Host Protective Immunity against Severe Acute Respiratory Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Immunity against SARS-CoV-2 and Its Variants

Risk of COVID-19 death for people with a pre-existing cancer diagnosis prior to COVID-19-vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis

While previous reviews found a positive association between pre-existing cancer diagnosis and COVID-19-related death, most early studies did not distinguish long-term cancer survivors from those recently diagnosed/treated, nor adjust for important confounders including age. We aimed to consolidate higher-quality evidence on risk of COVID-19-related death for people with recent/active cancer (compared to people without) in the pre-COVID-19-vaccination period. We searched the WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database (20 December 2021), and Medline and Embase (10 May 2023). We included studies adjusting for age and sex, and providing details of cancer status. Risk-of-bias assessment was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled adjusted odds or risk ratios (aORs, aRRs) or hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using generic inverse-variance random-effects models. Random-effects meta-regressions were used to assess associations between effect estimates and time since cancer diagnosis/treatment. Of 23 773 unique title/abstract records, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 low, 17 moderate, 20 high risk of bias). Risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with active or recently diagnosed/treated cancer (general population: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.36-1.61, I2  = 0; people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I2  = 0.58; inpatients with COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I2  = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (general population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I2  = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers. Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.

An Analysis of the Neutralizing Antibodies against the Main SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Healthcare Workers (HCWs) Vaccinated against or Infected by SARS-CoV-2

Although the anti-COVID-19 vaccination has proved to be an effective preventive tool, "breakthrough infections" have been documented in patients with complete primary vaccination courses. Most of the SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies produced after SARS-CoV-2 infection target the spike protein receptor-binding domain which has an important role in facilitating viral entry and the infection of the host cells. SARS-CoV-2 has demonstrated the ability to evolve by accumulating mutations in the spike protein to escape the humoral response of a host. The aim of this study was to compare the titers of neutralizing antibodies (NtAbs) against the variants of SARS-CoV-2 by analyzing the sera of recovered and vaccinated healthcare workers (HCWs). A total of 293 HCWs were enrolled and divided into three cohorts as follows: 91 who had recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection (nVP); 102 that were vaccinated and became positive after the primary cycle (VP); and 100 that were vaccinated with complete primary cycles and concluded the follow-up period without becoming positive (VN). Higher neutralization titers were observed in the vaccinated subjects' arms compared to the nVP subjects' arms. Differences in neutralization titers between arms for single variants were statistically highly significant (p < 0.001), except for the differences between titers against the Alpha variant in the nVP and in VP groups, which were also statistically significant (p < 0.05). Within the nVP group, the number of subjects with an absence of neutralizing antibodies was high. The presence of higher titers in patients with a complete primary cycle compared to patients who had recovered from infection suggested the better efficacy of artificial immunization compared to natural immunization, and this further encourages the promotion of vaccination even in subjects with previous infections.

Determinants of Anti-S Immune Response at 12 Months after SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in a Multicentric European Cohort of Healthcare Workers-ORCHESTRA Project

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of the immunity provided by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is an important public health issue. We analyzed the determinants of 12-month serology in a multicenter European cohort of vaccinated healthcare workers (HCW).

METHODS

We analyzed the sociodemographic characteristics and levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies (IgG) in a cohort of 16,101 vaccinated HCW from eleven centers in Germany, Italy, Romania, Slovakia and Spain. Considering the skewness of the distribution, the serological levels were transformed using log or cubic standardization and normalized by dividing them by center-specific standard errors. We fitted center-specific multivariate regression models to estimate the cohort-specific relative risks (RR) of an increase of one standard deviation of log or cubic antibody level and the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for different factors and combined them in random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

We included 16,101 HCW in the analysis. A high antibody level was positively associated with age (RR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.00-1.08 per 10-year increase), previous infection (RR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.29-2.45) and use of Spikevax [Moderna] with combinations compared to Comirnaty [BioNTech/Pfizer] (RR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.97-1.19) and was negatively associated with the time since last vaccine (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.98 per 30-day increase).

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide insight about vaccine-induced immunity to SARS-CoV-2, an analysis of its determinants and quantification of the antibody decay trend with time since vaccination.

Immunocytometric analysis of patients with thymic epithelial tumors revealed that COVID-19 vaccine booster strongly enhanced the immune response

Background

Thymic epithelial tumors (TETs) are rare malignancies with heterogeneous clinical manifestations. The high frequency of autoimmune paraneoplastic disorders observed in such patients requires caution when using COVID-19 vaccines. Furthermore, TETs are often associated with severe immunodeficiency, making it difficult to predict vaccine immunization. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate immune response to COVID-19 vaccine in patients with TETs.

