Time Since Rituximab Treatment Is Essential for Developing a Humoral Response to COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines in Patients With Rheumatic Diseases

COVID-19 Vaccination Before Initiating Rituximab Treatment Induces Strong Serological Response in Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease, Reducing Post-Pandemic Concerns About the Impact of Rituximab

OBJECTIVE

Rituximab (RTX)-treated patients exhibit suboptimal responses to COVID-19 vaccines. However, existing research primarily involves patients already receiving RTX when vaccines were introduced, failing to account for the current landscape where patients are vaccinated before initiating RTX. Our objective was to compare the serological response to COVID-19 vaccines in patients vaccinated before or after RTX initiation.

METHODS

We included 254 RTX-treated patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) and 113 blood donors (BDs) in a retrospective, observational cohort study. Patients were categorized based on the timing of RTX treatment relative to primary COVID-19 vaccination. Serological vaccine responses were assessed using three immunoassays, and logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of serological response.

RESULTS

Patients vaccinated before initiating RTX treatment had significantly higher seroconversion rates of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (87%) and neutralizing antibodies (91%) compared with those receiving RTX before and after vaccination (n = 132) (61% and 65%, respectively). In the logistic regression analysis, a positive serological response was associated with the number of vaccines administered >9 months after the last RTX treatment. Patients receiving the highest number of vaccines with >9 months after RTX showed a response comparable to that of the BDs.

CONCLUSION

Vaccinating before RTX initiation yields a robust serological response in patients with AIIRDs. Furthermore, we highlight the reversibility of antibody impairment after RTX treatment cessation, provided that adequate vaccinations occur within a minimum of 9 months after RTX. Our findings offer essential insights for clinical decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccination and RTX treatment, alleviating concerns about future RTX use.

Rituximab-to-vaccine interval on SARS-CoV-2 immunogenicity in children: The potential role of prior natural infection

BACKGROUND

Treatment with anti-CD20 antibodies (rituximab) is used in both adults and children to treat various autoimmune and oncological diseases. Rituximab depletes B CD20+ cells and, thereby, antibody response to vaccines. This study aimed to examine the antibody response to mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines in children aged 5-18 years undergoing rituximab treatment compared to healthy matched children.

METHODS

Between 31 January and 18 July 2022, we conducted a prospective observational study at the Geneva University Hospitals, enrolling children aged 5-18 years under rituximab treatment who had received two mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses. Controls were healthy volunteers with no significant medical conditions. Exclusion criteria included a recent SARS-CoV-2 infection. Blood samples were collected at day 60 (±30) and day 270 (±90) after the second vaccination.

RESULTS

The rituximab-treated group exhibited significantly lower levels of antibodies specific to the anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein than healthy controls at 60 (±30) days after the second vaccine dose (geometric mean concentration: 868.3 IU/mL in patients and 11,393 IU/mL in controls; p = .008). However, patients with a rituximab-to-vaccine interval shorter than 6 months and with evidence of a past infection (based on positive anti-N antibody levels) had a high level of anti-RBD antibodies.

CONCLUSION

A past infection with SARS-CoV-2 may induce anti-RBD-specific memory B cells that can be re-activated by SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, even after rituximab-induced B-cell depletion. This suggests that it is possible to vaccinate earlier than 6 months after rituximab to develop a good antibody response, especially in the case of past SARS-CoV-2 infection.

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

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

IMPORTANCE

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

CLINICAL TRIALS

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

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and COVID-19

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

BA.1/BA.5 Immunogenicity, Reactogenicity, and Disease Activity after COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with ANCA-Associated Vasculitis: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Emerging omicron subtypes with immune escape lead to inadequate vaccine response with breakthrough infections in immunocompromised individuals such as Anti-neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) patients. As AAV is considered an orphan disease, there are still limited data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and prospective studies that have focused exclusively on AAV patients are lacking. In addition, there are safety concerns regarding the use of highly immunogenic mRNA vaccines in autoimmune diseases, and further studies investigating reactogenicity are urgently needed. In this prospective observational cohort study, we performed a detailed characterization of neutralizing antibody responses against omicron subtypes and provided a longitudinal assessment of vaccine reactogenicity and AAV disease activity. Different vaccine doses were generally well tolerated and no AAV relapses occurred during follow-up. AAV patients had significantly lower anti-S1 IgG and surrogate-neutralizing antibodies after first, second, and third vaccine doses as compared to healthy controls, respectively. Live-virus neutralization assays against omicron subtypes BA.1 and BA.5 revealed that previous SARS-CoV-2 vaccines result in an inadequate neutralizing immune response in immunocompromised AAV patients. These data demonstrate that new vaccination strategies including adapted mRNA vaccines against epitopes of emerging variants are needed to help protect highly vulnerable individuals such as AAV patients.

