Optimal Dosing and Timing of High-Dose Corticosteroid Therapy in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: Study Protocol for a Retrospective Observational Multicenter Study (SELECT).

BACKGROUND: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the dosing and timing of corticosteroids vary widely. Low-dose dexamethasone therapy reduces mortality in patients requiring respiratory support, but it remains unclear how to treat patients when this therapy fails. In critically ill patients, high-dose corticosteroids are often administered as salvage late in the disease course, whereas earlier administration may be more beneficial in preventing disease progression. Previous research has revealed that increased levels of various biomarkers are associated with mortality, and whole blood transcriptome sequencing has the ability to identify host factors predisposing to critical illness in patients with COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: Our goal is to determine the most optimal dosing and timing of corticosteroid therapy and to provide a basis for personalized corticosteroid treatment regimens to reduce morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This is a retrospective, observational, multicenter study that includes adult patients who were hospitalized due to COVID-19 in the Netherlands. We will use the differences in therapeutic strategies between hospitals (per protocol high-dose corticosteroids or not) over time to determine whether high-dose corticosteroids have an effect on the following outcome measures: mechanical ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula therapy, in-hospital mortality, and 28-day survival. We will also explore biomarker profiles in serum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and use whole blood transcriptome analysis to determine factors that influence the relationship between high-dose corticosteroids and outcome. Existing databases that contain routinely collected electronic data during ward and intensive care admissions, as well as existing biobanks, will be used. We will apply longitudinal modeling appropriate for each data structure to answer the research questions at hand. RESULTS: As of April 2023, data have been collected for a total of 1500 patients, with data collection anticipated to be completed by December 2023. We expect the first results to be available in early 2024. CONCLUSIONS: This study protocol presents a strategy to investigate the effect of high-dose corticosteroids throughout the entire clinical course of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, from hospital admission to the ward or intensive care unit until hospital discharge. Moreover, our exploration of biomarker and gene expression profiles for targeted corticosteroid therapy represents a first step towards personalized COVID-19 corticosteroid treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05403359; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05403359. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/48183.

Immune Responses 6 Months After mRNA-1273 COVID-19 Vaccination and the Effect of a Third Vaccination in Patients with Inborn Errors of Immunity.

PURPOSE: Patients with inborn errors of immunity (IEI) are at increased risk of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Effective long-term protection against COVID-19 is therefore of great importance in these patients, but little is known about the decay of the immune response after primary vaccination. We studied the immune responses 6 months after two mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines in 473 IEI patients and subsequently the response to a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in 50 patients with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID). METHODS: In a prospective multicenter study, 473 IEI patients (including X-linked agammaglobulinemia (XLA) (N = 18), combined immunodeficiency (CID) (N = 22), CVID (N = 203), isolated or undefined antibody deficiencies (N = 204), and phagocyte defects (N = 16)), and 179 controls were included and followed up to 6 months after two doses of the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine. Additionally, samples were collected from 50 CVID patients who received a third vaccine 6 months after primary vaccination through the national vaccination program. SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG titers, neutralizing antibodies, and T cell responses were assessed. RESULTS: At 6 months after vaccination, the geometric mean antibody titers (GMT) declined in both IEI patients and healthy controls, when compared to GMT 28 days after vaccination. The trajectory of this decline did not differ between controls and most IEI cohorts; however, antibody titers in CID, CVID, and isolated antibody deficiency patients more often dropped to below the responder cut-off compared to controls. Specific T cell responses were still detectable in 77% of controls and 68% of IEI patients at 6 months post vaccination. A third mRNA vaccine resulted in an antibody response in only two out of 30 CVID patients that did not seroconvert after two mRNA vaccines. CONCLUSION: A similar decline in IgG titers and T cell responses was observed in patients with IEI when compared to healthy controls 6 months after mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccination. The limited beneficial benefit of a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in previous non-responder CVID patients implicates that other protective strategies are needed for these vulnerable patients.