Methods

We conducted a prospective study enrolling patients who underwent the SARS-Cov-2 mRNA full vaccine cycle (two doses plus a booster after 6 months of BNT162b2). All patients were enrolled before receiving 1st vaccine dose and were followed over the vaccination cycle for up to 6 months after the booster dose to i) assess humoral and cellular responses, ii) define biomarkers predictive of effective immunization, and iii) evaluate the safety of the vaccine.

Results

At the end of the full vaccine cycle, 27 (61.4%) patients developed humoral and 38 (86.4%) cellular responses (IFN γ release by stimulated cells) and showed an increase in activated TH1 and TH17 cells, particularly significant after the booster dose. The number of B and T lymphocytes at baseline was predictive of humoral and cellular responses, respectively. Patients with no evidence of tumor lesions had a higher probability of achieving a humoral response than those with evidence of the disease. Furthermore, the percentage of patients with immune-related disorders (75%), particularly Good's syndrome (47.7%) and myasthenia gravis (29.5%), did not change over the entire vaccine cycle. Overall, 19 of the 44 enrolled patients (43.2%) had COVID-19 during the observation period; none required hospitalization or oxygen support, and no fatalities were observed.

Conclusion

SARS-Cov-2 mRNA vaccine determines the immune responses in patients with TET, particularly after the booster dose, and in patients with no evidence of tumor lesions. Preliminary analysis of B and T lymphocytes may help identify patients who have a lower probability of achieving effective humoral and cellular responses and thus may need passive immunization. The vaccine prevented severe COVID-19 infection and is safe.

The Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in a Cohort of Family Pediatricians from Southern Italy

In Italy, from January 2021, the Ministry of Health indicated a vaccination plan against COVID for frail patients and physicians based on a three-dose scheme. However, conflicting results have been reported on which biomarkers permit immunization assessment. We used several laboratory approaches (i.e., antibodies serum levels, flow cytometry analysis, and cytokines release by stimulated cells) to investigate the immune response in a cohort of 53 family pediatricians (FPs) at different times after the vaccine. We observed that the BNT162b2-mRNA vaccine induced a significant increase of specific antibodies after the third (booster) dose; however, the antibody titer was not predictive of the risk of developing the infection in the six months following the booster dose. The antigen stimulation of PBMC cells from subjects vaccinated with the third booster jab induced the increase of the activated T cells (i.e., CD4+ CD154+); the frequency of CD4+ CD154+ TNF-α+ cells, as well as the TNF-α secretion, was not modified, while we observed a trend of increase of IFN-γ secretion. Interestingly, the level of CD8+ IFN-γ+ (independently from antibody titer) was significantly increased after the third dose and predicts the risk of developing the infection in the six months following the booster jab. Such results may impact also other virus vaccinations.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in older adults

In the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, vaccinations were essential in preventing COVID-19 infections and related mortality in older adults. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the COVID-19 vaccines in older adults. We systematically searched the electronic bibliographic databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, Research Square, and OpenGrey, as well as other sources of gray literature, for studies published between January 1, 2020, and October 1, 2022. We retrieved 22 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with a total of 3,404,696 older adults (aged over 60 years) participating, that were included in the meta-analysis. No significant publication bias was found. In the cumulative meta-analysis, we found that the COVID-19 vaccines were effective in preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (OR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.23-0.65, p = 0.0004) and in reducing the number of COVID-19-related deaths (OR = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.10-0.25, p < 0.00001) in elderly people. Antibody seroconversion (AS) and geometric mean titer (GMT) levels significantly increased in vaccinated older adults [OR = 24.42, 95% CI = 19.29-30.92; standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.64-1.20, respectively]. However, local and systemic adverse events after COVID-19 vaccine administration were found in older adults (OR = 2.57, 95% CI = 1.83-3.62, p < 0.00001). Although vaccination might induce certain adverse reactions in the elderly population, the available evidence showed that the COVID-19 vaccines are effective and tolerated, as shown by the decrease in COVID-19-related deaths in older adults. It needs to be made abundantly clear to elderly people that the advantages of vaccination far outweigh any potential risks. Therefore, COVID-19 vaccination should be considered as the recommended strategy for the control of this disease by preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and related deaths in older adults. More RCTs are needed to increase the certainty of the evidence and to verify our conclusions.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022319698, identifier CRD42022319698.