Immunogenicity and safety of a fourth COVID-19 vaccination in rituximab-treated patients: an open-label extension study

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

BACKGROUND

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Kinetics of humoral and cellular immune responses 5 months post-COVID-19 booster dose by immune response groups at the peak immunity phase: An observational historical cohort study using the Fukushima vaccination community survey

Background

Understanding the waning of immunity after booster vaccinations is important to identify which immune-low populations should be prioritized.

Methods

We investigated longitudinal cellular and humoral immunity after the third vaccine dose in both high- and low-cellular and humoral immunity groups at the peak immunity phase after the booster vaccination in a large community-based cohort. Blood samples were collected from 1045 participants at peak (T1: median 54 days post-third dose) and decay (T2: median 145 days post-third dose) phases to assess IgG(S), neutralizing activity, and ELISpot responses. Participants were categorized into high/low ELISpot/IgG(S) groups at T1. Cellular and humoral responses were tracked for approximately five months after the third vaccination.

Results

In total, 983 participants were included in the cohort. IgG(S) geometric mean fold change between timepoints revealed greater waning in the >79 years age group (T2/T1 fold change: 0.27) and higher IgG(S) fold change in the low-ELISpot group at T1 (T2/T1 fold change: 0.32-0.33) than in the other groups, although ELISpot geometric mean remained stable.

Conclusions

Antibody level of those who did not respond well to third dose vaccination waned rapidly than those who responded well. Evidence-based vaccine strategies are essential in preventing potential health issues caused by vaccines, including side-effects.

[Corona vaccination under immunosuppression]

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to play a major role as a severe and potentially fatal airway infection, especially in vulnerable patient groups. In view of the thin data situation on the influence of treatment and response to vaccination, at the beginning of the corona pandemic it was a major challenge to predict the tolerability and effectiveness in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases under immunomodulation or immunosuppression. In the meantime, numerous studies have addressed the questions of response and tolerability, at least for the COVID-19 vaccination. Even in the first months of the vaccination campaign, a small study on a single center cohort could show that apart from patients with B‑cell depletion, all included patients showed a seroconversion after the first two vaccinations. This resulted in neither an increased occurrence of exacerbations of the underlying disease nor new autoimmune phenomena. Various studies have since then confirmed these data.

The serological immunogenicity of the third and fourth doses of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases on different biologic or targeted DMARDs: a Swedish nationwide study (COVID-19-REUMA)

Studies investigating the immunogenicity of additional COVID-19 vaccine doses in immunosuppressed patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) are still limited. The objective was to explore the antibody response including response to omicron virus subvariants (sBA.1 and sBS.2) after third and fourth COVID-19 vaccine doses in Swedish IRD patients treated with immunomodulating drugs compared to controls. Antibody levels to spike wild-type antigens (full-length protein and S1) and the omicron variants sBA.1 and sBA.2 (full-length proteins) were measured. A positive response was defined as having antibody levels over cut-off or ≥fourfold increase in post-vaccination levels for both antigens. Patients with arthritis, vasculitis, and other autoimmune diseases (n = 414), and controls (n = 61) receiving biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) with or without conventional synthetic DMARDs participated. Of these, blood samples were available for 370 patients and 52 controls after three doses, and 65 patients and 15 controls after four doses. Treatment groups after three vaccine doses were rituximab (n = 133), abatacept (n = 22), IL6r inhibitors (n = 71), JAnus Kinase inhibitors (JAK-inhibitors) (n = 56), tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNF-inhibitors) (n = 61), IL12/23/17 inhibitors (n = 27), and controls (n = 52). The percentage of responders after three and four vaccine doses was lower in rituximab-treated patients (59% and 57%) compared to controls (100%) (P < 0.001). After three doses, the percentage of responders in all other groups was 100%, including response to omicron sBA.1 and sBA.2. In rituximab-treated patients, higher baseline immunoglobulin G (IgG) and longer time-period between rituximab and vaccination predicted better response. In this Swedish nationwide study including IRD patients three and four COVID-19 vaccine doses were immunogenic in patients treated with IL6r inhibitors, TNF-inhibitors, JAK-inhibitors, and IL12/23/17-inhibitors but not in rituximab. As >50% of rituximab patients responded to vaccines including omicron subvariants, these patients should be prioritized for additional vaccine doses.

