Study of efficacy and longevity of immune response to third and fourth doses of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cancer: A single arm clinical trial.

Background: Cancer patients show increased morbidity with COVID-19 and need effective immunization strategies. Many healthcare regulatory agencies recommend administering 'booster' doses of COVID-19 vaccines beyond the standard two-dose series, for this group of patients. Therefore, studying the efficacy of these additional vaccine doses against SARS-CoV-2 and variants of concern is of utmost importance in this immunocompromised patient population. Methods: We conducted a prospective single arm clinical trial enrolling patients with cancer that had received two doses of mRNA or one dose of AD26.CoV2.S vaccine and administered a third dose of mRNA vaccine. We further enrolled patients that had no or low responses to three mRNA COVID vaccines and assessed the efficacy of a fourth dose of mRNA vaccine. Efficacy was assessed by changes in anti-spike antibody, T-cell activity, and neutralization activity, which were again assessed at baseline and 4 weeks. Results: We demonstrate that a third dose of COVID-19 vaccine leads to seroconversion in 57% of patients that were seronegative after primary vaccination series. The immune response is durable as assessed by anti-SARS-CoV-2 (anti-S) antibody titers, T-cell activity, and neutralization activity against wild-type (WT) SARS-CoV2 and BA1.1.529 at 6 months of follow-up. A subset of severely immunocompromised hematologic malignancy patients that were unable to mount an adequate immune response (titer <1000 AU/mL) after the third dose and were treated with a fourth dose in a prospective clinical trial which led to adequate immune boost in 67% of patients. Low baseline IgM levels and CD19 counts were associated with inadequate seroconversion. Booster doses induced limited neutralization activity against the Omicron variant. Conclusions: These results indicate that third dose of COVID vaccine induces durable immunity in cancer patients and an additional dose can further stimulate immunity in a subset of patients with inadequate response. Funding: Leukemia Lymphoma Society, National Cancer Institute. Clinical trial number: NCT05016622.

People with cancer have a higher risk of death or severe complications from COVID-19. As a result, vaccinating cancer patients against COVID-19 is critical. But patients with cancer, particularly blood or lymphatic system cancers, are less likely to develop protective immunity after COVID-19 vaccination. Immune suppression caused by cancer or cancer therapies may explain the poor vaccine response. Booster doses of the vaccine may improve the vaccine response in patients with cancer. But limited information is available about how well booster doses protect patients with cancer against COVID-19. Thakkar et al. show that a third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine can induce a protective immune response in half of the patients with cancer with no immunity after the first two doses. In the experiments, Thakkar et al. tracked the immune reaction to COVID-19 booster shots in 106 cancer patients. A third booster dose protected patients for up to four to six months and reduced breakthrough infection rates to low levels. Eighteen patients with blood cancers and severe immune suppression had an inadequate immune response after three doses of the vaccine; a fourth dose boosted the immune response for two-thirds of them, which for some included neutralization of variants such as Omicron. The experiments show that booster doses can increase COVID-19 vaccine protection for patients with cancer, even those who do not respond to the initial vaccine series. Thakkar et al. also show that pre-vaccine levels of two molecules linked to the immune system, (immunoglobin M and the CD19 antigen) predicted the patients' vaccine response, which might help physicians identify which individuals would benefit from booster doses.

Evaluation of the automated LIAISON® SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG assay for the detection of circulating antibodies.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 has brought about tests from many manufacturers. While molecular and rapid antigen tests are targeted for early diagnosis, immunoassays have a larger role in epidemiological studies, understanding longitudinal immunity, and in vaccine development and response. METHODS: The performance of the LIAISON® SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG assay was evaluated against the Beckman ACCESS SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay in New Mexico, and against the Siemens ADVIA Centaur COV2G assay in New York. Discordant samples were parsed using a microneutralization assay. RESULTS: A SARS-CoV-2 antibody positivity rate of 23.8% was observed in the samples tested in New York (September 2020), while in the same month the positivity rate was 1.5% in New Mexico. Positive and negative agreement were 67.6% (95% CI 49.5-82.6%) and 99.8% (95% CI 99.5-99.9%), respectively, with the Beckman test, and 98.0% (95% CI 95.7-99.3%) and 94.8% (95% CI 93.4-96.0%), respectively, with the Siemens test. Receiver operating characteristic analysis for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies discloses an AUC, area under the curve, of 0.996 (95% CI 0.992-0.999) for the LIAISON® SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG assay. The criterion associated to the Youden Index was determined to be >12.9 kAU/L with a sensitivity of 99.44% and a specificity of 99.82%. CONCLUSIONS: The LIAISON® SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG assay is highly sensitive and specific. The balance of these parameters, without emphasis on high specificity alone, is particularly important when applied to high prevalence populations, where a highly sensitive assay will result in reporting a lower number of false negative subjects.

Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: Incidence, Predictors, Outcomes, and Comparison to Influenza.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study is to determine the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL) in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). BACKGROUND: COVID-19 results in increased inflammatory markers previously associated with atrial arrhythmias. However, little is known about their incidence or specificity in COVID-19 or their association with outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of 3,970 patients admitted with polymerase chain reaction-positive COVID-19 between February 4 and April 22, 2020, with manual review performed of 1,110. The comparator arm included 1,420 patients with influenza hospitalized between January 1, 2017, and January 1, 2020. RESULTS: Among 3,970 inpatients with COVID-19, the incidence of AF/AFL was 10% (n = 375) and in patients without a history of atrial arrhythmias it was 4% (n = 146). Patients with new-onset AF/AFL were older with increased inflammatory markers including interleukin 6 (93 vs. 68 pg/ml; p < 0.01), and more myocardial injury (troponin-I: 0.2 vs. 0.06 ng/ml; p < 0.01). AF and AFL were associated with increased mortality (46% vs. 26%; p < 0.01). Manual review captured a somewhat higher incidence of AF/AFL (13%, n = 140). Compared to inpatients with COVID-19, patients with influenza (n = 1,420) had similar rates of AF/AFL (12%, n = 163) but lower mortality. The presence of AF/AFL correlated with similarly increased mortality in both COVID-19 (relative risk: 1.77) and influenza (relative risk: 1.78). CONCLUSIONS: AF/AFL occurs in a subset of patients hospitalized with either COVID-19 or influenza and is associated with inflammation and disease severity in both infections. The incidence and associated increase in mortality in both cohorts suggests that AF/AFL is not specific to COVID-19, but is rather a generalized response to the systemic inflammation of severe viral illnesses.

Malignant Arrhythmias in Patients With COVID-19: Incidence, Mechanisms, and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop cardiac injury are reported to experience higher rates of malignant cardiac arrhythmias. However, little is known about these arrhythmias-their frequency, the underlying mechanisms, and their impact on mortality. METHODS: We extracted data from a registry (NCT04358029) regarding consecutive inpatients with confirmed COVID-19 who were receiving continuous telemetric ECG monitoring and had a definitive disposition of hospital discharge or death. Between patients who died versus discharged, we compared a primary composite end point of cardiac arrest from ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation or bradyarrhythmias such as atrioventricular block. RESULTS: Among 800 patients with COVID-19 at Mount Sinai Hospital with definitive dispositions, 140 patients had telemetric monitoring, and either died (52) or were discharged (88). The median (interquartile range) age was 61 years (48-74); 73% men; and ethnicity was White in 34%. Comorbidities included hypertension in 61%, coronary artery disease in 25%, ventricular arrhythmia history in 1.4%, and no significant comorbidities in 16%. Compared with discharged patients, those who died had elevated peak troponin I levels (0.27 versus 0.02 ng/mL) and more primary end point events (17% versus 4%, P=0.01)-a difference driven by tachyarrhythmias. Fatal tachyarrhythmias invariably occurred in the presence of severe metabolic imbalance, while atrioventricular block was largely an independent primary event. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who die experience malignant cardiac arrhythmias more often than those surviving to discharge. However, these events represent a minority of cardiovascular deaths, and ventricular tachyarrhythmias are mainly associated with severe metabolic derangement. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04358029.

Syncope and presyncope in patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Recent studies have described several cardiovascular manifestations of COVID-19 including myocardial ischemia, myocarditis, thromboembolism, and malignant arrhythmias. However, to our knowledge, syncope in COVID-19 patients has not been systematically evaluated. We sought to characterize syncope and/or presyncope in COVID-19. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 with either syncope or presyncope. This "study" group (n = 37) was compared with an age and gender-matched cohort of patients without syncope ("control") (n = 40). Syncope was attributed to various categories. We compared telemetry data, treatments received, and clinical outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: Among 1000 COVID-19 patients admitted to the Mount Sinai Hospital, the incidence of syncope/presyncope was 3.7%. The median age of the entire cohort was 69 years (range 26-89+ years) and 55% were men. Major comorbidities included hypertension, diabetes, and coronary artery disease. Syncopal episodes were categorized as (a) unspecified in 59.4% patients, (b) neurocardiogenic in 15.6% patients, (c) hypotensive in 12.5% patients, and (d) cardiopulmonary in 3.1% patients with fall versus syncope and seizure versus syncope in 2 of 32 (6.3%) and 1 of 33 (3.1%) patients, respectively. Compared with the "control" group, there were no significant differences in both admission and peak blood levels of d-dimer, troponin-I, and CRP in the "study" group. Additionally, there were no differences in arrhythmias or death between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Syncope/presyncope in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 is uncommon and is infrequently associated with a cardiac etiology or associated with adverse outcomes compared to those who do not present with these symptoms.