COVID-19 vaccines for patients with cancer: benefits likely outweigh risks

COVID-19 vaccination patterns among oral cancer patients: A comprehensive analysis in a medical center in Taiwan

Background/purpose

COVID-19 vaccines are supplied at no-cost to residents as a measure to prevent comorbidities, fatalities, and the increased risk of community transmission, thus protecting public health systems. However, vaccine acceptance among cancer patients remained uncertain. This study aimed to elucidate the vaccination rates among oral cancer patients at a medical center in Taiwan.

Materials and methods

We included Individuals who attended for routine follow-ups from January 2021 to December 2022, with a total of 1448 patients subjected to comprehensive analysis. Medical records were reviewed to identify factors influencing vaccine acceptance.

Results

Our findings indicate that 1,264 patients received vaccinations, while 184 remained unvaccinated. The vaccination rates among patients in advanced disease stages and those with neck lymph node metastasis (N+) were significantly lower (both P < 0.001). Furthermore, a notable lower vaccination rate was evident among patients receiving active treatment modalities (P < 0.01). Conversely, age, and comorbidities (evaluated using the New Charlson Comorbidity Index), didn't show a significant correlation with vaccination rates. The risk of death caused by oral cancer among vaccinated patients was significantly lower compared to non-vaccinated group (P < 0.001). Logistic regression showed the risk of COVID infection was significant lower in vaccinated group than non-vaccinated group (OR = 0.31, P = 0.034).

Conclusion

The risk of COVID-19 infection in oral cancer patients was lower among vaccinated group, and the vaccination was not associated with more mortality. Identifying the characteristics of non-vaccinated individuals and understanding factors influencing vaccine hesitancy in oral cancer patients is vital for developing targeted strategies to improve vaccine uptake.

Knowledge about, attitudes toward and acceptance and predictors of intention to receive the mpox vaccine among cancer patients in China: A cross-sectional survey

This study aimed to investigate the knowledge about, attitudes toward, and acceptance and predictors of receiving the mpox vaccine among Chinese cancer patients. Patients were selected using a convenience sampling method. A web-based self-report questionnaire was developed to assess cancer patients' knowledge, attitudes, and acceptance regarding the mpox vaccine. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine predictors of acceptance of the mpox vaccine. A total of 805 cancer patients were included in this study, with a vaccine hesitancy rate of 27.08%. Approximately 66% of the patients' information about mpox and the vaccine came from the mass media, and there was a significant bias in the hesitant group's knowledge about mpox and the vaccine. Multivariable logistic regression analysis suggested that retirement; chemotherapy; the belief that the mpox vaccine could prevent disease, that vaccination should be compulsory when appropriate and that the mpox vaccine prevents mpox and reduces complications; the willingness to pay for the mpox vaccine; the willingness to recommend that friends and family receive the mpox vaccine; and the belief that the mpox vaccine should be distributed fairly and equitably were factors that promoted vaccination. The belief that mpox worsens tumor prognosis was a driving factor for vaccine hesitancy. This study investigated the knowledge of cancer patients about mpox and the vaccine, evaluated the acceptance and hesitancy rates of the mpox vaccine and examined the predictors of vaccination intention. We suggest that the government scientifically promote the vaccine and develop policies such as free vaccination and personalized vaccination to increase the awareness and acceptance rate of the mpox vaccine.

De novo myasthenia gravis in a patient with malignant melanoma after concurrent SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: Case report and literature review

In recent years, the advent and increasingly common use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in cancer treatment have been notable. While ICIs have shown relatively better toxicity profiles compared to traditional chemotherapy agents, they are linked to a unique range of toxicities known as immune-related adverse events (irAEs), stemming from immune system dysregulation. Following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, cancer patients were universally categorized as the highest priority subgroup for vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), despite being excluded from vaccine trials. The exclusion of cancer patients from vaccine trials has raised concerns within the scientific community about the potential for a hyperactive autoimmune response, which could lead to severe irAEs in patients receiving concurrent ICIs and anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Retrospective studies have indicated subtle safety concerns for mRNA vaccines in cancer patients who have undergone ICI treatment, with none of these studies encompassing inactivated anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Here, we present a case of a patient with malignant melanoma who developed fatal myasthenia gravis (MG) following concurrent vaccination with Sinopharm's inactivated COVID-19 vaccine (BBIBP-CorV) and initiation of pembrolizumab. Additionally, we examine current research on the relationship between anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and irAEs in patients treated with ICIs and propose a potential mechanism responsible for the fatal MG in our patient.

Vaccine challenges in CLL: a comprehensive exploration of efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 immunization for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is characterized by disease- and treatment-related immunosuppression. Patients with CLL comprise a vulnerable population to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), while the protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination remains uncertain.We conducted a systematic review to evaluate published data reporting response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with CLL. The primary outcome was the rate of seropositivity after full primary vaccination, while secondary outcomes were rates of positive neutralizing antibodies, cellular responses, and adverse events. Response after booster doses of vaccination was also evaluated.Twenty-three studies of full primary vaccination (12 CLL-specific with 1747 patients, 11 with mixed hematologic diseases including 1044 patients with CLL) with a total of 2791 patients, and eight studies on booster doses with 389 patients were included in the analysis. The serologic response varied between studies with a median of 55%. Where reported, the median neutralizing antibody response rate was 61.2% and the cellular response rate was 44.2%. Poor serologic response was noted in patients under active treatment with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, BCL2, and BTK inhibitors.The present review highlights the substantially impaired humoral and cellular response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with CLL with patients under active treatment being the most vulnerable.

Prophylactic and therapeutic vaccine development: advancements and challenges

Biomedical research is fundamental in developing preventive and therapeutic vaccines, serving as a cornerstone of global public health. This review explores the key concepts, methodologies, tools, and challenges in the vaccine development landscape, focusing on transitioning from basic biomedical sciences to clinical applications. Foundational disciplines such as virology, immunology, and molecular biology lay the groundwork for vaccine creation, while recent innovations like messenger RNA (mRNA) technology and reverse vaccinology have transformed the field. Additionally, it highlights the role of pharmaceutical advancements in translating lab discoveries into clinical solutions. Techniques like CRISPR-Cas9, genome sequencing, monoclonal antibodies, and computational modeling have significantly enhanced vaccine precision and efficacy, expediting the development of vaccines against infectious diseases. The review also discusses challenges that continue to hinder progress, including stringent regulatory pathways, vaccine hesitancy, and the rapid emergence of new pathogens. These obstacles underscore the need for interdisciplinary collaboration and the adoption of innovative strategies. Integrating personalized medicine, nanotechnology, and artificial intelligence is expected to revolutionize vaccine science further. By embracing these advancements, biomedical research has the potential to overcome existing challenges and usher in a new era of therapeutic and prophylactic vaccines, ultimately improving global health outcomes. This review emphasizes the critical role of vaccines in combating current and future health threats, advocating for continued investment in biomedical science and technology.

COVID-19 vaccine updates for people under different conditions

SARS-CoV-2 has caused global waves of infection since December 2019 and continues to persist today. The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants with strong immune evasion capabilities has compromised the effectiveness of existing vaccines against breakthrough infections. Therefore, it is important to determine the best utilization strategies for different demographic groups given the variety of vaccine options available. In this review, we will discuss the protective efficacy of vaccines during different stages of the epidemic and emphasize the importance of timely updates to target prevalent variants, which can significantly improve immune protection. While it is recognized that vaccine effectiveness may be lower in certain populations such as the elderly, individuals with chronic comorbidities (e.g., diabetes with poor blood glucose control, those on maintenance dialysis), or those who are immunocompromised compared to the general population, administering multiple doses can result in a strong protective immune response that outweighs potential risks. However, caution should be exercised when considering vaccines that might trigger an intense immune response in populations prone to inflammatory flare or other complications. In conclusion, individuals with special conditions require enhanced and more effective immunization strategies to prevent infection or reinfection, as well as to avoid the potential development of long COVID.