IMPORTANCE

Results from this study provide further evidence that additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines are immunogenic and result in satisfactory antibody response in a majority of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) receiving potent immunomodulating treatments such as biological or targeted disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) given as monotherapy or combined with traditional DMARDs. We observed that rituximab treatment, both as monotherapy and combined with csDMARDs, impaired antibody response, and only roughly 50% of patients developed a satisfactory antibody response including response to omicron subvariants after the third vaccine. In addition, higher IgG levels at the last rituximab course before the third vaccine dose and a longer time after the last rituximab treatment increased the chance of a satisfactory antibody response. These results indicate that rituximab-treated patients should be prioritized for additional vaccine doses.

CLINICAL TRIALS

EudraCT (European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database) with number 2021-000880-63.

Prognostic improvement and treatment of COVID-19 in patients with rheumatic diseases until December 2022: Analysis of the JCR COVID-19 registry in Japan

OBJECTIVES

The aim is to evaluate the treatment and prognosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) according to the time of onset and dominant strain in patients with rheumatic diseases.

METHODS

This study analysed a nationwide COVID-19 registry of Japanese patients with rheumatic diseases compiled between June 2020 and December 2022. The primary endpoints of the study were hypoxaemia incidence and mortality. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess differences according to the period of onset.

RESULTS

A total of 760 patients were compared across four periods. Hypoxaemia rates were 34.9, 27.2, 13.8, and 6.1% and mortality rates were 5.6, 3.5, 1.8, and 0% until June 2021, between July and December 2021, January and June 2022, and July and December 2022, respectively. History of vaccination (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.84) and onset during the July to December 2022 Omicron BA.5-dominant period (odds ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.41) were negatively associated with hypoxaemia in the multivariate model, adjusting for age, sex, obesity, glucocorticoid dose, and comorbidities. Over the Omicron-dominant period, antiviral treatment was administered in 30.5% of patients with a low probability of hypoxaemia.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 prognosis improved over time in patients with rheumatic diseases, especially in the Omicron BA.5-dominant period. In the future, treatment of mild cases should be optimised.

Sustained cell-mediated but not humoral responses in rituximab-treated rheumatic patients after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2

OBJECTIVES

B-cell depleting monoclonal antibodies are associated with increased COVID-19 severity and impaired immune response to vaccination. We aimed to assess the humoral and cell mediated (CMI) immune response after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in rituximab (RTX)-treated rheumatic patients.

METHODS

Serum and whole blood samples were collected from RTX-treated rheumatic patients 3-6 months after last vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Serum was tested by ELISA for quantitative detection of anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 IgG. Cell-mediated variant-specific SARS-CoV-2 immunity (CMI) was assessed by interferon-γ release assay Covi-FERON FIA. Patients were interviewed for breakthrough COVID-19 infection (BTI) 3 months post sampling.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were studied after a median (IQR) of 179 (117-221.5) days from last vaccine to sampling. Forty (66.7%) patients had positive Covi-FERON and 23 (38.3%) had detectable anti-spike IgG. Covi-FERON positive patients had lower median RTX cumulative dose [6 (4-10.75) vs 11 (6.75-14.75) grams, (P = 0.019)]. Patients with positive anti-spike IgG had received fewer RTX cycles [2 (2-4) vs 6 (4-8), P = 0.002] and cumulative dose [4 (3-7) vs 10 (6.25-13) grams, P = 0.002] and had shorter time from last vaccination to sampling [140 (76-199) vs 192 (128-230) days, P = 0.047]. Thirty-seven percent were positive only for Covi-FERON and 7% only for anti-spike IgG. Twenty (33.3%) BTI occurred post sampling, exclusively during Omicron variant predominance. The proportion of patients with CMI response against Delta variant was lower in patients who experienced BTI (25% vs 55%, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Four out of ten RTX-treated vaccinated patients show lasting cell-mediated immune response despite undetectable anti-spike antibodies. Cumulative RTX dose affects both humoral and cell-mediated responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Cell-mediated immune responses call for attention as a vaccine efficacy marker against SARS-CoV-2.

Microfluidic antibody profiling after repeated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination links antibody affinity and concentration to impaired immunity and variant escape in patients on anti-CD20 therapy

Background

Patients with autoimmune/inflammatory conditions on anti-CD20 therapies, such as rituximab, have suboptimal humoral responses to vaccination and are vulnerable to poorer clinical outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to examine how the fundamental parameters of antibody responses, namely, affinity and concentration, shape the quality of humoral immunity after vaccination in these patients.