Immunogenicity of bivalent omicron (BA.1) booster vaccination after different priming regimens in health-care workers in the Netherlands (SWITCH ON): results from the direct boost group of an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Bivalent mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines encoding the ancestral and omicron spike (S) protein were developed as a countermeasure against antigenically distinct SARS-CoV-2 variants. We aimed to assess the (variant-specific) immunogenicity and reactogenicity of mRNA-based bivalent omicron (BA.1) vaccines in individuals who were primed with adenovirus-based or mRNA-based vaccines encoding the ancestral spike protein. METHODS: We analysed results of the direct boost group of the SWITCH ON study, an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Health-care workers from four academic hospitals in the Netherlands aged 18-65 years who had completed a primary COVID-19 vaccination regimen and received one booster of an mRNA-based vaccine, given no later than 3 months previously, were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using computer software in block sizes of 16 and 24 to receive an omicron BA.1 bivalent booster straight away (direct boost group) or a bivalent omicron BA.5 booster, postponed for 90 days (postponed boost group), stratified by priming regimen. The BNT162b2 OMI BA.1 boost was given to participants younger than 45 years, and the mRNA-1273.214 boost was given to participants 45 years or older, as per Dutch guidelines. The direct boost group, whose results are presented here, were divided into four subgroups for analysis: (1) Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson) prime and BNT162b2 OMI BA.1 (BioNTech-Pfizer) boost (Ad/P), (2) mRNA-based prime and BNT162b2 OMI BA.1 boost (mRNA/P), (3) Ad26.COV2.S prime and mRNA-1273.214 (Moderna) boost (Ad/M), and (4) mRNA-based prime and mRNA-1273.214 boost (mRNA/M). The primary outcome was fold change in S protein S1 subunit-specific IgG antibodies before and 28 days after booster vaccination. The primary outcome and safety were assessed in all participants except those who withdrew, had a SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection, or had a missing blood sample at day 0 or day 28. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05471440. FINDINGS: Between Sept 2 and Oct 4, 2022, 219 (50%) of 434 eligible participants were randomly assigned to the direct boost group; 187 participants were included in the primary analyses; exclusions were mainly due to SARS-CoV-2 infection between days 0 and 28. From the 187 included participants, 138 (74%) were female and 49 (26%) were male. 42 (22%) of 187 participants received Ad/P and 44 (24%) mRNA/P (those aged <45 years), and 45 (24%) had received Ad/M and 56 (30%) mRNA/M (those aged ≥45 years). S1-specific binding antibody concentrations increased 7 days after bivalent booster vaccination and remained stable over 28 days in all four subgroups (geometric mean ratio [GMR] between day 0 and day 28 was 1·15 [95% CI 1·12-1·19] for the Ad/P group, 1·17 [1·14-1·20] for the mRNA/P group, 1·20 [1·17-1·23] for the Ad/M group, and 1·16 [1·13-1·19] for the mRNA/M group). We observed no significant difference in the GMR between the Ad/P and mRNA/P groups (p=0·51). The GMR appeared to be higher in the Ad/M group than in the mRNA/M group, but was not significant (p=0·073). Most side-effects were mild to moderate in severity and resolved within 48 h in most individuals. INTERPRETATION: Booster vaccination with mRNA-1273.214 or BNT162b2 OMI BA.1 in adult healthcare workers resulted in a rapid recall of humoral and cellular immune responses independent of the priming regimen. Monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 immunity at the population level, and simultaneously antigenic drift at the virus level, remains crucial to assess the necessity and timing of COVID-19 variant-specific booster vaccinations. FUNDING: The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw).

A beacon in the dark: COVID-19 course in CVID patients from two European countries: Different approaches, similar outcomes.

Background: CVID patients present an increased risk of prolonged SARS-CoV-2 infection and re-infection and a higher COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality compared to the general population. Since 2021, different therapeutic and prophylactic strategies have been employed in vulnerable groups (vaccination, SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies and antivirals). The impact of treatments over the last 2 years has not been explored in international studies considering the emergence of viral variants and different management between countries. Methods: A multicenter retrospective/prospective real-life study comparing the prevalence and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection between a CVID cohort from four Italian Centers (IT-C) and one cohort from the Netherlands (NL-C), recruiting 773 patients. Results: 329 of 773 CVID patients were found positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 1st, 2020 and September 1st 2022. The proportion of CVID patients infected was comparable in both national sub-cohorts. During all waves, chronic lung disease, "complicated" phenotype, chronic immunosuppressive treatment and cardiovascular comorbidities impacted on hospitalization, whereas risk factors for mortality were older age, chronic lung disease, and bacterial superinfections. IT-C patients were significantly more often treated, both with antivirals and mAbs, than NL-C patients. Outpatient treatment, available only in Italy, started from the Delta wave. Despite this, no significant difference was found for COVID-19 severity between the two cohorts. However, pooling together specific SARS-CoV-2 outpatient treatments (mAbs and antivirals), we found a significant effect on the risk of hospitalization starting from Delta wave. Vaccination with ≥ 3 doses shortened RT-PCR positivity, with an additional effect only in patients receiving antivirals. Conclusions: The two sub-cohorts had similar COVID-19 outcomes despite different treatment approaches. This points out that specific treatment should now be reserved for selected subgroups of CVID patients, based on pre-existing conditions.

