ABSTRACT
Background: COVID-19 vaccination has been suggested as very effective in patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), but most studies assess antibody levels within a few weeks after vaccination and do not use the most recent recommendations as seroconversion cut-off. The objective of VACOVEII study is to evaluate the antibody response to vaccination at 6 months using these recommendations, the improvement after a booster dose and the effect of the immunosuppressive therapy (IST). We present the intermediate results of the study. Method(s): Spanish multicentre, prospective and case-control study. 18 years or older IBD patients fully vaccinated against COVID-19 were included. Those with previous COVID infection were not included, but not excluded for the next analyses if the infection was subsequent. Main outcomes were anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody (anti S) concentrations and rate of seroconversion (defined above the protection threshold of 260 BAU/mL), measured 6 months after vaccination at a single centralized laboratory. The effect of IST on the main outcomes was analysed, adjusted by age, vaccine type and COVID infection. Groups of treatment considered for the analysis were: Patients without IST (without treatment or under salicylates alone), anti-TNF in combination with immunomodulators (IMM), anti-TNF in monotherapy, IMM in monotherapy, ustekinumab and anti-integrin. Result(s): We included 313 patients with IBD (46.5% ulcerative colitis and 52.3% Crohn's disease, median age 49 years) vaccinated either with non-mRNA vaccines (14%) or mRNA vaccines (86%). Baseline therapy was: 124 patients without IST, 21 with anti-TNF plus IMM, 67 with anti-TNF in monotherapy, 54 with IMM in monotherapy, 28 with ustekinumab and 19 with anti-integrin. Mean anti S concentrations were significant lower in patients with anti-TNF compared with patients without IST (Figure 1). In multivariable analysis, lower antibody concentrations were independently associated with anti-TNF treatment, non-mRNA vaccines and older age. Within the patients with no COVID infection during the follow-up, we found very low rates of seroconversion in patients with anti-TNF (14.1%), ustekinumab (30.8%) and IMM in monotherapy (34.9%), compared with patients without IST (51.5%) (Table 1). In multivariable analysis, anti-TNF treatment, non-mRNA vaccines and older age were independently associated with lower rates of seroconversion, as well as ustekinumab and IMM in monotherapy (Table 2). Conclusion(s): COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody seroconversion in patients with IBD, measured at 6 months and according to >260 BAU as protection threshold, is clearly lower than previously reported, with a profound impact by some IST therapies, mainly anti-TNF, besides age and type of vaccine.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The information regarding IBD patients with COVID-19 suggests that the factors related to bad outcome are older age and comorbidity whereas immunosuppressants do not have a significant impact worsening the disease evolution. Aims & Methods: Aims: To assess if there are differences in epidemiological, demographical, and clinical characteristics between infected and non-infected IBD patients. Methods: Case-control study in IBD patients with COVID-19 (cases) compared to IBD without COVID-19 (controls) in the period March-July/2020 within the ENEIDA registry (promoted by GETECCU and with more than 60.000 IBD patients included). Cases were matched 1:2 by age (±5y), type of disease (CD/UC), gender, and centre. All controls were selected from only one investigator blind to other clinical characteristics of the patients to avoid selection bias. Results: 482 cases and 964 controls from 63 Spanish centres were included. No differences were found within the basal characteristics including CD location, CD behaviour, extraintestinal manifestations, family history of IBD or smoking habits. Cases had ≥ 1 comorbidities (cases:43%vs. controls: 35%, p=0.01) and occupational risk (cases:27% vs. controls:10.6%, p<0.0001) in a higher proportion. Strict lock-down was the only measure demonstrating protection against COVID-19 (cases:49% vs. controls:70%, p<0.0001). There were no differences in the use of systemic steroids (p=0.19), immunosuppressants (p=0.39) or biologics (p=0.28) between cases and controls. Cases were more often treated with aminosalycilates (42% vs.34%, p=0.003). Having ≥ 1 comorbidities (OR:1.6, 95%CI: 1.2-2.1), occupational risk (OR:1.95, 95%CI:1.39-2.7) and the use of aminosalycilates (OR:1.4, 95%CI: 1-1.8) were risk factors for COVID-19. On the other hand, strict lockdown was a protective factor (OR:0.38, CI:0.29-0.49). Conclusion: Comorbidities and epidemiological risk factors are the most relevant aspects for the risk of COVID-19 in IBD patients. This risk of COVID- 19 seems to be increased by aminosalycilates but not by immunosuppressants or biologics. The attitude regarding treating IBD patients with aminosalicylates during COVID-19 pandemic deserves a deeper analysis. (Table Presented).