Single-shot dendritic cell targeting SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate induces broad, durable and protective systemic and mucosal immunity in mice

Current coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines face limitations including waning immunity, immune escape by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants, limited cellular response, and poor mucosal immunity. We engineered a Clec9A-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody construct that delivers the SARS-CoV-2 RBD to conventional type 1 dendritic cells. Compared with non-targeting approaches, single dose immunization in mice with Clec9A-RBD induced far higher RBD-specific antibody titers that were sustained for up to 21 months after vaccination. Uniquely, increasing neutralizing and antibody-dependent cytotoxicity activities across the sarbecovirus family was observed, suggesting antibody affinity maturation over time. Consistently and remarkably, RBD-specific follicular T helper cells and germinal center B cells persisted up to 12 months after immunization. Furthermore, Clec9A-RBD immunization induced a durable mono- and poly-functional T-helper 1-biased cellular response that was strongly cross-reactive against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including Omicron subvariants, and with a robust CD8+ T cell signature. Uniquely, Clec9A-RBD single-shot systemic immunization effectively primed RBD-specific cellular and humoral immunity in lung and resulted in significant protection against homologous SARS-CoV-2 challenge as evidenced by limited body weight loss and approximately 2 log10 decrease in lung viral loads compared with non-immunized controls. Therefore, Clec9A-RBD immunization has the potential to trigger robust and sustained, systemic and mucosal protective immunity against rapidly evolving SARS-CoV2 variants.

Cardiovascular Safety of COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Cancer: A Self-Controlled Case Series Study in Korea

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients have an increased risk of cardiovascular outcomes and are susceptible to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. We aimed to assess the cardiovascular safety of COVID-19 vaccination for cancer patients in South Korea.

METHODS

We conducted a self-controlled case series study using the K-COV-N cohort (2018-2021). Patients with cancer aged 12 years or older who experienced cardiovascular outcomes were identified. Cardiovascular outcomes were defined as myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolism (VTE), myocarditis, or pericarditis, and the risk period was 0-28 days after receiving each dose of COVID-19 vaccines. A conditional Poisson regression model was used to calculate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Among 318,105 patients with cancer, 4,754 patients with cardiovascular outcomes were included. The overall cardiovascular risk was not increased (adjusted IRR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.90-1.08]) during the whole risk period. The adjusted IRRs of total cardiovascular outcomes during the whole risk period according to the vaccine type were 1.07 (95% CI, 0.95-1.21) in the mRNA vaccine subgroup, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.83-1.19) in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine subgroup, and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.68-1.10) in the mix-matched vaccination subgroup. However, in the analysis of individual outcome, the adjusted IRR of myocarditis was increased to 11.71 (95% CI, 5.88-23.35) during the whole risk period. In contrast, no increased risk was observed for other outcomes, such as myocardial infarction, stroke, VTE, and pericarditis.

CONCLUSION

For cancer patients, COVID-19 vaccination demonstrated an overall safe profile in terms of cardiovascular outcomes. However, caution is required as an increased risk of myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination was observed in this study.

Recent development of oral vaccines (Review)

Oral immunization can elicit an effective immune response and immune tolerance to specific antigens. When compared with the traditional injection route, delivering antigens via the gastrointestinal mucosa offers superior immune effects and compliance, as well as simplicity and convenience, making it a more optimal route for immunization. At present, various oral vaccine delivery systems exist. Certain modified bacteria, such as Salmonella, Escherichia coli and particularly Lactobacillus, are considered promising carriers for oral vaccines. These carriers can significantly enhance immunization efficiency by actively replicating in the intestinal tract following oral administration. The present review provided a discussion of the main mechanisms of oral immunity and the research progress made in the field of oral vaccines. Additionally, it introduced the advantages and disadvantages of the currently more commonly administered injectable COVID-19 vaccines, alongside the latest advancements in this area. Furthermore, recent developments in oral vaccines are summarized, and their potential benefits and side effects are discussed.

Effect of chronic diseases on willingness to receive the second COVID-19 vaccine booster dose among cancer patients: A multicenter cross-sectional survey in China

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients and those with chronic diseases face severe outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, their willingness to receive a second booster dose remains low. This study identified factors affecting the willingness of cancer patients with chronic diseases (CPCD) and cancer patients without chronic diseases (non-CPCD) to receive the second COVID-19 booster vaccine dose.

METHODS

A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted across 4 tertiary care hospitals in China. Based on the Health Belief Model, a questionnaire assessed respondents' perceptions of the second booster dose. Multivariable logistic regression analyzed factors influencing the willingness to receive a second vaccine dose.

RESULTS

Out of 171 CPCD and 722 non-CPCD, CPCD showed a higher willingness to receive the second booster dose than non-CPCD (46.8% vs 32.3%, P < .001). Factors influencing CPCD's willingness included the belief that vaccination was detrimental to cancer treatment and the perceived higher infection risk compared to healthy individuals. Fear of vaccination's negative impact on cancer treatment was the main factor affecting non-CPCD's willingness (each P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Different factors influenced the willingness of the 2 groups. Health education interventions should be implemented alongside vaccination, involving patients' relatives and medical staff, for both CPCD and non-CPCD populations. Additionally, health management service interventions should emphasize the benefits of vaccination for CPCD to improve their second dose coverage.

Improving the safety of CAR-T-cell therapy: The risk and prevention of viral infection for patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell lymphoma undergoing CAR-T-cell therapy

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, an innovative immunotherapeutic against relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphoma, faces challenges due to frequent viral infections. Despite this, a comprehensive review addressing risk assessment, surveillance, and treatment management is notably absent. This review elucidates immune response compromises during viral infections in CAR-T recipients, collates susceptibility risk factors, and deliberates on preventive strategies. In the post-pandemic era, marked by the Omicron variant, new and severe threats to CAR-T therapy emerge, necessitating exploration of preventive and treatment measures for COVID-19. Overall, the review provides recommendations for viral infection prophylaxis and management, enhancing CAR-T product safety and recipient survival.

Perceptions and practices of people with a total laryngectomy during COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed methods analysis

PURPOSE

People with a total laryngectomy (PTL) confront safety threats related to altered airway anatomy and risk of adverse events is amplified during healthcare crises, as exemplified by COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding these challenges, how they are navigated by PTL, and what resources can be deployed to alleviate risk can improve interprofessional care by speech-language pathologists (SLPs), otolaryngologists, and other professionals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey was disseminated to PTL in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, querying participants about safety concerns and sources of information accessed to address care. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square were used to analyze information sources consumed by tracheoesophageal, esophageal, and electrolaryngeal speakers. Content analysis was completed to identify themes and quantify responses by subtheme.

RESULTS

Among 173 respondent PTL, tracheoesophageal speakers preferentially sought otolaryngologist input, whereas esophageal and electrolaryngeal speakers more often chose SLPs (p < .01). Overall, tracheoesophageal speakers had more SLP or otolaryngologist contact. Many PTL reported stringent handwashing, neck cleaning, and hygienic risk mitigation strategies. Six themes emerged in content analysis involving risk of infection/transmission, heightened vigilance, changes to alaryngeal communication, modified tracheostoma coverage, diagnostic testing, and risk from comorbid conditions. Limited provider contact suggested pandemic barriers to healthcare access.

CONCLUSIONS

PTL have a range of laryngectomy-specific needs and concerns, and type of alaryngeal communication was associated with source of information sought. Collaborations among healthcare professionals need to be optimized to improve patient navigation and overall access to specialized care.

The impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a significant challenge for individuals with compromised immune systems, such as patients with cancer, as they face a heightened susceptibility to severe infections compared to the general population. Such severe infections substantially increase the risk of morbidity and mortality among these patients. Notable risk factors for mortality include advanced age (> 70 years), current or past smoking history, advanced disease stage, the use of cytotoxic chemotherapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score of 2 or higher. Multiple types of vaccines have been developed and implemented, demonstrating remarkable efficacy in preventing infections. However, there have been observable reductions in their ability to elicit an immune response, particularly among individuals with hematological malignancies. The situation becomes more challenging due to the emergence of viral variants of concern (VOCs). Despite the increase in neutralizing antibody levels after vaccination, they remain lower in response to these evolving variants. The need for booster vaccinations has become apparent, particularly for this vulnerable population, due to the suboptimal immune response and waning of immunity post-vaccination. Examining and comprehending how the immune system reacts to various vaccination regimens for SARS-CoV-2 and its VOCs in cancer patients is crucial for designing clinical and public health strategies. This review aims to provide an updated overview of the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in cancer patients, including those undergoing treatments such as hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, by exploring the extent of both humoral and cellular immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination. Furthermore, it outlines risk factors and potential biomarkers that are associated with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccine responses, and offers suggestions for improving SARS-CoV-2 protection in cancer patients.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and the Multi-Hit Hypothesis of Oncogenesis

Cancer is a complex and dynamic disease. The "hallmarks of cancer" were proposed by Hanahan and Weinberg (2000) as a group of biological competencies that human cells attain as they progress from normalcy to neoplastic transformation. These competencies include self-sufficiency in proliferative signaling, insensitivity to growth-suppressive signals and immune surveillance, the ability to evade cell death, enabling replicative immortality, reprogramming energy metabolism, inducing angiogenesis, and activating tissue invasion and metastasis. Underlying these competencies are genome instability, which expedites their acquisition, and inflammation, which fosters their function(s). Additionally, cancer exhibits another dimension of complexity: a heterogeneous repertoire of infiltrating and resident host cells, secreted factors, and extracellular matrix, known as the tumor microenvironment, that through a dynamic and reciprocal relationship with cancer cells supports immortality, local invasion, and metastatic dissemination. This staggering intricacy calls for caution when advising all people with cancer (or a previous history of cancer) to receive the COVID-19 primary vaccine series plus additional booster doses. Moreover, because these patients were not included in the pivotal clinical trials, considerable uncertainty remains regarding vaccine efficacy, safety, and the risk of interactions with anticancer therapies, which could reduce the value and innocuity of either medical treatment. After reviewing the available literature, we are particularly concerned that certain COVID-19 vaccines may generate a pro-tumorigenic milieu (i.e., a specific environment that could lead to neoplastic transformation) that predisposes some (stable) oncologic patients and survivors to cancer progression, recurrence, and/or metastasis. This hypothesis is based on biological plausibility and fulfillment of the multi-hit hypothesis of oncogenesis (i.e., induction of lymphopenia and inflammation, downregulation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression, activation of oncogenic cascades, sequestration of tumor suppressor proteins, dysregulation of the RNA-G quadruplex-protein binding system, alteration of type I interferon responses, unsilencing of retrotransposable elements, etc.) together with growing evidence and safety reports filed to Vaccine Adverse Effects Report System (VAERS) suggesting that some cancer patients experienced disease exacerbation or recurrence following COVID-19 vaccination. In light of the above and because some of these concerns (i.e., alteration of oncogenic pathways, promotion of inflammatory cascades, and dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin system) also apply to cancer patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, we encourage the scientific and medical community to urgently evaluate the impact of both COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination on cancer biology and tumor registries, adjusting public health recommendations accordingly.

COVID-19 vaccination is associated with enhanced efficacy of anti-PD-(L)1 immunotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients: a real-world study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine has played a major role in ending the pandemic. However, little is known about the influence of COVID-19 vaccine on the efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study is to explore whether COVID-19 vaccine impacts the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in NSCLC patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the survival data of ICI-treated 104 patients with stage III-IV NSCLC, who either received COVID-19 vaccination (n = 25) or no vaccination (n = 79). The potential risk factors, in particular roles of COVID-19 vaccination in the efficacy of ICIs in these patients, were evaluated.

RESULTS

Our results showed significantly improved ORR (28.0% vs. 11.39%, p = 0.05) and DCR (88.0% vs. 54.43%, p = 0.005) in the COVID-19 vaccinated group compared with the non-vaccinated group. Regarding the long-term survival benefits, COVID-19 vaccine showed profound influence both on the PFS (HR = 0.16, p = 0.021) and OS (HR = 0.168, p = 0.019) in patients with NSCLC under ICIs treatment. The PFS (p < 0.001) or OS (p < 0.001) was significantly improved in the COVID-19 vaccinated group, compared with the non-vaccinated group. Moreover, CD4 T cell (p = 0.047) level was higher in the COVID-19 vaccinated group than in the non-vaccinated group.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccination enhances anti-PD-1 immunotherapy efficacy in patients with stage III-IV NSCLC, suggesting that COVID-19 vaccination may provide additional benefit to NSCLC patients.

Are People Willing to Take Regular COVID-19 Vaccines? Prevalence and Determinants of Hesitancy for Regular COVID-19 Vaccination: A Random Population-Based Survey in Hong Kong

The emergence of new coronavirus variants and evidence of waning immunity offered by COVID-19 vaccines draw attention to the need for regular vaccination. Vaccine hesitancy is one of the top ten threats to global health. There is a dearth of knowledge on people's hesitancy to take regular COVID-19 vaccines. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and determinants of hesitancy for regular COVID-19 vaccination. A population-based, random telephone survey was performed in Hong Kong in April 2022 (n = 1213). The age-standardized hesitancy rate for regular COVID-19 vaccines among Hong Kong adults was 39.4% (95% CI = 35.3-44.1%), exhibiting a sloping S-shape with age. Regression analyses revealed that females, young adults, self-perceived fair/bad health, low COVID-19 vaccine uptake, and believing there are better ways for prevention of infection were positive determinants of hesitancy for regular vaccination. Vaccine confidence, perceived severity and availability, trust in manufacturers and government, and civic duty inclination were negative determinants. Tailored vaccine promotions are needed for females, young adults, and people perceiving poor health and receiving fewer doses. Information on infection severity, vaccine availability, and trust in suppliers, products, and governments are key attitude-change facilitators to decrease hesitancy for regular COVID-19 vaccination and cope with future pandemics.

Multidisciplinary recommendations for the management of CAR-T recipients in the post-COVID-19 pandemic era

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) posed an unprecedented challenge on public health systems. Despite the measures put in place to contain it, COVID-19 is likely to continue experiencing sporadic outbreaks for some time, and individuals will remain susceptible to recurrent infections. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T recipients are characterized by durable B-cell aplasia, hypogammaglobulinemia and loss of T-cell diversity, which lead to an increased proportion of severe/critical cases and a high mortality rate after COVID-19 infection. Thus, treatment decisions have become much more complex and require greater caution when considering CAR T-cell immunotherapy. Hence, we reviewed the current understanding of COVID-19 and reported clinical experience in the management of COVID-19 and CAR-T therapy. After a panel discussion, we proposed a rational procedure pertaining to CAR-T recipients with the aim of maximizing the benefit of CAR-T therapy in the post COVID-19 pandemic era.

Predictive factors of delayed viral clearance of asymptomatic Omicron-related COVID-19 screened positive in patients with cancer receiving active anticancer treatment

OBJECTIVES

We sought to identify the predictors of delayed viral clearance in patients with cancer with asymptomatic COVID-19 when the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants prevailed in Hong Kong.

METHODS

All patients with cancer who were attending radiation therapy for head and neck malignancies or systemic anticancer therapy saved their deep throat saliva or nasopharyngeal swabs at least twice weekly for SARS-CoV-2 screening between January 1 and April 30, 2022. The multivariate analyses identified predictors of delayed viral clearance (or slow recovery), defined as >21 days for the cycle threshold values rising to ≥30 or undetectable in two consecutive samples saved within 72 hours. Three machine learning algorithms evaluated the prediction performance of the predictors.

RESULTS

A total of 200 (15%) of 1309 patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Age >65 years (P = 0.036), male sex (P = 0.003), high Charlson comorbidity index (P = 0.042), lung cancer (P = 0.018), immune checkpoint inhibitor (P = 0.036), and receipt of one or no dose of COVID-19 vaccine (P = 0.003) were significant predictors. The three machine learning algorithms revealed that the mean ± SD area-under-the-curve values predicting delayed viral clearance with the cut-off cycle threshold value ≥30 was 0.72 ± 0.11.