Rituximab-treated rheumatic patients: B cells predict seroconversion after COVID-19 boost or revaccination in initial vaccine non-responders

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effect of either a booster vaccine (one dose) or revaccination (two doses 3 weeks apart) on the antibody response to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in patients with rheumatic disease (RD) treated with rituximab (RTX) who had not produced vaccine-reactive antibodies after the initial two vaccine doses. Further, to examine if B cell levels in peripheral blood predicted seroconversion.

METHODS

We included 91 RTX-treated RD patients previously vaccinated against COVID-19. Patients were offered revaccination or a single booster vaccination with an mRNA vaccine. Serum total antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein were measured before and 6 weeks after the last vaccine dose. B cells (CD19+CD45+) were measured by flow cytometry at inclusion.

RESULTS

Of RD patients with undetectable SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels before inclusion, seroconversion was seen in 38% 6 weeks after the booster dose and 32% after revaccination. Patients receiving revaccination had significantly higher antibody levels than patients receiving a booster dose (P < 0.001). In both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis, only B cells higher than 10/µl before boost or revaccination were associated with seroconversion (P = 0.009 and P = 0.01, respectively). Seroconversion was independent of age, gender, diagnosis, cumulative RTX dose, RTX treatment time and time since last RTX treatment.

CONCLUSION

Continuously impaired humoral response to mRNA vaccines was found in most RTX-treated patients after a booster dose or revaccination. Seroconversion was observed in approximately one-third of the patients. Measurable B cells before boosting or revaccination was the strongest predictor of antibody response after boost or revaccination.

The impact of immunomodulating treatment on the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory rheumatic diseases compared to healthy controls. A Swedish nationwide study (COVID19-REUMA)

Objectives

To elucidate antibody responses after the second and third dose of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) treated with biologic/targeted disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (b/ts DMARDs).

Methods

Antibody levels to antigens representing spike full length protein and spike S1 were measured before vaccination, 2-12 weeks after the second dose, before and after the third dose using multiplex bead-based serology assay. Positive antibody response was defined as antibody levels over cut off (seropositivity) in seronegative individuals or ≥4-fold increase in antibodies in individuals seropositive for both spike proteins.

Results

Patients (n=414) receiving b/ts DMARDs (283 had arthritis, 75 systemic vasculitis and 56 other autoimmune diseases) and controls (n=61) from five Swedish regions participated. Treatments groups were: rituximab (n=145); abatacept (n=22); Interleukin 6 receptor inhibitors [IL6i (n=79)]; JAnus Kinase Inhibitors [JAKi (n=58)], Tumour Necrosis Factor inhibitor [TNFi (n=68)] and Interleukin12/23/17 inhibitors [IL12/23/17i (n=42)]. Percentage of patients with positive antibody response after two doses was significantly lower in rituximab (33,8%) and abatacept (40,9%) (p<0,001) but not in IL12/23/17i, TNFi or JAKi groups compared to controls (80,3%). Higher age, rituximab treatment and shorter time between last rituximab course and vaccination predicted impaired antibody response. Antibody levels collected 21-40 weeks after second dose decreased significantly (IL6i: p=0,02; other groups: p<0,001) compared to levels at 2-12 week but most participants remained seropositive. Proportion of patients with positive antibody response increased after third dose but was still significantly lower in rituximab (p<0,001).

Conclusions

Older individuals and patients on maintenance rituximab have an impaired response after two doses of COVID-19 vaccine which improves if the time between last rituximab course and vaccination extends and also after an additional vaccine dose. Rituximab patients should be prioritized for booster vaccine doses. TNFi, JAKi and IL12/23/17i does not diminished humoral response to primary and an additional vaccination.

Optimal time for COVID-19 vaccination in rituximab-treated dermatologic patients

Background

By depleting circulating B lymphocytes, rituximab time-dependently suppresses coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines’ humoral immunogenicity for a prolonged period. The optimal time to vaccinate rituximab-exposed immune-mediated dermatologic disease (IMDD) patients is currently unclear.