Methods

We performed in-depth antibody characterisation in sera collected 4 to 6 weeks after each of three vaccine doses to wild-type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 in rituximab-treated primary vasculitis patients (n = 14) using Luminex and pseudovirus neutralisation assays, whereas we used a novel microfluidic-based immunoassay to quantify polyclonal antibody affinity and concentration against both WT and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variants. We performed comparative antibody profiling at equivalent timepoints in healthy individuals after three antigenic exposures to WT SARS-CoV-2 (one infection and two vaccinations; n = 15) and in convalescent patients after WT SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 30).

Results

Rituximab-treated patients had lower antibody levels and neutralisation titres against both WT and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants compared to healthy individuals. Neutralisation capacity was weaker against Omicron versus WT both in rituximab-treated patients and in healthy individuals. In the rituximab cohort, this was driven by lower antibody affinity against Omicron versus WT [median (range) KD: 21.6 (9.7-38.8) nM vs. 4.6 (2.3-44.8) nM, p = 0.0004]. By contrast, healthy individuals with hybrid immunity produced a broader antibody response, a subset of which recognised Omicron with higher affinity than antibodies in rituximab-treated patients [median (range) KD: 1.05 (0.45-1.84) nM vs. 20.25 (13.2-38.8) nM, p = 0.0002], underpinning the stronger serum neutralisation capacity against Omicron in the former group. Rituximab-treated patients had similar anti-WT antibody levels and neutralisation titres to unvaccinated convalescent individuals, despite two more exposures to SARS-CoV-2 antigen. Temporal profiling of the antibody response showed evidence of affinity maturation in healthy convalescent patients after a single SARS-CoV-2 infection, which was not observed in rituximab-treated patients, despite repeated vaccination.

Discussion

Our results enrich previous observations of impaired humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 in rituximab-treated patients and highlight the significance of quantitative assessment of serum antibody affinity and concentration in monitoring anti-viral immunity, viral escape, and the evolution of the humoral response.

COVID-19 Vaccine in Immunosuppressed Adults with Autoimmune rheumatic Diseases (COVIAAD): safety, immunogenicity and antibody persistence at 12 months following Moderna Spikevax primary series

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety, immunogenicity and cellular responses following the Moderna Spikevax primary series in rheumatic disease.

METHODS

We conducted a 12-month, prospective, non-randomised, open-label, comparative trial of adults with either rheumatoid arthritis (RA, n=131) on stable treatment; systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE, n=23) on mycophenolate mofetil (MMF); other rheumatic diseases on prednisone ≥10 mg/day (n=8) or age-matched/sex-matched controls (healthy control, HC, n=58). Adverse events (AEs), humoral immune responses (immunogenicity: IgG positivity for anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and its receptor binding domain, neutralising antibodies (NAbs)), cellular responses (ELISpot) and COVID-19 infection rates were assessed.

RESULTS

Frequency of solicited self-reported AEs following vaccination was similar across groups (HC 90%, RA 86%, SLE 90%); among them, musculoskeletal AEs were more frequent in RA (HC 48% vs RA 66% (Δ95% CI CI 3 to 32.6)). Disease activity scores did not increase postvaccination. No vaccine-related serious AEs were reported. Postvaccination immunogenicity was reduced in RA and SLE (RA 90.2%, SLE 86.4%; for both, ΔCIs compared with HC excluded the null). Similarly, NAbs were reduced among patients (RA 82.6%, SLE 81.8%). In RA, age >65 (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.8) and rituximab treatment (OR 0.003, 95% CI 0.001 to 0.02) were negative predictors of immunogenicity. ELISpot was positive in 16/52 tested RA and 17/26 HC (ΔCI 11.2-53.3). During the study, 11 HC, 19 RA and 3 SLE patients self-reported COVID-infection.

CONCLUSION

In COVID-19 Vaccine in Immunosuppressed Adults with Autoimmune Diseases, the Moderna Spikevax primary series was safe. MMF, RA age >65 and rituximab were associated with reduced vaccine-induced protection.