CONCLUSION

We identified subgroups with delayed viral clearance that may benefit from targeted interventions.

Efficacy and safety of mRNA and AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) are at a potentially higher risk for COVID-19 infection complications. Given their inherent altered immune system and the use of immunomodulatory medications, vaccine immunogenicity could be unpredictable with a suboptimal or even an exaggerated immunological response. The aim of this study is to provide real-time data on the emerging evidence of COVID-19 vaccines' efficacy and safety in patients with ARDs.

METHODS

We performed a literature search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and OVID databases up to 11-13 April 2022 on the efficacy and safety of both types of the mRNA-vaccines and the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines in patients with ARD. The risk of bias in the retrieved studies was evaluated using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. Also, current clinical practice guidelines from multiple international professional societies were reviewed.

RESULTS

We identified 60 prognostic studies, 69 case reports and case series, and eight international clinical practice guidelines. Our results demonstrated that most patients with ARDs were able to mount humoral and/or cellular responses after two doses of COVID-19 vaccine although this response was suboptimal in patients receiving certain disease-modifying medications including rituximab, methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil, daily glucocorticoids >10 mg, abatacept, as well as in older individuals, and those with comorbid interstitial lung diseases. Safety reports on COVID-19 vaccines in patients with ARDs were largely reassuring with mostly self-limiting adverse events and very minimal post-vaccination disease flares.

CONCLUSION

Both types of the mRNA-vaccines and the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective and safe in patients with ARD. However, due to their suboptimal response in some patients, alternative mitigation strategies such as booster vaccines and shielding practices should also be followed. Management of immunomodulatory treatment regimens during the peri vaccination period should be individualized through shared decision making with patients and their attending rheumatologists.

Role of Healthcare Professionals and Sociodemographic Characteristics in COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance among Uro-Oncology Patients: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study

At the time when mass COVID-19 vaccination began, providing appropriate vaccination advice to uro-oncology patients became a challenge. This was a single-center cross-sectional observational study aimed to investigate the rate of COVID-19 vaccination among uro-oncology patients receiving systemic therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Furthermore, we aimed to assess patients' attitudes and identify factors influencing their decision to vaccinate against COVID-19. Data on patients' sociodemographic characteristics, vaccination status, and awareness and attitudes about COVID-19 vaccination were collected from questionnaires completed by the patients. A total of 173 patients were enrolled in this study, and 124 (71.7%) of them completed the COVID-19 vaccination. Significantly higher vaccination rates were found in male patients, and also in older patients, highly educated patients, and those who lived with one household member. Furthermore, we found significantly higher vaccination rates in patients who had consulted with doctors involved in their treatment, particularly with urologists. A significant association was observed between COVID-19 vaccination and doctor's advice, family member influence, and personal beliefs toward the vaccination. Our study showed multiple associations of patients' sociodemographic characteristics with vaccination rates. Furthermore, consultation with doctors who are particularly involved in oncology treatment and advice received from them were associated with significantly higher vaccination rates among uro-oncology patients.

Development of High-Grade Sarcoma After Second Dose of Moderna Vaccine

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a disease characterized by predominantly respiratory symptoms, which can progress to respiratory failure. Due to the novelty of the vaccines, it is difficult to assess if there are any associated long-term side effects. Here, we present a case of an elderly female who received the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine and developed a high-grade sarcoma at the site of the injection. A 73-year-old female with a past medical history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and renal angiomyolipoma status post resection in 2019 presented with worsening right upper arm swelling for the past two weeks. She noticed the swelling two to four days after receiving her second dose of the Moderna vaccine within 1 cm from the prior injection site. Physical examination was remarkable for a 6 cm, circular, mobile, soft mass present in the right upper arm. MRI with and without contrast revealed a 5.2 cm soft tissue mass overlying the triceps region with irregular features concerning for malignancy. Fine needle aspiration revealed pathologic characteristics indicative of high-grade sarcoma. The patient ultimately had resection of the mass four months after the initial visit and was diagnosed as having grade 3, stage IIIA undifferentiated, pleomorphic high-grade sarcoma. Herein, we present a case demonstrating the development of high-grade sarcoma at the injection site in an elderly female patient within days of receiving the second dose of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. Currently, it is unclear whether there is a true association between the vaccines and malignancy or inflammatory response exacerbating underlying malignancy. This case highlights the necessity to investigate and be aware of such rare, adverse complications that may be associated with the novel COVID-19 vaccinations to guide physicians in their differential diagnosis.

Usage of Heat and Moisture Exchange Devices, Virtual Visits, Masking, and Vaccinations Among People With a Laryngectomy During COVID-19

PURPOSE

This study described the COVID-19 risk mitigation actions of people with a total laryngectomy (TL) during the pandemic.

METHOD

An online survey was completed by 215 people with a TL who lived in the United States. The survey was open from December 1, 2021, to January 15, 2022.

RESULTS

There was a significant increase in frequency of heat and moisture exchange (HME) device use during the pandemic compared with pre-COVID-19. Frequency of HME use was significantly greater for those who were vaccinated and those who had at least one clinical visit with their speech-language pathologist (SLP). The use of virtual visits increased from 9% pre-COVID-19 to 37% during the pandemic. Seventy percent of respondents were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with virtual visits and 51% judged them "as good as in-person." Eighty percent were vaccinated for COVID-19 and 75% received a booster. One third reported that they did not wear mask over the face or over the tracheostoma. Twenty percent had tested positive for COVID-19 with 70% of these people requiring hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

HME use and virtual SLP visits increased during the pandemic and the vaccination rate was high among this group of respondents. Overall, there were still large percentages of people with a TL who were not using an HME, not vaccinated, and did not wear a mask. SLPs should consider reaching out directly to their TL caseload, particularly those not yet seen during the pandemic, to support uptake of COVID-19 mitigation activities specific to people with a TL as the pandemic persists.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, acceptance and informational needs in an Australian cancer population: a cross-sectional survey

Objective This study aimed to investigate COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, acceptance, and unmet informational needs in a cancer population during the first phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination rollout in Australia. Methods A cross-sectional survey was conducted in a large tertiary hospital in Queensland, Australia, between 10 May and 31 July 2021. The survey assessed health beliefs, experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and informational needs. Results COVID-19 was perceived to be a significant threat to both physical and mental health. While 57.9% (n  = 110) of respondents believed the COVID-19 vaccines were safe and 64.2% (n  = 122) believed they were effective, more than half (52.6%; n  = 100) agreed that they worried about vaccine side effects. Most respondents (84.2%; n  = 160) planned to receive the COVID-19 vaccine; however, feelings of hesitancy remained. There was a statistically significant association between those aged under 60 years (P  = 0.003), those with previous vaccine hesitancy (P  = 0.000), those who felt they had not received adequate information (P  = 0.000) and vaccine hesitancy. Requested information pertained to interactions with cancer treatments, those with a history of blood clotting and information for those undergoing bone marrow transplantation. Conclusions There is a need for tailored COVID-19 vaccine communication that is responsive to the concerns of people with cancer. This will be beneficial during current and future vaccination rollouts.

COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) can cause off-target inflammatory and immune-related adverse events (irAE). Conceivably, COVID-19 vaccination could trigger an inflammatory and immune response that could induce or aggravate irAE.

METHODS

The objective of this systematic review is to appraise the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer treated with ICI. The literature search was performed in PubMed and Embase in English from December 2019 to February 2022. The review included clinical trials, observational cohort studies, case series, and case reports reporting on the clinical efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines on patients with cancer treated with ICI. Outcomes of interest included seroconversion, SARS-CoV-2 infection rate, severe COVID-19, COVID-19 mortality rate. Incidence of ICI irAEs was also ascertained as well as vaccine adverse events. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the pooled effect sizes of the outcomes when possible, using random effects models.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 studies were included for the analysis (n=10 865 with 2477 receiving ICI). We analyzed 15 cohort studies, 1 cross-sectional study, and 3 case reports. There were no statistically significant differences in seroconversion rates after the second dose of the vaccine when comparing patients with cancer receiving ICI with patients without cancer (risk ratio, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.03) or with patients with cancer without active treatment (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.04). There was a higher probability of seroconversion in patients with cancer treated with ICI compared with patients with cancer treated with chemotherapy (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.18). In a single study in patients receiving ICI, no differences were observed in risk of irAE between those receiving inactivated vaccine and those unvaccinated (pneumonitis RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.3; rash RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.62; arthralgia RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.75). There were no studies for other types of vaccines comparing vaccinated vs not vaccinated in patients treated with ICI. The most common vaccine-related adverse events were local pain or fatigue. Overall, the quality of evidence was rated as very low.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccination appears to be effective and safe in patients with cancer receiving ICI.