Objective

To estimate the vaccination timeframe that equalized the occurrence of humoral immunogenicity outcomes between rituximab-exposed and rituximab-naïve IMDD patients.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study recruited rituximab-exposed and age-matched rituximab-naïve subjects tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific immunity post-vaccination. Baseline clinical and immunological data (i.e., immunoglobulin levels, lymphocyte immunophenotyping) and SARS-CoV-2-specific immunity levels were extracted. The outcomes compared were the percentages of subjects who produced neutralizing antibodies (seroconversion rates, SR) and SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG levels among seroconverters. The outcomes were first analyzed using multiple regressions adjusted for the effects of corticosteroid use, steroid-spearing agents, and pre-vaccination immunological status (i.e., IgM levels, the percentages of the total, naïve, and memory B lymphocytes) to identify rituximab-related immunogenicity outcomes. The rituximab-related outcome differences with a 95% confidence interval (CI) between groups were calculated, starting by including every subject and then narrowing down to those with longer rituximab-to-vaccination intervals (≥3, ≥6, ≥9, ≥12 months). The desirable cut-off performances were &lt;25% outcome inferiority observed among rituximab-exposed subgroups compared to rituximab-naïve subjects, and the positive likelihood ratio (LR+) for the corresponding outcomes ≥2.

Findings

Forty-five rituximab-exposed and 90 rituximab-naive subjects were included. The regression analysis demonstrated a negative association between rituximab exposure status and SR but not with SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG levels. Nine-month rituximab-to-vaccination cut-off fulfilled our prespecified diagnostic performance (SR difference between rituximab-exposed and rituximab-naïve group [95%CI]: -2.6 [-23.3, 18.1], LR+: 2.6) and coincided with the repopulation of naïve B lymphocytes in these patients.

Conclusions

Nine months of rituximab-to-vaccination interval maximize the immunological benefits of COVID-19 vaccines while avoiding unnecessary delay in vaccination and rituximab treatment for IMDD patients.

Cellular and humoral responses after second and third SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations in patients with autoimmune diseases treated with rituximab: specific T cell immunity remains longer and plays a protective role against SARS-CoV-2 reinfections

Background

Humoral and cellular immune responses are known to be crucial for patients to recover from COVID-19 and to protect them against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection once infected or vaccinated.

Objectives

This study aimed to investigate humoral and T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with autoimmune diseases after the second and third vaccine doses while on rituximab and their potential protective role against reinfection.

Methods

Ten COVID-19-naïve patients were included. Three time points were used for monitoring cellular and humoral responses: pre-vaccine to exclude virus exposure (time point 1) and post-second and post-third vaccine (time points 2 and 3). Specific IgG antibodies were monitored by Luminex and T cells against SARS-CoV-2 spike-protein by ELISpot and CoVITEST. All episodes of symptomatic COVID-19 were recorded.

Results

Nine patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis and one with an undifferentiated autoimmune disease were included. Nine patients received mRNA vaccines. The last rituximab infusion was administered for a mean (SD) of 15 (10) weeks before the first vaccine and six patients were CD19-B cell-depleted. After a mean (SD) of 19 (10) and 16 (2) days from the second and third vaccine dose, IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in six (60%) and eight (80%) patients, respectively. All patients developed specific T cell responses by ELISpot and CoVITEST in time points 2 and 3. Previous B cell depletion correlated with anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels. Nine (90%) patients developed mild COVID-19 after a median of 7 months of the third dose.

Conclusion

Rituximab in patients with autoimmune diseases reduces humoral responses but does not avoid the development of T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, which remain present after a booster dose. A steady cellular immunity appears to be protective against subsequent reinfections.

Clinical usefulness of testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibodies

In the COVID-19 pandemic era, antibody testing against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has proven an invaluable tool and herein we highlight some of the most useful clinical and/or epidemiological applications of humoral immune responses recording. Anti-spike circulating IgGs and SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies can serve as predictors of disease progression or disease prevention, whereas anti-nucleocapsid antibodies can help distinguishing infection from vaccination. Also, in the era of immunotherapies we address the validity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody monitoring post-infection and/or vaccination following therapies with the popular anti-CD20 monoclonals, as well as in the context of various cancers or autoimmune conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis. Additional crucial applications include population immunosurveillance, either at the general population or at specific communities such as health workers. Finally, we discuss how testing of antibodies in cerebrospinal fluid can inform us on the neurological complications that often accompany COVID-19.

