Antibody, cell-mediated response and infection susceptibility in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell recipients after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (allo-SCT) have reduced responses to vaccines due to immunosuppressive status linked to GvHD prophylaxis and treatment. In our study, we compared humoral responses to anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine, and infection onset, according to patients and transplant features; we also evaluated cellular response in patients without seroconversion. METHODS: We tested antibodies titer after second and third vaccine doses. Antibodies were detected through an immune-enzymatic assay. In a patients' subgroup without seroconversion, we tested cell-mediated responses evaluating interferon-gamma release by T-lymphocytes exposed to virus spike protein. RESULTS: Seroconversion rate increased from 66% at 30 days to 81% at 90 days after the second dose; it was 97% at 150 days after the third dose. We found a significant association between seroconversion after the second dose and two variables: shorter interval between allo-SCT and vaccination; ongoing immunosuppression. Twelve of 19 patients (63%) without antibodies after the second dose did not show cellular responses. Nineteen percent of patients developed SARS-CoV-2 infection after the third dose, with favorable outcome in all cases. Patients within 12 months after allo-SCT showed a significantly higher infection risk. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that an interval shorter than 12 months between allo-SCT and first vaccine dose and/or ongoing immunosuppression were associated with humoral and cellular response deficiency after two doses. Third dose induced an increased and sustained humoral response in the majority of patients. However, patients within 1 year after allo-SCT remained at higher infection risk and may be candidate for prophylaxis with anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies.

Impact of Cryopreservation of Peripheral Blood Stem Cells (PBSC) in Transplantation from Matched Unrelated Donor (MUD).

Background: Cryopreservation of PBSC for allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) was implemented due to the current Coronavirus 2019 pandemic. The impact of match unrelated donor (MUD) graft freezing on the outcome of allo-HSCT in terms of hematological recovery, graft versus host disease (GVHD), and survival are still controversial. Methods: In this study, we compared graft composition, clinical characteristics, and outcome of 31 allo-HSCT from MUD cryopreserved PBSC (Cryo Group) with 23 matched-pair allo-HSCT from fresh MUD PBSC (Fresh Group) performed in our center between January 2020 and July 2021. Results: No significant differences were recognized in clinical characteristics of patients, donors, and transplants between the Cryo and Fresh groups except for a better prognostic comorbidity index (HCT-CI) of the Cryo group. In the Cryo Group, the median time from apheresis to cryopreservation was 46.0 h (range 23.8-53.5), while the median time from cells collection and reinfusion was 13.9 days (range 5.8-28.1). In the Fresh Group, median time from apheresis to reinfusion was 35.6 h (range 21.4-51.2). The number of viable (7-AAD negative) CD34+ cells per kg patient infused was significantly lower in the Cryo Group (5.2 ± 1.9 × 106/kg vs. 7.0 ± 1.3 × 106/kg; p < 0.001). Indeed, there was a 36% (11-70) median loss of viable CD34+/kg cells after freezing. All patients engrafted: median time to neutrophil engraftment (>0.5 × 109/L) was 13.5 days (range 12-15) for Cryo Group and 14 days (range 13-16) days for Fresh Group (p = 0.522), while the median time to platelet engraftment (>20 × 109/L) was, respectively, 14 (range 12-18) and 15 (range 12-17) days (p = 0.904). The incidence of grade ≥ 2 acute GVHD was similar in the two groups (56.5% Cryo Group vs. 60.0% Fresh Group; p = 0.832) and no differences in terms of OS (p = 0.090), PFS (p = 0.200) and TRM (p = 0.970) were observed between the Cryo and Fresh groups. Conclusions: In our series, no differences between the Cryo and Fresh groups were found in engraftment, grade ≥ 2 acute GVHD incidence, OS, PFS, and TRM despite a lower CD34+ infused dose in the Cryo Group. Frozen PBSCs could be considered a safe option also for allo-HSCT from MUD but a higher amount of PBSC should be collected to warrant an adequate viable CD34+ post-thawing.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence in 860 cancer patients with a combined screening procedure including triage, molecular nasopharyngeal swabs and rapid serological test. A report from the first epidemic wave.