How SARS-CoV-2 Infection Impacts the Management of Patients with Vulvar Cancer: Experience in a Third-Level Hospital of Southern Italy

Background: Since February 2020, the spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Italy has induced the government to call for lockdown of any activity apart from primary needs, and changing the lives of each of us. All that has dramatically impacted the management of patients affected by cancer. Patients with vulvar cancer (VC) represent a particularly frail population because they are elderly and affected by multiple comorbidities. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical impact of the SARS-CoV-2 infection on VC patients in terms of delay or impossibility of carrying out the scheduled treatment. Methods: The medical records of patients affected by vulvar tumors, referred to "DAI Materno-Infantile" of AOU Federico II of Naples between February 2020 and January 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The presence of a positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in nasopharyngeal swab defined the positivity to SARS-CoV-2. Results: Twenty-four patients with VC were analyzed and scheduled for treatment. The median age was 70.7 years (range: 59-80). Seven (29.2%) patients were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection: In three (42.8%) patients, the treatment was delayed with no apparent consequences, in four (57.2%), the treatment was delayed or changed due to cancer progression and, of these four, one died due to respiratory complications of COVID-19, and one died due to oncologic disease progression. Conclusion: COVID-19 caused, in most cases, significant delays in oncologic treatments and high mortality in our series of patients affected by VC.

Cancer and COVID-19 Vaccines on Twitter:The Voice and Vaccine Attitude of Cancer Community

We investigate social media discourses on the relationship between cancer and COVID-19 vaccines focusing on the key textual topics, themes reflecting the voice of cancer community, authors who contribute to the discourse, and valence toward vaccines. We analyzed 6,427 tweets about cancer and COVID-19 vaccines, posted from when vaccines were approved in the U.S. (December 2020) to the February 2022. We mixed quantitative text mining, manual coding and statistical analysis, and inductive qualitative thematic analysis. Nearly 16% of the tweets posted by a cancer community member mentioned about refusal or delay of their vaccination at the state/local level during the initial rollout despite the CDC's recommendation to prioritize adults with high-risk medical conditions. Most tweets posted by cancer patients (pro = 82.4% vs. anti = 5.1%) and caregivers (pro = 89.2% vs. anti = 4.2%) showed positive valence toward vaccines and advocated for vaccine uptake increase among cancer patients and the general population. Vaccine hesitancy, self-reported adverse events, and COVID-19 disruption of cancer treatment also appeared as key themes. The cancer community called for actions to improve vaccination procedures to become safe and accessible especially for elderly cancer patients, develop COVID-19 vaccines suitable for varying type, stage, and treatment of cancer, and advance cancer vaccines. Future research should continue surveilling conversations around continuous impacts of COVID-19 interference with the cancer control continuum, beyond vaccination, focusing on the voice and concern of cancer community.

Unilateral Axillary Lymphadenopathy in Cancer Patients Post-COVID-19 Vaccination: Review and Case Series

Novel coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) variants continue to spread worldwide with the development of highly transmissible strains. Several guidelines addressing management of cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic have been published, primarily based upon expert opinion. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all aspects of breast cancer care including screening, diagnosis, treatment, and long-term follow-up. Recent reports indicate that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines can provoke lymphadenopathy in both cancer patients and healthy individuals. Unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy (UAL) post-COVID-19 vaccination is a challenging presentation for cancer patients because of the potential for misinterpretation as malignancy. The World Health Organization's target to vaccinate 70% of the world's population by mid-2023 is likely to increase the incidence of post-COVID-19 vaccination UAL. In this article, we review the published evidence regarding UAL post-COVID-19 vaccination and present diverse cases of breast cancer patients where false-positive UAL post-COVID-19 vaccination proved to be a therapeutic challenge. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) vaccination program is well ahead of other countries in the world, having accomplished the target of 100% vaccination of the population with at least one dose. Therefore, an increasing number of recently vaccinated patients are likely to present with UAL, detected by surveillance imaging, post-vaccination. We have therefore made recommendations regarding the management of cancer patients with UAL post-COVID-19 vaccination in order to avoid misdiagnosis and unnecessary imaging or invasive biopsy procedures.

Immune Response to COVID-19 Vaccination in Hematologic Malignancies: A Mini-Review

The outbreak of the COVID-19 infection has led to the rapidity of vaccine usage in recent years. Emerging data indicate that the efficacy of vaccination against COVID-19 was about 95% in the general population, though its impact is impaired in patients with hematologic malignancies. As such, we decided to research the publications in which the authors reported the impacts of COVID-19 vaccination in patients suffering from hematologic malignancies. We concluded that patients with hematologic malignancies have lower responses, antibody titers as well as an impaired humoral response following vaccination, notably in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and lymphoma. Furthermore, it seems that the status of treatment can significantly affect the responses to the COVID-19 vaccination.

An Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Care: An Update

The world has been affected socioeconomically for the last two years due to the emergence of different variants of the COVID-19 virus. Vaccination is the major and most efficient way to prevent the widening of this pandemic. Those who are having comorbidities are more vulnerable to serious infections due to their immunocompromised state. Additionally, cancer patients could be at significant risk for COVID-19. In this pandemic era, the diagnosis and treatment of cancer were significantly affected. Clinical trials at the initial stage were performed on healthy or COVID-19 infected patients. This produces a greater level of hesitancy in cancer patients. This review article provide an update regarding the vaccination and treatment for COVID-19 in patients with cancer and future directions.

Immunogenicity evaluation of ChAdox1 nCov-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in solid cancer patients in Chulabhorn Hospital

INTRODUCTION

Cancer patients are more vulnerable to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) owing to their compromised immune status. However, data regarding COVID-19 vaccine safety and immune response in cancer patients are scarce.

METHOD

This prospective, age- and sex-matched, single-center cohort study included 61 cancer patients and 122 healthy control participants. Seropositivity was defined as anti-S IgG titer >0.8 units/ml. Primary end point was seroconversion rate of immunoglobulin (Ig)G antibodies against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike (S) protein (anti-S IgG) in cancer patients vs. healthy control participants following the second dose of COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222).

RESULTS

After the second-dose vaccination, there was no difference in seropositivity rate between groups (57 [93.44%] patients with cancer vs. 121 [99.18%] control participants; geometric mean ratio [GMR]: 0.39; 95%CI: 0.01-10.46; p-value = 0.571). In contrast, after the first-dose vaccination, the seropositivity rate was significantly lower in the cancer patients than in the control participants (50/61 [81.97%] vs. 121/122 [99.18%]; GMR: 0.07; 95%CI: 0.01-0.71; p = 0.025). The median anti-S IgG titer after the first-and second dose vaccination were not significantly different between groups. Female sex was significantly associated with a higher anti-S IgG titer. 5FU- and taxane-based chemotherapy regimens were associated with a lower IgG titer. Side effects of vaccination were tolerable.

CONCLUSIONS

The anti-S IgG seropositivity rate after completing the second vaccine dose did not differ between the cancer patients and control participants. However, the anti-S IgG seropositivity rate after the first-dose vaccination was lower in cancer patients.