Antibody response to four doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases: an observational study

Objective

Antibody responses to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are reduced among immunocompromised patients but are not well quantified among people with rare disease. We conducted an observational study to evaluate the antibody responses to the booster SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in people with rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases (RAIRD).

Methods

Blood samples were collected after second, before third, after third and after fourth vaccine doses. Anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid antibody levels were measured using an in-house ELISA. Logistic regression models were built to determine the predictors for non-response. Results were compared with age- and sex-matched healthy controls.

Results

Forty-three people with RAIRD were included, with a median age of 56 years. Anti-spike seropositivity increased from 42.9% after second dose to 51.2% after third dose and 65.6% after fourth dose. Median anti-spike antibody levels increased from 33.6 (interquartile range 7.8-724.5) binding antibody units after second dose to 239.4 (interquartile range 35.8-1051.1) binding antibody units after the booster dose (third dose, or fourth dose if eligible). Of the participants who had sufficient antibody levels post-second dose, 22.2% had insufficient levels after the booster, and 34.9% of participants had lower antibodies after the booster than the lowest healthy control had after the second dose. Rituximab in the 6 months prior to booster (P = 0.02) and non-White ethnicity (P = 0.04) were associated with non-response. There was a dose-response relationship between the timing of rituximab and generation of sufficient antibodies (P = 0.03).

Conclusion

Although the booster dose increased anti-spike IgG and seropositivity rates, some people with RAIRD, particularly those on rituximab, had insufficient antibody levels despite three or four doses.

Current research trends of nanomedicines

Owing to the inherent shortcomings of traditional therapeutic drugs in terms of inadequate therapeutic efficacy and toxicity in clinical treatment, nanomedicine designs have received widespread attention with significantly improved efficacy and reduced non-target side effects. Nanomedicines hold tremendous theranostic potential for treating, monitoring, diagnosing, and controlling various diseases and are attracting an unfathomable amount of input of research resources. Against the backdrop of an exponentially growing number of publications, it is imperative to help the audience get a panorama image of the research activities in the field of nanomedicines. Herein, this review elaborates on the development trends of nanomedicines, emerging nanocarriers, in vivo fate and safety of nanomedicines, and their extensive applications. Moreover, the potential challenges and the obstacles hindering the clinical translation of nanomedicines are also discussed. The elaboration on various aspects of the research trends of nanomedicines may help enlighten the readers and set the route for future endeavors.

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and COVID-19

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe the current state of knowledge regarding COVID-19 in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). We focus on (i) SARS-CoV-2 vaccination uptake, immunogenicity and safety, and (ii) outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with SLE and pertinent risk factors for adverse sequelae.

RECENT FINDINGS

Notwithstanding the potential concern of patients about possible post-vaccination side-effects, the safety of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with SLE has been undisputedly confirmed in numerous studies. Humoral immunogenicity is generally attained in SLE, although affected by the use of background immunosuppressive drugs, especially rituximab. The latter has also clearly been implicated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes in SLE, including need for hospitalization, mechanical ventilation and death. Although the wide adoption of vaccination has significantly improved COVID-19 outcomes, patients with SLE continue to pose challenges during the pandemic, mainly owing to administered immunosuppressive medications.

Effect of DMARDs on the immunogenicity of vaccines

Vaccines are important for protecting individuals at increased risk of severe infections, including patients undergoing DMARD therapy. However, DMARD therapy can also compromise the immune system, leading to impaired responses to vaccination. This Review focuses on the impact of DMARDs on influenza and SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, as such vaccines have been investigated most thoroughly. Various data suggest that B cell depletion therapy, mycophenolate mofetil, cyclophosphamide, azathioprine and abatacept substantially reduce the immunogenicity of these vaccines. However, the effects of glucocorticoids, methotrexate, TNF inhibitors and JAK inhibitors on vaccine responses remain unclear and could depend on the dosage and type of vaccination. Vaccination is aimed at initiating robust humoral and cellular vaccine responses, which requires efficient interactions between antigen-presenting cells, T cells and B cells. DMARDs impair these cells in different ways and to different degrees, such as the prevention of antigen-presenting cell maturation, alteration of T cell differentiation and selective inhibition of B cell subsets, thus inhibiting processes that are necessary for an effective vaccine response. Innovative modified vaccination strategies are needed to improve vaccination responses in patients undergoing DMARD therapy and to protect these patients from the severe outcomes of infectious diseases.