The Impact of Immune-Modifying Treatments for Skin Diseases on the Immune Response to COVID-19 Vaccines: a Narrative Review

Purpose of Review

SARS-CoV-2 has had a devastating global effect, with vaccinations being paramount in the public health strategy against COVID-19. Vaccinations have uncoupled infection from adverse COVID-19 outcomes worldwide. While immune-modifying therapies are effective for the management of skin diseases such as psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, these medications also impair protective immune responses. There has been longstanding uncertainty and concern over the impact of immune-modifying therapies on the effectiveness of vaccines; for example, it is well recognised that methotrexate impairs humoral responses to both influenza and pneumococcal vaccines. This narrative review aims to discuss the evidence to date on the impact of immune-modifying therapies on the immune response to COVID-19 vaccines, with a focus on the first two vaccine doses.

Recent Findings

Individuals receiving immune-modifying therapy are more likely to have attenuated humoral responses to a single dose of COVID-19 vaccine compared to healthy controls; however, this may be improved by a complete course of vaccination. B cell targeted biologics such as rituximab markedly impair the humoral response to both the first and second COVID-19 vaccination. There remains a paucity of data on cellular immune responses, with the few available studies indicating lower responses to two vaccine doses in individuals receiving immune-modifying therapies compared to healthy controls, which may impact the durability of immune responses.

Summary

Inadequate humoral immune responses to a single dose of vaccine in the context of immune-modifying therapy are improved by a complete course of vaccination. Individuals receiving immune-modifying treatments should be encouraged to take up a complete vaccine course to mitigate their risk against COVID-19. Research in large patient populations on the longevity/kinetics of the complex humoral and cellular response to subsequent vaccine doses, including against newer variants of concern, is warranted, in addition to data on immune correlates of vaccine clinical effectiveness.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Rheumatic Diseases Leads to a High Seroconversion Rate and Reduced Self-Imposed Isolation and Shielding Behavior

INTRODUCTION

We investigated the effect of a two-dose mRNA vaccine on antibody levels against SARS-CoV-2 and patient behavior and shielding concerning fear of COVID-19 in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus or rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

Three-hundred-and-three patients and 44 blood donors were included. All patients received two doses of an mRNA vaccine and had total antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 measured before vaccination and 2 and 9 weeks after the second vaccination. Further, patients answered an electronic questionnaire before and after vaccination concerning behavior, anxiety, and symptoms of depression (PHQ-9).

RESULTS

Significantly fewer patients (90%) had measurable antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 compared to blood donors (100%) after the second vaccination (p<0.001). Treatment with rituximab was the strongest predictor of an unfavorable vaccine response, as only 27% had measurable antibodies. Nearly all patients (97%) not treated with rituximab experienced seroconversion. Prednisone and methotrexate had a negative effect on seroconversion, but no effect of age or comorbidity was observed. Patients experienced significant improvement after vaccination in 10 out of 12 questions regarding behavior and fear of COVID-19, while no change in PHQ-9 or anxiety was observed.

CONCLUSION

We find a very high seroconversion rate among rheumatic patients, and reduced self-imposed isolation and shielding after COVID-19 vaccination.

RNA Viruses, Pregnancy and Vaccination: Emerging Lessons from COVID-19 and Ebola Virus Disease

Pathogenic viruses with an RNA genome represent a challenge for global human health since they have the tremendous potential to develop into devastating pandemics/epidemics. The management of the recent COVID-19 pandemic was possible to a certain extent only because of the strong foundations laid by the research on previous viral outbreaks, especially Ebola Virus Disease (EVD). A clear understanding of the mechanisms of the host immune response generated upon viral infections is a prime requisite for the development of new therapeutic strategies. Hence, we present here a comparative study of alterations in immune response upon SARS-CoV-2 and Ebola virus infections that illustrate many common features. Vaccination and pregnancy are two important aspects that need to be studied from an immunological perspective. So, we summarize the outcomes and immune responses in vaccinated and pregnant individuals in the context of COVID-19 and EVD. Considering the significance of immunomodulatory approaches in combating both these diseases, we have also presented the state of the art of such therapeutics and prophylactics. Currently, several vaccines against these viruses have been approved or are under clinical trials in various parts of the world. Therefore, we also recapitulate the latest developments in these which would inspire researchers to look for possibilities of developing vaccines against many other RNA viruses. We hope that the similar aspects in COVID-19 and EVD open up new avenues for the development of pan-viral therapies.