Cancer Patients and the COVID-19 Vaccines: Considerations and Challenges

Few guidelines exist for COVID-19 vaccination amongst cancer patients, fostering uncertainty regarding the immunogenicity, safety, and effects of cancer therapies on vaccination, which this review aims to address. A literature review was conducted to include the latest articles covering the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with solid and hematologic cancers receiving various treatments. Lower seropositivity following vaccination was associated with malignancy (compared to the general population), and hematologic malignancy (compared to solid cancers). Patients receiving active cancer therapy (unspecified), chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and immunosuppressants generally demonstrated lower seropositivity compared to healthy controls; though checkpoint inhibition, endocrine therapy, and cyclin dependent kinase inhibition did not appear to affect seropositivity. Vaccination appeared safe and well-tolerated in patients with current or past cancer and those undergoing treatment. Adverse events were comparable to the general population, but inflammatory lymphadenopathy following vaccination was commonly reported and may be mistaken for malignant etiology. Additionally, radiation recall phenomenon was sporadically reported in patients who had received radiotherapy. Overall, while seropositivity rates were decreased, cancer patients showed capacity to generate safe and effective immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination, thus vaccination should be encouraged and hesitancy should be addressed in this population.

Efficacy and safety profile of two-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in cancer patients: An observational study in China

BACKGROUND

The new coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has produced a global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), resulting in modifications to public health policies on a universal scale. SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has evolved as the most effective and secure way for protecting healthy individuals against COVID-19. Patients with cancer were excluded from clinical trials due to their increased COVID-19 risk and current immunosuppressing therapy. Safety and effectiveness evidence is insufficient for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in cancer patients.

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of two-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in cancer patients.

METHODS

A multicenter observational study was performed at ten Chinese hospitals between January 1, 2021 and December 31, 2021. Each participant in the research received two doses of vaccination. A total of 215 healthy people were screened and 132 eligible patients with cancer were recruited. In order to verify the safety of the second dose of the vaccine, a side-effect report was compiled. Two weeks following the second vaccination dose, subjects underwent an analogous questionnaire survey. Utilizing a magnetic particle-based chemiluminescence immunoassay, serum levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were measured to determine the effectiveness of vaccination. IgG levels ≥ 10 AU/mL were considered seropositive.

RESULTS

All the 347 eligible patients completed the follow-up, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies were detected. Local pain at the injection location was the most common side effect mentioned by all responders, with an increased incidence in cancer patients than the healthy people after the second dose vaccine (17.2% vs 9.1%; P = 0.035). There was no significant difference in headache, urticaria, or other adverse reactions between patients with cancer and healthy people. In the group of cancer patients, the seropositivity incidence was 83.3%, while it was 96.3% in the group of healthy people. In the group of cancer patients, the seropositivity incidence and antibody levels were significantly lower (P < 0.001). This analysis showed a poorer response rate in patients on active immunosuppressive treatment and elderly cancer patients.

CONCLUSION

Two-dose Chinese vaccines are effective and safe in cancer patients. However, further research is required on the efficacy in elderly cancer patients and those on active immunosuppressive treatment.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Patients with cancer are more vulnerable to COVID-19 morbidity and morbidity than the general population and have been prioritised in COVID-19 vaccination programmes. This study aims to investigate COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among patients with cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

PubMed, ScienceDirect and the Cochrane COVID-19 study registry were searched in addition to secondary literature using a predefined search method. Two authors independently performed the study identification, screening and eligibility assessment. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines and Joanna Brides' Institute quality appraisal tools.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies and reports were selected for the final review. The pooled prevalence of vaccine acceptance was 59% (95% confidence interval 52-67%, I2: 99%). Concerns about vaccine-related side-effects, uncertainty about vaccine efficacy and safety, ongoing active anticancer therapies and scepticism about rapid vaccine development were the leading causes for vaccine hesitancy. Female gender and undergoing active anticancer treatments were significant factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Early cancer stages (stages I and II) and good compliance with prior influenza vaccinations were significant factors associated with the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients with cancer are hesitant about COVID-19 vaccination. Well-designed problem-based educational interventions will increase compliance with COVID-19 vaccination.

Impact and the delivery of loco-regional treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma during the COVID-19 pandemic

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the second most lethal tumour, with therapies broadly divided into curative and palliative intent. Unfortunately, the majority of HCCs were found to be unresectable at diagnosis. Advances in novel loco-regional therapies have given patients with unresectable HCC a vital chance for disease control and survival. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has greatly shaped and impacted treatment protocols and delivery for HCC patients. This review article aims to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of loco-regional treatment modalities for HCC and compare treatment trends between the pre -pandemic and pandemic eras. Treatment of HCC involves complex collaboration between clinical professionals within their local and global healthcare institutions. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the treatment of HCC. The delivery of loco-regional treatment for HCC will need to adapt to each healthcare system's unique structure.

COVID-19 in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors: Recommendations for management and vaccination

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic profoundly affected the management and treatment of patients with malignancies. Based on the progress reported in the literature, we reviewed the recommendations for treatment and vaccination in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) during COVID-19. We focus on whether there is a risk and what could be the possible effects of vaccinating patients with GIST/cancer. Since the situation is quickly changing, and the health services have been severely disrupted, the diagnosis, treatment and recommendations for vaccination of these patients against COVID-19 are still not updated. The approval of vaccines in the pandemic gave hope that we would soon be able to return to a more normal life. However, the oncology community needs to adapt and provide the most effective treatment and care models for patients with rare cancer, such as GIST. Collecting data on the impact of vaccination in patients with GIST/cancer also will be beneficial in expanding knowledge about the future planning of treatment strategies and optimizing care in the event of a subsequent pandemic.

Answers to common questions about COVID-19 vaccines in children with cancer

BACKGROUND

The SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in 2020 evolved into a global pandemic, and COVID-19 vaccines became rapidly available, including for pediatric patients. However, questions emerged that challenged vaccine acceptance and use. We aimed to answer these questions and give recommendations applicable for use in pediatric patients with cancer by healthcare professionals and the public.

METHODS

A 12-member global COVID-19 Vaccine in Pediatric Oncology Working Group made up of physicians and nurses from all world regions met weekly from March to July 2021. We used a modified Delphi method to select the top questions. The Working Group, in four-member subgroups, answered assigned questions by providing brief recommendations, followed by a discussion of the rationale for each answer. All Working Group members voted on each recommendation using a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being complete agreement. A "pass" recommendation corresponded to an agreement ≥7.5.

RESULTS

We selected 15 questions from 173 suggested questions. Based on existing published information, we generated answers for each question as recommendations. The overall average agreement for the 24 recommendations was 9.5 (95% CI 9.4-9.6).

CONCLUSION

Top COVID-19 vaccine-related questions could be answered using available information. Reports on COVID-19 vaccination and related topics have been published at record speed, aided by available technology and the priority imposed by the pandemic; however, all efforts were made to incorporate emerging information throughout our project. Recommendations will be periodically updated on a dedicated website.

Spike-based adenovirus vectored COVID-19 vaccine does not aggravate heart damage after ischemic injury in mice

An unprecedented number of COVID-19 vaccination campaign are under way worldwide. The spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, which majorly binds to the host receptor angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) for cell entry, is used by most of the vaccine as antigen. ACE2 is highly expressed in the heart and has been reported to be protective in multiple organs. Interaction of spike with ACE2 is known to reduce ACE2 expression and affect ACE2-mediated signal transduction. However, whether a spike-encoding vaccine will aggravate myocardial damage after a heart attack via affecting ACE2 remains unclear. Here, we demonstrate that cardiac ACE2 is up-regulated and protective after myocardial ischemia/reperfusion (I/R). Infecting human cardiac cells or engineered heart tissues with a spike-based adenovirus type-5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine (AdSpike) does not affect their survival and function, whether subjected to hypoxia-reoxygenation injury or not. Furthermore, AdSpike vaccination does not aggravate heart damage in wild-type or humanized ACE2 mice after I/R injury, even at a dose that is ten-fold higher as used in human. This study represents the first systematic evaluation of the safety of a leading COVID-19 vaccine under a disease context and may provide important information to ensure maximal protection from COVID-19 in patients with or at risk of heart diseases.

Booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines for patients with haematological and solid cancer: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Patients with cancer have an increased risk of severe disease and mortality from COVID-19, as the disease and antineoplastic therapy cause reduced vaccine immunogenicity. Booster doses have been proposed to enhance protection, and efficacy data are emerging from several studies.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the proportion of COVID-19 primary vaccination non-responders with cancer who seroconvert after a booster dose.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL and medRxiv were searched from 1st January 2021 to 10th March 2022. Quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal checklist.

