Seroconversion rate after primary vaccination with two doses of BNT162b2 versus mRNA-1273 in solid organ transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the general population, the seroconversion rate after primary vaccination with two doses of an anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine reaches nearly 100%, with significantly higher antibody titers after mRNA-1273 vaccination compared to BNT162b2 vaccination. Here we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the antibody response after two-dose mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 vaccination in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed using PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library and original research papers were included for a meta-analysis to calculate vaccine-specific seroconversion rates for each of the mRNA vaccines. Next, the pooled relative seroconversion rate was estimated. RESULTS: Eight studies that described the development of antibodies against receptor-binding domain (RBD) and/or spike protein were eligible for meta-analysis. Two of these studies also reported antibody titers. The meta-analysis revealed lower seroconversion rates in SOT recipients vaccinated with two doses of BNT162b2 {44.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 34.1-54.7]} as compared with patients vaccinated with two doses of mRNA-1273 [58.4% (95% CI 47.2-69.2)]. The relative seroconversion rate was 0.795 (95% CI 0.732-0.864). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that in SOT recipients, higher seroconversion rates were observed after vaccination with mRNA-1273 compared with BNT162b2.

Preparing European Nephrology for the next pandemic: lessons from the ERACODA collaboration.

Owing to the vulnerability of patients with chronic kidney disease to infectious diseases, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been particularly devastating for the nephrology community. Unfortunately, the possibility of future COVID-19 waves or outbreaks of other infectious diseases with pandemic potential cannot be ruled out. The nephrology community made tremendous efforts to contain the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite this, the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted several shortcomings in our response to the pandemic and has taught us important lessons that can be utilized to improve our preparedness for any future health crises of similar nature. In this article we draw lessons from the European Renal Association COVID-19 Database (ERACODA) project, a pan-European collaboration initiated in March 2020 to understand the prognosis of COVID-19 in patients on kidney function replacement therapy. We discuss challenges faced in generating timely and robust evidence for informed management of patients with kidney disease and give recommendations for our preparedness for the next pandemic in Europe. Limited collaboration, the absence of common data architecture, and the sub-optimal quality of available data posed challenges in our response to COVID-19. Aligning different research initiatives, strengthening electronic health records, and involving experts in study design and data analysis will be important in our response to the next pandemic. The European Renal Association may take a leading role in aligning research initiatives via its engagement with other scientific societies, national registries, administrators, and researchers.

Kidney transplantation during mass disasters - from COVID-19 to other catastrophes A Consensus Statement by the DESCARTES Working Group and Ethics Committee of the ERA.

Mass disasters are characterized by a disparity between health care demand and supply, which hampers complex therapies like kidney transplantation. Considering scarcity of publications on previous disasters, we reviewed transplantation practice during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, and dwelled upon this experience for guiding transplantation strategies in the future pandemic and non-pandemic catastrophes. We strongly suggest continuing transplantation programs during mass disasters, if medical and logistic operational circumstances are appropriate. Postponing transplantations from living donors and referral of urgent cases to safe regions or hospitals are justified. Specific preventative measures in anticipated disasters (such as vaccination programs during pandemics or evacuation in case of hurricanes or wars) may be useful to minimize risks. Immunosuppressive therapies should consider stratifying risk status and avoiding heavy immune suppression in patients with a low probability of therapeutic success. Discharging patients at the earliest convenience is justified during pandemics, whereas delaying discharge is reasonable in other disasters, if infrastructural damage results in unhygienic living environments for the patients. In the outpatient setting, telemedicine is a useful approach to reduce the patient load to hospitals, to minimize the risk of nosocomial transmission in pandemics and the need for transport in destructive disasters. If it comes down to save as many lives as possible, some ethical principles may vary in function of disaster circumstances, but elementary ethical rules are non-negotiable. Patient education is essential to minimize disaster-related complications and to allow for an efficient use of health care resources.