Correction: Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in people living with HIV in the Netherlands: A nationwide prospective cohort study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003979.].

Durability of immune responses after boosting in Ad26.COV2.S-primed healthcare workers.

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants raised questions regarding the durability of immune responses after homologous or heterologous booster vaccination after Ad26.COV2.S priming. We found that SARS-CoV-2-specific binding antibodies, neutralizing antibodies and T-cells are detectable 5 months after boosting, although waning of antibodies and limited cross-reactivity with Omicron BA.1 was observed.

Clinical characteristics and outcome of immunocompromised patients with COVID-19 caused by the Omicron variant: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: In the general population, illness after infection with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is less severe compared with previous variants. Data on the disease burden of Omicron in immunocompromised patients are lacking. We investigated the clinical characteristics and outcome of a cohort of immunocompromised patients with COVID-19 caused by Omicron. METHODS: Solid organ transplant recipients, patients on anti-CD20 therapy, and allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients on immunosuppressive therapy infected with the Omicron variant, were included. Patients were contacted regularly until symptom resolution. Clinical characteristics of consenting patients were collected through their electronic patient files. To identify possible risk factors for hospitalization, a univariate logistic analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 114 consecutive immunocompromised patients were enrolled. Eighty-nine percent had previously received three mRNA vaccinations. While only one patient died, 23 (20%) required hospital admission for a median of 11 days. A low SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response (<300 BAU/mL) at diagnosis, higher age, being a lung transplant recipient, more comorbidities and a higher frailty were associated with hospital admission (all p < 0.01). At the end of follow-up, 25% had still not fully recovered. Of the 23 hospitalized patients, 70% had a negative and 92% a low IgG (<300 BAU/mL) antibody response at admission. Sotrovimab was administered to 17 of them, of which one died. CONCLUSIONS: While the mortality in immunocompromised patients infected with Omicron was low, hospital admission was frequent and the duration of symptoms often prolonged. Besides vaccination, other interventions are needed to limit the morbidity from COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in people living with HIV in the Netherlands: A nationwide prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Vaccines can be less immunogenic in people living with HIV (PLWH), but for SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations this is unknown. In this study we set out to investigate, for the vaccines currently approved in the Netherlands, the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations in PLWH. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a prospective cohort study to examine the immunogenicity of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, ChAdOx1-S, and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines in adult PLWH without prior COVID-19, and compared to HIV-negative controls. The primary endpoint was the anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 IgG response after mRNA vaccination. Secondary endpoints included the serological response after vector vaccination, anti-SARS-CoV-2 T-cell response, and reactogenicity. Between 14 February and 7 September 2021, 1,154 PLWH (median age 53 [IQR 44-60] years, 85.5% male) and 440 controls (median age 43 [IQR 33-53] years, 28.6% male) were included in the final analysis. Of the PLWH, 884 received BNT162b2, 100 received mRNA-1273, 150 received ChAdOx1-S, and 20 received Ad26.COV2.S. In the group of PLWH, 99% were on antiretroviral therapy, 97.7% were virally suppressed, and the median CD4+ T-cell count was 710 cells/µL (IQR 520-913). Of the controls, 247 received mRNA-1273, 94 received BNT162b2, 26 received ChAdOx1-S, and 73 received Ad26.COV2.S. After mRNA vaccination, geometric mean antibody concentration was 1,418 BAU/mL in PLWH (95% CI 1322-1523), and after adjustment for age, sex, and vaccine type, HIV status remained associated with a decreased response (0.607, 95% CI 0.508-0.725, p < 0.001). All controls receiving an mRNA vaccine had an adequate response, defined as >300 BAU/mL, whilst in PLWH this response rate was 93.6%. In PLWH vaccinated with mRNA-based vaccines, higher antibody responses were predicted by CD4+ T-cell count 250-500 cells/µL (2.845, 95% CI 1.876-4.314, p < 0.001) or >500 cells/µL (2.936, 95% CI 1.961-4.394, p < 0.001), whilst a viral load > 50 copies/mL was associated with a reduced response (0.454, 95% CI 0.286-0.720, p = 0.001). Increased IFN-γ, CD4+ T-cell, and CD8+ T-cell responses were observed after stimulation with SARS-CoV-2 spike peptides in ELISpot and activation-induced marker assays, comparable to controls. Reactogenicity was generally mild, without vaccine-related serious adverse events. Due to the control of vaccine provision by the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, there were some differences between vaccine groups in the age, sex, and CD4+ T-cell counts of recipients. CONCLUSIONS: After vaccination with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels were reduced in PLWH compared to HIV-negative controls. To reach and maintain the same serological responses as HIV-negative controls, additional vaccinations are probably required. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (NL9214). https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/9214.