Impact of rituximab on humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in previously vaccinated patients with autoimmune diseases

SARS-CoV-2 infection is more severe in patients undergoing rituximab (RTX) treatment. Humoral response to vaccination is severely impaired in patients already treated with RTX, but data on antibody persistence in patients initiating RTX are lacking. We evaluated the impact of RTX initiation on humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in previously vaccinated patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. We performed a retrospective, multicenter study evaluating the evolution of anti-spike antibodies and breakthrough infections after initiation of RTX in previously vaccinated patients with protective levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Threshold for anti-S antibodies positivity and protection were 30 and 264 BAU/mL, respectively. We included 31 previously vaccinated patients initiating RTX (21 female, median age 57 years). At first RTX infusion, 12 (39%) patients had received 2 doses of vaccine, 15 (48%) had received 3 doses, and 4 (13%) had received 4 doses. The most frequent underlying diseases were ANCA-associated vasculitis (29%) and rheumatoid arthritis (23%). Median anti-S antibody titers at RTX initiation, 3 months, and 6 months were 1620 (589-2080), 1055 (467-2080), and 407 (186-659) BAU/mL, respectively. Overall, antibody titers waned by almost two-fold at 3 months and four-fold at 6 months. Median antibody titers were significantly higher in patients who received ≥3 doses compared to those who received only 2 doses. Three patients developed SARS-CoV-2 infection without any severe symptom. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers in previously vaccinated patients decline after RTX initiation similarly to general population. Specific monitoring is useful to anticipate prophylactic strategies. Key Points • Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers in previously vaccinated patients decline after rituximab initiation similarly to the general population. • The number of dose of vaccine before rituximab initiation is associated with higher antibody titers at month 3. • Monitoring antibody levels is mandatory to initiate prophylactic strategies in this population.

Specific Cellular and Humoral Response after the Third Dose of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 RNA Vaccine in Patients with Immune-Mediated Rheumatic Diseases on Immunosuppressive Therapy

OBJECTIVE

Data on cellular and humoral immunogenicity after the third dose of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases (IMRDs) are scarce. Herein, we evaluated the adaptive immune response in IMRD patients treated with different immunosuppressive therapies (conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [csDMARDs], biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [bDMARDs], and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [tsDMARDs]) after the booster of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine to determine whether any drug reduced the vaccine's response.

METHODS

A single-center prospective study was conducted, including patients presenting with IMRD and healthy controls (HC). Specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) production was evaluated between 8-12 weeks after the third dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. In addition, anti-Spike IgG antibody titers were also measured.

RESULTS

Samples were obtained from 79 IMRD patients (51 women, 28 men; mean age 57 ± 11.3 years old): 43 rheumatoid arthritis, 10 psoriatic arthritis, 14 ankylosing spondylitis, 10 undifferentiated spondyloarthritis, and 2 inflammatory bowel disease-associated spondyloarthritis (IBD-SpA). In total, 31 HC (mean age 50.9 ± 13.1 years old, 67.7% women) were included in the study. Post-vaccine results displayed positive T-cell immune responses in 68 out of 79 (86.1%) IMRD patients (82.3% of those without prior COVID-19). All HC and IMRDs patients had an antibody response against the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain; however, the HC response was significantly higher (median of 18,048 AU/mL) than in IMRDs patients (median of 6590.3 AU/mL, p < 0.001). MTX and leflunomide were associated with lower titers of IgG and IFN-γ responses. Among bDMARDs, adalimumab, etanercept, and guselkumab are associated with reduced cellular responses.

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary data show that the majority of our IMRD patients develop cellular and humoral responses after the SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination, emphasizing the relevance of vaccination in this group. However, the magnitude of specific responses was dependent on the immunosuppressive therapy administered. Specific vaccination protocols and personalized decisions about boosters are essential for these patients.

Humoral response after a fourth dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in immunocompromised patients. Results of a systematic review

Background and objective

The fourth dose the COVID-19 vaccine was first proposed to immunocompromised patients. The aim of the article is to systematically review the literature and report the humoral response and outcomes after the fourth dose administration in people with impaired immune system.