Seroconversion Rate After Primary Vaccination with Two Doses of BNT162B2 versus MRNA-1273 in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS In the general population, the seroconversion rate after primary vaccination with two doses of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine reaches nearly 100%, with significantly higher antibody titers after mRNA-1273 vaccination compared with BNT162b2 vaccination. Here, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the antibody response after two-dose mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 vaccination in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. METHOD A systematic literature research was performed in PubMed, the Web of Science and the Cochrane library, and original research papers were included for a meta-analysis to calculate vaccine-specific seroconversion rates for each of the mRNA vaccines. Next, the pooled relative seroconversion rate was estimated. RESULTS Six studies that described the development of antibodies against receptor-binding domain (RBD) and/or S1 subunit of the spike protein were eligible for meta-analysis. Two of them also reported antibody titers. The meta-analysis revealed lower seroconversion rates in SOT recipients vaccinated with two doses of BNT162b2 {45.2%;[95% confidence interval (95% CI) 32.5%–58.3%]} than patients vaccinated with two doses of mRNA-1273 (60.4%;95% CI 47.4%–72.7%). The relative seroconversion rate amounted 0.79 (95% CI 0.71–0.88). CONCLUSION This systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that, in SOT recipients, higher seroconversion rates were observed after vaccination with mRNA-1273 compared with BNT162b2.

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination is not associated with the induction of anti-HLA or non-HLA antibodies.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is strongly recommended in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) and dialysis patients. Whether these vaccinations may trigger alloantibodies, is still debated. METHODS: In the current study we evaluated the effect of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines on anti-Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) and 60 anti-non-HLA antibody profiles in clinically stable KTR and dialysis patients. In total, we included 28 KTR, 30 patients on haemodialysis, 25 patients on peritoneal dialysis and 31 controls with a positive seroresponse 16-21 days after the first dose of either the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine. Both anti-HLA and anti-non-HLA antibodies were determined prior to vaccination and 21 to 35 days after the second vaccine dose. RESULTS: Overall, the proportion of patients with detectable anti-HLA antibodies was similar before and after vaccination (class I 14% vs. 16%, p = 0.48; class II 25% before and after vaccination). After vaccination, there was no pattern in 1) additionally detected anti-HLA antibodies, or 2) the levels of pre-existing ones. Additional anti-non-HLA antibodies were detected in 30% of the patients, ranging from 1 to 5 new anti-non-HLA antibodies per patient. However, the clinical significance of anti-non-HLA antibodies is still a matter of debate. To date, only a significant association has been found for anti-non-HLA ARHGDIB antibodies and long-term kidney graft loss. No additionally developed anti-ARHGDIB antibodies or elevated level of existing anti-ARHGDIB antibodies was observed. CONCLUSION: The current data indicate that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination does not induce anti-HLA or anti-non-HLA antibodies, corroborating the importance of vaccinating KTR and dialysis patients.

Renin-Angiotensin System Blockers and the Risk of COVID-19-Related Mortality in Patients with Kidney Failure.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is concern about potential deleterious effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients with kidney failure, who often use ACEis/ARBs, are at higher risk of more severe COVID-19. However, there are no data available on the association of ACEi/ARB use with COVID-19 severity in this population. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: From the European Renal Association COVID-19 database (ERACODA), we retrieved data on kidney transplant recipients and patients on dialysis who were affected by COVID-19, between February 1 and October 1, 2020, and had information on 28-day mortality. We used Cox proportional-hazards regression to calculate hazard ratios for the association between ACEi/ARB use and 28-day mortality risk. Additionally, we studied the association of discontinuation of these agents with 28-day mortality. RESULTS: We evaluated 1511 patients: 459 kidney transplant recipients and 1052 patients on dialysis. At diagnosis of COVID-19, 189 (41%) of the transplant recipients and 288 (27%) of the patients on dialysis were on ACEis/ARBs. A total of 88 (19%) transplant recipients and 244 (23%) patients on dialysis died within 28 days of initial presentation. In both groups of patients, there was no association between ACEi/ARB use and 28-day mortality in both crude and adjusted models (in transplant recipients, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.69 to 1.83; in patients on dialysis, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.47). Among transplant recipients, ACEi/ARB discontinuation was associated with a higher mortality risk after adjustment for demographics and comorbidities, but the association was no longer statistically significant after adjustment for severity of COVID-19 (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.40 to 4.58). Among patients on dialysis, ACEi/ARB discontinuation was not associated with mortality in any model. We obtained similar results across subgroups when ACEis and ARBs were studied separately, and when other outcomes for severity of COVID-19 were studied, e.g., hospital admission, admission to the intensive care unit, or need for ventilator support. CONCLUSIONS: Among kidney transplant recipients and patients on dialysis with COVID-19, there was no significant association of ACEi/ARB use or discontinuation with mortality.