Analyzing the immunogenicity of bivalent booster vaccinations in healthcare workers: The SWITCH ON trial protocol.

Vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has contributed greatly to providing protection against severe disease, thereby reducing hospital admissions and deaths. Several studies have reported reduction in vaccine effectiveness over time against the Omicron sub-lineages. However, the willingness to receive regular booster doses in the general population is declining. To determine the need for repeated booster vaccinations in healthy individuals and to aid policymakers in future public health interventions for COVID-19, we aim to gain insight into the immunogenicity of the additional bivalent booster vaccination in a representative sample of the healthy Dutch population. The SWITCH ON study was initiated to investigate three main topics: i) immunogenicity of bivalent vaccines after priming with adenovirus- or mRNA-based vaccines, ii) immunological recall responses and reactivity with relevant variants after booster vaccination, and iii) the necessity of booster vaccinations for the healthy population in the future. Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT05471440.

Ad26.COV2.S priming provided a solid immunological base for mRNA-based COVID-19 booster vaccination.

The emergence of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants led to the recommendation of booster vaccinations after Ad26.COV2.S priming. It was previously shown that heterologous booster vaccination induces high antibody levels, but how heterologous boosters affect other functional aspects of the immune response remained unknown. Here, we performed immunological profiling of Ad26.COV2.S-primed individuals before and after homologous or heterologous (mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2) booster. Booster vaccinations increased functional antibodies targeting ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and emerging variants. Especially heterologous booster vaccinations induced high levels of functional antibodies. In contrast, T-cell responses were similar in magnitude following homologous or heterologous booster vaccination and retained cross-reactivity towards variants. Booster vaccination led to a minimal expansion of SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell clones and no increase in the breadth of the T-cell repertoire. In conclusion, we show that Ad26.COV2.S priming vaccination provided a solid immunological base for heterologous boosting, increasing humoral and cellular responses targeting emerging variants of concern.

Immunogenicity of the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine in adult patients with inborn errors of immunity.

BACKGROUND: Patients with inborn errors of immunity (IEI) are at increased risk of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Effective vaccination against COVID-19 is therefore of great importance in this group, but little is known about the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in these patients. OBJECTIVES: We sought to study humoral and cellular immune responses after mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccination in adult patients with IEI. METHODS: In a prospective, controlled, multicenter study, 505 patients with IEI (common variable immunodeficiency [CVID], isolated or undefined antibody deficiencies, X-linked agammaglobulinemia, combined B- and T-cell immunodeficiency, phagocyte defects) and 192 controls were included. All participants received 2 doses of the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine. Levels of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2-specific binding antibodies, neutralizing antibodies, and T-cell responses were assessed at baseline, 28 days after first vaccination, and 28 days after second vaccination. RESULTS: Seroconversion rates in patients with clinically mild antibody deficiencies and phagocyte defects were similar to those in healthy controls, but seroconversion rates in patients with more severe IEI, such as CVID and combined B- and T-cell immunodeficiency, were lower. Binding antibody titers correlated well to the presence of neutralizing antibodies. T-cell responses were comparable to those in controls in all IEI cohorts, with the exception of patients with CVID. The presence of noninfectious complications and the use of immunosuppressive drugs in patients with CVID were negatively correlated with the antibody response. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination with mRNA-1273 was immunogenic in mild antibody deficiencies and phagocyte defects and in most patients with combined B- and T-cell immunodeficiency and CVID. Lowest response was detected in patients with X-linked agammaglobulinemia and in patients with CVID with noninfectious complications. The assessment of longevity of immune responses in these vulnerable patient groups will guide decision making for additional vaccinations.

