. Thus, social media is an evolving and important tool to enhance research discourse, dissemination, and collaboration in rheumatology.

Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination uptake and hesitancy among Polish patients with inborn errors of immunity, autoinflammatory syndromes, and rheumatic diseases: A multicenter survey

Data regarding the willingness of patients affected by inborn errors of immunity to accept vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are limited. Therefore, this study assessed SARS-CoV-2 vaccination coverage and hesitancy in immunodeficient patients by surveying adults with primary immune deficiencies and autoinflammatory and rheumatic diseases on biologic therapy. The study was conducted from September 20, 2021, to January 22, 2022, when the primary coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations were available to all adults in Poland. We included 207 participants consecutively recruited from five referral centers (57% female; median age: 42.6 [range: 18–76, standard deviation ± 14.70] years). Overall, 55% (n = 114), 17% (n = 36), and 28% (n = 57) of the patients had primary immune deficiencies, autoinflammatory diseases, and rheumatic diseases, respectively. Among the entire cohort, 168 patients (81%) were vaccinated, and 82% were willing to receive a booster dose. Patients with autoinflammatory diseases had the highest vaccination rate (94.4%). A strong conviction that it was the correct decision (72%), fear of getting COVID-19 (38%), and expert opinions (34%) influenced the decision to vaccinate. Among the unvaccinated patients, 33.3% had primary or vocational education (p <0.001). Furthermore, only 33% believed they were at risk of a severe course of COVID-19 (p = 0.014), and 10% believed in vaccine efficacy (p <0.001). They also doubted the safety of the vaccine (p <0.001) and feared a post-vaccination flare of their disease (p <0.001). Half of the unvaccinated respondents declared that they would consider changing their decision. Vaccination coverage in immunodeficient patients was higher than in the general Polish population. However, the hesitant patients doubted the vaccine’s safety, feared a post-vaccination disease flare, and had primary or vocational education. Therefore, vaccination promotion activities should stress personal safety and the low risk of disease flares due to vaccination. Furthermore, all evidence must be communicated in patient-friendly terms.