RESULTS

After the eligibility assessment, 22 studies were included in this systematic review and 17 for meta-analysis of seroconversion in non-responders, pooling a total of 849 patients with haematological cancer and 82 patients with solid cancer. Haematological cancer non-responders exhibited lower seroconversion at 44% (95% CI 36-53%) than solid cancer at 80% (95% CI 69-87%). Individual patient data meta-analysis found the odds of having a meaningful rise in antibody titres to be significantly associated with increased duration between the second and third dose (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.03, P ≤ 0.05), age of patient (OR 0.960, 95% CI 0.934-0.987, P ≤ 0.05) and cancer type. With patients with haematological cancer as a reference, patients with lung cancer had 16.8 times the odds of achieving a meaningful increase in antibody titres (OR 16.8, 95% CI 2.95-318, P ≤ 0.05) and gastrointestinal cancer patients had 25.4 times the odds of achieving a meaningful increase in antibody titres (OR 25.4, 95% CI 5.26-492.21, P ≤ 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

administration of a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose is effective in improving seroconversion and antibody levels. Patients with haematological cancer consistently demonstrate poorer response to booster vaccines than patients with solid cancer.

COVID-19 and lung cancer: update on the latest screening, diagnosis, management and challenges

Lung cancer, considered one of the most common causes of cancer deaths worldwide, is a complex disease with its own challenges. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), compounded these challenges and forced the medical healthcare system to alter its approach to lung cancer. This narrative review aims to identify the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on lung cancer screening, diagnosis and management. During this public health crisis, various medical societies have worked on developing guidelines to protect patients with lung cancer from the deleterious effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as from the complications imposed by treatment delays. The different therapeutic approaches, such as surgery, radiation oncology and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, along with the latest international recommendations, will be discussed. Protecting patients with lung cancer from COVID-19 complications, while avoiding barriers in treatment delays, has brought unique challenges to healthcare facilities. Prompt modifications to guidelines, and constant evaluation of their efficacy, are thus needed.

Benefit-risk evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination in special population groups of interest

Several population groups display an increased risk of severe disease and mortality following SARS-CoV-2 infection. These include those who are immunocompromised (IC), have a cancer diagnosis, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection or chronic inflammatory disease including autoimmune disease, primary immunodeficiencies, and those with kidney or liver disease. As such, improved understanding of the course of COVID-19 disease, as well as the efficacy, safety, and benefit-risk profiles of COVID-19 vaccines in these vulnerable groups is paramount in order to inform health policy makers and identify evidence-based vaccination strategies. In this review, we seek to summarize current data, including recommendations by national health authorities, on the impact and benefit-risk profiles of COVID-19 vaccination in these populations. Moving forward, although significant efforts have been made to elucidate and characterize COVID-19 disease course and vaccine responses in these groups, further larger-scale and longer-term evaluation will be instrumental to help further guide management and vaccination strategies, particularly given concerns about waning of vaccine-induced immunity and the recent surge of transmission with SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern.

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 breakthrough infections in patients with cancer (UKCCEP): a population-based test-negative case-control study

BACKGROUND

People with cancer are at increased risk of hospitalisation and death following infection with SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, we aimed to conduct one of the first evaluations of vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients with cancer at a population level.

METHODS

In this population-based test-negative case-control study of the UK Coronavirus Cancer Evaluation Project (UKCCEP), we extracted data from the UKCCEP registry on all SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results (from the Second Generation Surveillance System), vaccination records (from the National Immunisation Management Service), patient demographics, and cancer records from England, UK, from Dec 8, 2020, to Oct 15, 2021. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with cancer in the UKCCEP registry were identified via Public Health England's Rapid Cancer Registration Dataset between Jan 1, 2018, and April 30, 2021, and comprised the cancer cohort. We constructed a control population cohort from adults with PCR tests in the UKCCEP registry who were not contained within the Rapid Cancer Registration Dataset. The coprimary endpoints were overall vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections after the second dose (positive PCR COVID-19 test) and vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections at 3-6 months after the second dose in the cancer cohort and control population.

FINDINGS

The cancer cohort comprised 377 194 individuals, of whom 42 882 had breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections. The control population consisted of 28 010 955 individuals, of whom 5 748 708 had SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 69·8% (95% CI 69·8-69·9) in the control population and 65·5% (65·1-65·9) in the cancer cohort. Vaccine effectiveness at 3-6 months was lower in the cancer cohort (47·0%, 46·3-47·6) than in the control population (61·4%, 61·4-61·5).

INTERPRETATION

COVID-19 vaccination is effective for individuals with cancer, conferring varying levels of protection against breakthrough infections. However, vaccine effectiveness is lower in patients with cancer than in the general population. COVID-19 vaccination for patients with cancer should be used in conjunction with non-pharmacological strategies and community-based antiviral treatment programmes to reduce the risk that COVID-19 poses to patients with cancer.

FUNDING

University of Oxford, University of Southampton, University of Birmingham, Department of Health and Social Care, and Blood Cancer UK.

BNT162b2 vaccine considerations for immunocompromised individuals: A global perspective

With the emergence of COVID-19 vaccines, individuals with comorbidities and immunosuppression require particular attention and should be prioritized for vaccination. However, the majority of vaccine clinical trials excluded people with comorbidities, resulting in a lack of data regarding vaccine efficacy in this demographic. Along with more inclusivity in clinical trials, reaching a definitive conclusion regarding vaccine efficacy in these patients is also crucial. In our review, we highlight the BNT162b2 vaccine safety and efficacy based on the limited number of clinical trials which included this demographic. We also provide vaccine considerations for individuals with cancer, autoimmune diseases, HIV, obesity, diabetes, organ transplant recipients and those undergoing maintenance haemodialysis to help them govern their decision regarding vaccine administration. In conclusion, further studies are required to alleviate any insecurities in patients with comorbidities regarding vaccination and it is recommended that patients are monitored post-vaccination to make sure sufficient immunity is achieved.

Factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in parents of children with cancer

AIM

Little research exists on coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among caregivers of children with cancer. We aimed to (a) describe vaccine hesitancy in parents of children with cancer for both their child and self, and (b) examine the mediating role of parent-reported COVID impact on the association between COVID exposure and vaccine hesitancy.

PROCEDURE

We conducted a national survey of parents of children with cancer via Facebook and Momcology, a pediatric cancer community-based organization recruited February-May 2021. Parents completed standardized measures online. A series of mediation models assessed the role of COVID-19 impact (e.g., effects on parenting and well-being) on associations between COVID-19 exposure (e.g., direct/indirect exposure) and vaccine hesitancy. Moderation models examined the role of treatment status, COVID-19 exposure, impact, and vaccine hesitancy.

RESULTS

Parents (n = 491; 90% mothers; 93% White) reported moderate vaccine hesitancy (M = 2.08, SD = 0.76). Specifically, 18.5% (n = 90) reported they would not vaccinate their child, and 24.4% (n = 119) would only consider vaccination. Parents expressed higher concerns about vaccine side effects for their children (M = 3.01, SD = 0.95) than for themselves (M = 2.61, SD = 1.03; t[479] = 9.07, p < .01). Mediation analysis revealed a significant indirect effect of impact (95% CI [-0.013, -0.001]) on the association between higher exposure and higher vaccine hesitancy (b = .02, p = .06). There was no moderating effect of treatment status. Income remained a significant covariate (b = -.11, p < .01).