Methods

Published studies on the humoral response, efficacy and safety of the fourth dose of the COVID-19 vaccine were analyzed in various settings of immunocompromised patients. We conducted systematic searches of PubMed, Cochrane Library and WHO COVID-19 Research Database for series published through January 31, 2023, using the search terms "fourth dose" or "second booster" or "4th dose" and "Coronavirus" or "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2." All articles were selected according to the PRISMA guidelines.

Results

A total of 24 articles including 2,838 patients were comprised in the systematic review. All the studies involved immunocompromised patients, including solid organ transplant recipients, patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease, patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and patients with blood cancers or diseases. Almost all patients received BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 as fourth dose. All the studies demonstrated the increase of antibody titers after the fourth dose, both in patients who had a serological strong response and in those who had a weak response after the third dose. No serious adverse events after the 4th dose have been reported by 13 studies. COVID-19 infection after the fourth dose ranged from 0 to 21%.

Conclusion

The present review highlights the importance of the fourth dose of covid-19 vaccines for immunocompromised patients. Across the included studies, a fourth dose was associated with improved seroconversion and antibody titer levels. In particular, a fourth dose was associated with increasing immunogenicity in organ transplant recipients and patients with hematological cancers, with a very low rate of serious side effects.

Improvement of humoral immunity by repeated dose-intensified COVID-19 vaccinations in primary non- to low-responders and B cell deficient rheumatic disease patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether repeated, dose-intensified mRNA vaccinations against COVID-19 increase humoral immunity in previously low-responding patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRD), including rituximab-treated and B cell depleted patients.

METHODS

Of 308 AIRD patients receiving basic immunization, 98 had a low serological response against SARS-CoV-2 with a neutralizing capacity of < 70% using surrogate neutralization assay. 38 patients received a third vaccination with 30 μg BNT162b2 16 weeks after second vaccination. If neutralizing serum capacity was below 70% four weeks after the last vaccination, then the fourth vaccination (n = 19) and the fifth (n = 4) vaccination with 100 μg mRNA-1273 took place eight weeks after the last vaccination.

RESULTS

Each of the three booster vaccinations resulted in a significant increase of mean serum neutralizing capacity (3rd: Δ = 42%, p < 0.001; 4th: Δ = 19%, p = 0.049 and 5th: Δ = 51%, p = 0.043) and produced a significant proportion of high-responders (3rd: 34%; 4th: 32% and 5th: 75%). Low B cell counts (p = 0.047), lower previous antibody response (p < 0.001) and rituximab therapy (p = 0.021) were negatively associated with successful response to the third but not to the fourth vaccination. Remarkably, substantial increases in neutralization capacity of up to 99% were observed after repeated vaccinations in B cell depleted patients.

CONCLUSION

AIRD patients with low humoral response benefited from up to three repeated dose-intensified mRNA booster vaccinations - despite low B cell count and previous rituximab therapy. Each additional vaccination substantially reduced the number of low-responding, vulnerable patients.

Accelerated waning of immune responses to a third COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases

BACKGROUND

A 3rd COVID-19 vaccination is currently recommended for patients under immunosuppression. However, a fast decline of antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein has been observed. Currently it remains unclear whether immunosuppressive therapy affects kinetics of humoral and cellular immune responses.

METHODS

50 patients under immunosuppression and 42 healthy controls (HCs) received a 3rd dose of an mRNA-based vaccine and were monitored over a 12-weeks period. Humoral immune response was assessed 4 and 12 weeks after 3rd dose. Antibodies were quantified using the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike immunoassay against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses were quantified by IFN-γ ELISpot assays. Adverse events, including SARS-CoV-2 infections, were monitored over a 12-week period.

RESULTS

At week 12, reduced anti-RBD antibody levels were observed in IMID patients as compared to HCs (median antibody level 5345 BAU/ml [1781-10,208] versus 9650 BAU/ml [6633-16,050], p < 0.001). Reduction in relative antibody levels was significantly higher in IMID patients as compared to HCs at week 12 (p < 0.001). Lowest anti-RBD antibody levels were detected in IMID patients who received biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) or a combination therapy with conventional synthetic and biological DMARDs. Number of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells against wildtype and Omicron variants remained stable over 12 weeks in IMID patients. No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

Due to a fast decline in anti-RBD antibodies in IMID patients an early 4th vaccination should be considered in this vulnerable group of patients.