Blood myxovirus resistance protein-1 measurement in the diagnostic work-up of suspected COVID-19 infection in the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: Myxovirus resistance protein 1 (MxA) is a biomarker that is elevated in patients with viral infections. The goal of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of MxA in diagnosing COVID-19 infections in the emergency department (ED) patients. METHODS: This was a single-center prospective observational cohort study including patients with a suspected COVID-19 infection. The primary outcome of this study was a confirmed COVID-19 infection by RT-PCR test. MxA was assessed using an enzyme immunoassay on whole blood and receiver operating chart and area under the curve (AUC) analysis was conducted. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value of MxA on diagnosing COVID-19 at the optimal cut-off of MxA was determined. RESULTS: In 2021, 100 patients were included. Of these patients, 77 patients had COVID-19 infection and 23 were non-COVID-19. Median MxA level was significantly higher (p < .001) in COVID-19 patients compared to non-COVID-19 patients, respectively 1933 and 0.1 ng/ml. The AUC of MxA on a confirmed COVID-19 infection was 0.941 (95% CI: 0.867-1.000). The optimal cut-off point of MxA was 252 ng/ml. At this cut-off point, the sensitivity of MxA on a confirmed COVID-19 infection was 94% (95% CI: 85%-98%) and the specificity was 91% (95% CI: 72%-99%). CONCLUSION: MxA accurately distinguishes COVID-19 infections from bacterial infections and noninfectious diagnoses in the ED in patients with a suspected COVID-19 infection. If the results can be validated, MxA could improve the diagnostic workup and patient flow in the ED.

Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity of Vaccine Boosters after Ad26.COV2.S Priming.

BACKGROUND: The Ad26.COV2.S vaccine, which was approved as a single-shot immunization regimen, has been shown to be effective against severe coronavirus disease 2019. However, this vaccine induces lower severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein (S)-specific antibody levels than those induced by messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines. The immunogenicity and reactogenicity of a homologous or heterologous booster in persons who have received an Ad26.COV2.S priming dose are unclear. METHODS: In this single-blind, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving health care workers who had received a priming dose of Ad26.COV2.S vaccine, we assessed immunogenicity and reactogenicity 28 days after a homologous or heterologous booster vaccination. The participants were assigned to receive no booster, an Ad26.COV2.S booster, an mRNA-1273 booster, or a BNT162b2 booster. The primary end point was the level of S-specific binding antibodies, and the secondary end points were the levels of neutralizing antibodies, S-specific T-cell responses, and reactogenicity. A post hoc analysis was performed to compare mRNA-1273 boosting with BNT162b2 boosting. RESULTS: Homologous or heterologous booster vaccination resulted in higher levels of S-specific binding antibodies, neutralizing antibodies, and T-cell responses than a single Ad26.COV2.S vaccination. The increase in binding antibodies was significantly larger with heterologous regimens that included mRNA-based vaccines than with the homologous booster. The mRNA-1273 booster was most immunogenic and was associated with higher reactogenicity than the BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S boosters. Local and systemic reactions were generally mild to moderate in the first 2 days after booster administration. CONCLUSIONS: The Ad26.COV2.S and mRNA boosters had an acceptable safety profile and were immunogenic in health care workers who had received a priming dose of Ad26.COV2.S vaccine. The strongest responses occurred after boosting with mRNA-based vaccines. Boosting with any available vaccine was better than not boosting. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development ZonMw; SWITCH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04927936.).

Characteristics of COVID-19 infection and antibody formation in patients known at a tertiary immunology department.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about COVID-19 infections is expanding, although knowledge about the disease course and antibody formation in patients with an auto-immune disease or immunodeficiency is not fully unraveled yet. It could be hypothesized that immunodeficient patients, due to immunosuppressive drugs or their disease, have a more severe disease course due to their immunocompromised state. However, it could also be hypothesized that some of the immunosuppressive drugs protect against a hyperinflammatory state. METHODS: We collected data on the incidence of COVID-19, disease course and SARS-CoV-2 antibody formation in COVID-19 positive patients in a cohort of patients (n â€‹= â€‹4497) known at the Clinical Immunology outpatient clinic in a tertiary care hospital in the Netherlands. RESULTS: In the first six months of the pandemic, 16 patients were identified with COVID-19, 14 by nasal swab PCR, and 2 patients by SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Eight patients were admitted to the hospital. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were measured in 8 patients and were detectable in all, including one patient on B-cell ablative therapy and one patient with Common Variable Immunodeficiency Disorder. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that the disease course differs among immunocompromised patients, independently of (dis)continuation of immunosuppressive drugs. Antibody production for SARS-CoV-2 in immunocompromised patients was shown. More research needs to be conducted to confirm these observations and guidelines regarding (dis)continuation of immunosuppressive drugs in COVID-19 positive immunocompromised patients should be developed.