CONCLUSION

Lower parent-reported COVID exposure, higher COVID impact, concern for side effects, and lower income may be important factors related to vaccine hesitancy among parents of children with cancer. Providers of childhood cancer survivors should address vaccine hesitancy and potential health risks.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Cancer

Simple Summary

Patients with cancer are concerned about the effects of the COVID-19 vaccination while authorities search for ways to encourage vaccination; however, many points are still unclear. To remedy this situation, we conducted an online survey of 1182 female patients with cancer. The results showed that 768 were concerned about the vaccine, and 726 consulted with their attending physicians about the vaccination. The results also showed significantly higher vaccination rates among the patients who had consulted with their physicians. We found that consulting with attending physicians appeared to be linked to reduced anxiety, decisions about the timing of the vaccination, and higher vaccination rates. This was corroborated by the result of the cross-analysis of vaccination status and information sources about the vaccination. Therefore, we concluded that consulting with a physician about vaccination alleviates the concerns of patients with cancer and encourages them to get vaccinated.

Abstract

Patients with cancer are concerned about the effects of the COVID-19 vaccination. We conducted an online survey on the COVID-19 vaccination status and side effects among patients with cancer in Japan between 8 and 14 August 2021. We included 1182 female patients with cancer aged 20–70 years and registered on an online patient website. Of the patients, 944 had breast cancer, 216 had gynecological cancer, 798 were undergoing drug/radiation therapy, and 370 were in follow-up. At the time of the survey, 885 patients had already received at least one dose. Of these, 580 had also received their second dose. The incidence rate of side effects was equivalent to previous reports. In patients with breast cancer, problems such as the onset or worsening of lymphedema or axillary lymphadenopathy metastasis requiring differential diagnosis were encountered following vaccination. A total of 768 patients were concerned about the vaccine at some point, and 726 consulted with their attending physicians about the timing or side effects of the vaccination. Of the 110 patients undergoing chemotherapy or radiation therapy, 75 adjusted the timing of the vaccination based on their therapy. The cross-analysis revealed that 81% of those who consulted their physician had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccination compared with 65% of those who had not consulted their physician. Consulting with a physician about the COVID-19 vaccination was found to alleviate the concerns of patients with cancer and encourage them to get vaccinated.

Risk and Outcome of Breakthrough COVID-19 Infections in Vaccinated Patients With Cancer: Real-World Evidence From the National COVID Cohort Collaborative

PURPOSE

To provide real-world evidence on risks and outcomes of breakthrough COVID-19 infections in vaccinated patients with cancer using the largest national cohort of COVID-19 cases and controls.

METHODS

We used the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) to identify breakthrough infections between December 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021. We included patients partially or fully vaccinated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines with no prior SARS-CoV-2 infection record. Risks for breakthrough infection and severe outcomes were analyzed using logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 6,860 breakthrough cases were identified within the N3C-vaccinated population, among whom 1,460 (21.3%) were patients with cancer. Solid tumors and hematologic malignancies had significantly higher risks for breakthrough infection (odds ratios [ORs] = 1.12, 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.23 and 4.64, 95% CI, 3.98 to 5.38) and severe outcomes (ORs = 1.33, 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.62 and 1.45, 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.95) compared with noncancer patients, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, smoking status, vaccine type, and vaccination date. Compared with solid tumors, hematologic malignancies were at increased risk for breakthrough infections (adjusted OR ranged from 2.07 for lymphoma to 7.25 for lymphoid leukemia). Breakthrough risk was reduced after the second vaccine dose for all cancers (OR = 0.04; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.05), and for Moderna's mRNA-1273 compared with Pfizer's BNT162b2 vaccine (OR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.70), particularly in patients with multiple myeloma (OR = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.72). Medications with major immunosuppressive effects and bone marrow transplantation were strongly associated with breakthrough risk among the vaccinated population.

CONCLUSION

Real-world evidence shows that patients with cancer, especially hematologic malignancies, are at higher risk for developing breakthrough infections and severe outcomes. Patients with vaccination were at markedly decreased risk for breakthrough infections. Further work is needed to assess boosters and new SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Debate on mandatory COVID-19 vaccination

BACKGROUND

Since January 2020, worldwide public health has been threatened by COVID-19, for which vaccines have been adopted from December 2020.

DISCUSSION

Although vaccines demonstrate effectiveness against this disease, vaccine hesitancy reveals concerns towards short-term and long-term side effects or adverse reactions such as post-inoculation death. Mandatory vaccination is used to provide herd immunity, but is refutable due to infringement of human rights and autonomy. Furthermore, the evidence testifies that vaccination cannot guarantee prevention of infection or re-infection, resulting in public resentment against this coercive measure, whilst post-inoculation anxiety continues.

PERSPECTIVE

This discussion suggests a holistic approach, involving the collective efforts of governments, medical experts and individuals, through basic preventive measures and alternative therapy to live with COVID-19 in a healthy and resourceful manner.

mRNA-COVID19 Vaccination Can Be Considered Safe and Tolerable for Frail Patients

Background

Frail patients are considered at relevant risk of complications due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and, for this reason, are prioritized candidates for vaccination. As these patients were originally not included in the registration trials, fear related to vaccine adverse events and disease worsening was one of the reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Herein, we report the safety profile of the prospective, multicenter, national VAX4FRAIL study (NCT04848493) to evaluate vaccines in a large trans-disease cohort of patients with solid or hematological malignancies and neurological and rheumatological diseases.

Methods

Between March 3 and September 2, 2021, 566 patients were evaluable for safety endpoint: 105 received the mRNA-1273 vaccine and 461 the BNT162b2 vaccine. Frail patients were defined per protocol as patients under treatment with hematological malignancies (n = 131), solid tumors (n = 191), immune-rheumatological diseases (n = 86), and neurological diseases (n = 158), including multiple sclerosis and generalized myasthenia. The impact of the vaccination on the health status of patients was assessed through a questionnaire focused on the first week after each vaccine dose.

Results

The most frequently reported moderate-severe adverse events were pain at the injection site (60.3% after the first dose, 55.4% after the second), fatigue (30.1%-41.7%), bone pain (27.4%-27.2%), and headache (11.8%-18.9%). Risk factors associated with the occurrence of severe symptoms after vaccine administration were identified through a multivariate logistic regression analysis: age was associated with severe fever presentation (younger patients vs. middle-aged vs. older ones), female individuals presented a higher probability of severe pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, and bone pain; and the mRNA-1237 vaccine was associated with a higher probability of severe pain at the injection site and fever. After the first dose, patients presenting a severe symptom were at a relevant risk of recurrence of the same severe symptom after the second one. Overall, 11 patients (1.9%) after the first dose and 7 (1.2%) after the second one required postponement or suspension of the disease-specific treatment. Finally, two fatal events occurred among our 566 patients. These two events were considered unrelated to the vaccine.

Conclusions

Our study reports that mRNA-COVID-19 vaccination is safe also in frail patients; as expected, side effects were manageable and had a minimum impact on patient care path.

The impact of casirivimab-imdevimab antibody cocktail in patients amidst and post COVID 19 treatment: A retro-prospective comparative study in India

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies have gained attention in developing countries owing to its benefits portrayed by few clinical trials. However, no studies until now have been undergone in India.

METHODS

A retro-prospective comparative observational study was conducted in symptomatic COVID19 patients to evaluate the impact of Casirivimab and Imdevimab antibody cocktail in the high-risk population. Through an extensive data retrieval for 6 months, 152 samples were documented and sorted into test (Casirivimab and Imdevimab treated patients, n = 79) and control (Non- Casirivimab and Imdevimab treated individuals, n = 73) subsets. The research had two phases; first, estimation of mechanical ventilation and high flow oxygen requirement and mortality in samples amidst the treatment, and second was the post COVID19 patients' feedback through validated (Cronbach's alpha coefficient = 0.7) questionnaire that evaluated their health and vaccination status, and treatment satisfaction.

RESULTS

We noticed lesser requisite for mechanical ventilation (6.3%; p < 0.001), high flow oxygen (5.1%; p < 0.001) and no death during Casirivimab and Imdevimab therapy. Meanwhile, non-vaccinated test groups were not on mechanical ventilation and those fully immunized seldom entailed high flow oxygen (test, 6.3%; control, 41.9%, p < 0.01). On evaluating the post COVID19 status of each patient in the study, 90.1% of the test samples were healthy and 97.2% were satisfied with the treatment than those in control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Casirivimab and Imdevimab regimen was clinically beneficial for high risk COVID19 patients than those treated without the antibody cocktail.