INTRODUCTION: Even if now we have available the weapon of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, the patients with cancer remains a very frail population in which frequently the immunologic response to vaccination may be impaired. In this setting, the SARS-CoV-2 infection screening retains a great value. However, there are still limited data on the feasibility and efficacy of combined screening procedures to assess the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (including asymptomatic cases) in cancer outpatients undergoing antineoplastic therapy. PATIENTS AND RESULTS: From May 1, 2020, to June 15, 2020, during the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, 860 consecutive patients, undergoing active anticancer therapy, were evaluated and tested for SARS-CoV-2 with a combined screening procedure, including a self-report questionnaire, a molecular nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and a rapid serological immunoassay (for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM antibodies). The primary endpoint of the study was to estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (including asymptomatic cases) in consecutive and unselected cancer outpatients by a combined screening modality. A total of 2955 SARS-CoV-2 NPS and 860 serological tests, in 475 patients with hematologic cancers and in 386 with solid tumors, were performed. A total of 112 (13%) patients self-reported symptoms potentially COVID-19 related. In 1/860 cases (< 1%) SARS-CoV-2 NPS was positive and in 14 cases (1.62%) the specific serological test was positive (overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection 1.62%). Of the 112 cases who declared symptoms potentially COVID-19-related, only 2.7% (3/112) were found SARS-CoV-2 positive. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study reporting the feasibility of a combined screening procedure (including triage, NPS and serologic test) to evaluate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients receiving active therapy, during the first epidemic wave and under the restrictive lockdown measures, in one of the active areas of the SARS-CoV-2 circulation. Lacking specific recommendations for the detection of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 cases, a combined diagnostic screening might be more effective to detect the exact prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in neoplastic patient population. The prevalence can obviously change according to the territorial context, the entity of the restrictive measures adopted and the phase of the epidemic curve. However, its exact and real-time knowledge could be important to balance risks/benefits of oncologic treatments, avoiding (if the prevalence is low) the reduction of dose intensity or the selection of less intensive (but also less effective) anti-cancer therapies.

The serological prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia is similar to that in the general population.

BACKGROUND: Patients with hematological malignancies are at an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 disease (COVID-19) and adverse outcome. However, a low mortality rate has been reported in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Preclinical evidence suggests that tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) may have a protective role against severe COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 564 consecutive patients with CML who were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM antibodies at their first outpatient visit between May and early November 2020 in five hematologic centers representative of three Italian regions. RESULTS: The estimated serological prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with CML after the first pandemic wave was similar to that in the general population (about 2%), both at national and regional levels. CML patients with positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 serology were more frequently male (p = 0.027) and active workers (p = 0.012), while there was no significant association with TKI treatment type. Only 3 out of 11 IgG-positive patients had previously received a molecular diagnosis of COVID-19, while the remainders were asymptomatic or with mild symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm that the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with CML is generally mild and reassure about the safety of continuing TKIs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, we suggest that patients with CML succeed to mount an antibody response after exposure to SARS-CoV-2, similar to the general population.

Feasibility and Predictive Performance of a Triage System for Patients with Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Triage procedures have been implemented to limit hospital access and minimize infection risk among patients with cancer during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. In the absence of prospective evidence, we aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of a triage system in the oncological setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzes hospital admissions to the oncology and hematology department of Udine, Italy, during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 30 to April 30, 2020). A total of 3,923 triage procedures were performed, and data of 1,363 individual patients were reviewed. RESULTS: A self-report triage questionnaire identified 6% of triage-positive procedures, with a sensitivity of 66.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.0%-85.4%), a specificity of 94.3% (95% CI, 93.5%-95.0%), and a positive predictive value of 5.9% (95% CI, 4.3%-8.0%) for the identification of patients who were not admitted to the hospital after medical review. Patients with thoracic cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.69; 95% CI, 1.13-2.53, p = .01), younger age (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.15-2.01, p < .01), and body temperature at admission ≥37°C (OR, 9.52; 95% CI, 5.44-16.6, p < .0001) had increased risk of positive triage. Direct hospital access was warranted to 93.5% of cases, a further 6% was accepted after medical evaluation, whereas 0.5% was refused at admission. CONCLUSION: A self-report questionnaire has a low positive predictive value to triage patients with cancer and suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) symptoms. Differential diagnosis with tumor- or treatment-related symptoms is always required to avoid unnecessary treatment delays. Body temperature measurement improves the triage process's overall sensitivity, and widespread SARS-CoV-2 testing should be implemented to identify asymptomatic carriers. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This is the first study to provide data on the predictive performance of a triage system in the oncological setting during the coronavirus disease outbreak. A questionnaire-based triage has a low positive predictive value to triage patients with cancer and suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) symptoms, and a differential diagnosis with tumor- or treatment-related symptoms is mandatory to avoid unnecessary treatment delays. Consequently, adequate recourses should be reallocated for a triage implementation in the oncological setting. Of note, body temperature measurement improves the overall sensitivity of the triage process, and widespread testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection should be implemented to identify asymptomatic carriers.