Four SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses or hybrid immunity in patients on immunosuppressive therapies: a Norwegian cohort study

Background

Data on response and safety of repeated vaccinations and hybrid immunity in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases on immunosuppressive therapy is needed to further develop vaccination strategies in this vulnerable population. This study aimed to evaluate hybrid immunity and humoral immune response and safety of four SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases on immunosuppressive therapy.

Methods

This prospective observational Norwegian study of vaccine response to COVID-19 (Nor-vaC) included adult patients aged 18 years and older with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis) on immunosuppressive therapy, who had received four SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses (vaccine group) or three vaccine doses followed by COVID-19 (hybrid group), and healthy controls receiving three vaccine doses (control group). Patients were recruited from the Division of Rheumatology at Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, and the Department of Gastroenterology at Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog. Patients who had COVID-19 before the third vaccine dose, and patients with allergies or intolerances to elements of the vaccine were excluded. Antibodies to the receptor-binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (anti-RBD antibodies) were assessed 2-4 weeks following vaccination or COVID-19. This study is registered at Clinialtrials.gov, NCT04798625.

Findings

Between Nov 12, 2021, and April 19, 2022, 1458 participants with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases provided post-vaccination samples at 2-4 weeks following a third vaccine dose. After 544 participants were excluded, 715 (78%) of the remaining 914 participants received the fourth dose of the vaccine, and of these, 536 (75%) provided post-vaccination samples 2-4 weeks after their fourth vaccination (vaccine group). 199 (22%) of the 914 had COVID-19 after their third dose of the vaccine and of these, 167 (84%) provided samples (hybrid group). 256 of the eligible 703 patients had rheumatoid arthritis, 107 had spondyloarthritis, 115 had psoriatic arthritis, 130 had Crohn's disease, and 95 had ulcerative colitis). Median age was 56 years [IQR 45-65], 398 (57%) were women, and 305 (43%) were men. Patients in the vaccine group had higher anti-RBD antibody concentrations following the fourth vaccine dose (median 6192 BAU/ml [IQR 2878-11 243]) than after the third dose (median 5087 BAU/ml [1250-9081]; p< 0·0001), but lower antibody concentrations than the control group following the third dose (median 7595 BAU/ml [5916-12 001]; p< 0·0001). Antibody concentrations were higher in the patients in the hybrid group (23 548 BAU/ml [IQR 11 440-35 935]) than in the vaccine group (p<0·0001). No difference was found in antibody concentrations between the fourth dose of BNT162b2 (full-dose) and mRNA-1273 (half-dose). Patients and controls had a comparable safety profile after both three and four vaccine doses.

Interpretation

Vaccine boosters improve humoral immune responses and are safe in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases on immunosuppressive therapy, and administration should be considered regularly in this patient group. Hybrid immunity with omicron induces a strong humoral response suggesting longer intervals between booster doses in this patient group.

Funding

The South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority, The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Akershus University Hospital.

Strong Humoral but Not Cellular Immune Responses against SARS-CoV-2 in Individuals with Oncohematological Disease Who Were Treated with Rituximab before Receiving a Vaccine Booster

The humoral immune response developed after receiving the full vaccination schedule against COVID-19 is impaired in individuals who received anti-CD20 therapy 6-9 months before vaccination. However, there is little information about the cellular immune responses elicited in these individuals. In this study, we analyzed the humoral and cellular immune responses in 18 individuals with hematological disease who received the last dose of rituximab 13.8 months (IQR 9.4-19) before the booster dose. One month after receiving the booster dose, the seroconversion rate in the rituximab-treated cohort increased from 83.3% to 88.9% and titers of specific IgGs against SARS-CoV-2 increased 1.53-fold (p = 0.0098), while the levels of neutralizing antibodies increased 3.03-fold (p = 0.0381). However, the cytotoxic activity of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from rituximab-treated individuals remained unchanged, and both antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) and direct cellular cytotoxicity (CDD) were reduced 1.7-fold (p = 0.0047) and 2.0-fold (p = 0.0086), respectively, in comparison with healthy donors. Breakthrough infections rate was higher in our cohort of rituximab-treated individuals (33.33%), although most of the infected patients (83.4%) developed a mild form of COVID-19. In conclusion, our findings confirm a benefit in the humoral, but not in the cellular, immune response in rituximab-treated individuals after receiving a booster dose of an mRNA-based vaccine against COVID-19.