Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ; 81:938-939, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2008904

ABSTRACT

Background: The impact of immunosuppressants on COVID-19 vaccination response and durability in patients with immune-mediated infammatory diseases (IMID) is yet to be fully characterized. Humoral response may be attenuated in these patients especially those on B cell depleting therapy and higher doses of corticosteroids, but data regarding other immunosuppressants are scarce. Objectives: We aimed to investigate antibody and T cell responses and durability to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b and/or mRNA 1273) in IMID patients on immunomodulatory maintenance therapy other than B-cell depleting therapy and corticosteroids. Methods: This prospective observational cohort study examined the immuno-genicity of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in adult patients with IMIDs (psoriatic arthritis, psoriasis, infammatory bowel disease and rheumatoid arthritis) with or without maintenance immunosuppressive therapies (anti-TNF, methotrexate/azathioprine [MTX/AZA], anti-TNF + MTX/AZA, anti IL12/23, anti-IL-17, anti-IL23) compared to healthy controls. Automated ELISA for IgGs to spike trimer, spike receptor binding domain (RBD) and the nucleocapsid (NP) and T-cell release of 9 cytokines (IFNg, IL2, IL4, IL17A, TNF) and cytotoxic molecules (sFasL, GzmA, GzmB, Perforinin) in cell culture supernatants following stimulation with spike or NP peptide arrays were conducted at 4 time points: T1=pre vaccination, T2=me-dian 26 days after dose 1, T3=median 16 days after dose 2 and T4=median 106 days after dose 2. Neutralization assays against four SARS-CoV-2 variants (wild type, delta, beta and gamma) were conducted at T3. Results: We followed 150 subjects: 26 healthy controls and 124 IMID patients: 9 untreated, 44 on anti-TNF, 16 on anti-TNF with MTX/AZA, 10 on anti-IL23, 28 on anti-IL12/23, 9 on anti-IL17, 8 on MTX/AZA (Table 1). Most patients mounted antibody and T cell responses with increases from dose 1 to dose 2 (100% sero-conversion at T3) and some decline by T4, with variability within groups. Antibody levels and neutralization efficacy was lower in anti-TNFgroups (anti-TNF, anti-TNF + MTX/AZA) compared to controls and waned by T4 (Figure 1). T cell responses were not consistently different between groups. Pooled data showed a higher antibody response to mRNA-1273 compared to BNT162b. Conclusion: Following 2 doses of mRNA vaccination there is 100% seroconver-sion in IMID patients on maintenance therapy. Antibody levels and neutralization efficacy in anti-TNF group are lower than controls, and wane substantially by 3 months after dose 2. These fndings highlight the need for third dose in patients undergoing treatment with anti-TNF therapy and continued monitoring of immunity in these patient groups, taking into consideration newer variants and additional vaccine doses.

2.
Gastroenterology ; 162(7):S-1006, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1967392

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND Little is known about the impact of immunosuppressants on COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID). Although humoral response may be attenuated in patients using immunomodulators (IMM) and TNFinhibitors (anti-TNF), data regarding cellular response are scarce and conflicting. This study was aimed to identify immune response to COVID-19 vaccination in IMID patients. METHODS A prospective observational multicentre cohort study was conducted to examine the immunogenicity of mRNA vaccines to SARS-CoV-2 in adult IMID patients using immunosuppressive therapy (anti-TNF, IMM, anti-TNF+IMM, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL-17, anti-IL-23) or no therapy as compared to healthy controls (HC). Patient details and vaccination history were recorded. Blood samples were drawn at 3 time points: before, 3-4 weeks after first and 2 weeks after second vaccination. Humoral immune response to S and RBD proteins were assessed by ELISA. Neutralization was tested against 4 variants of SARS-CoV-2 by surrogate neutralization ELISA. Cellular immune responses were determined based on analysis of 9 secreted cytokines and cytotoxic molecules after stimulation of PBMC with S peptide pools. Response to N protein was used to assess SARS-CoV-2 exposure. RESULTS A total of 159 subjects (133 IMID patients and 26 HC) were included in this study (median age 42 years [IQR 30-53], 52% male). Of 133 IMID patients, 87 had inflammatory bowel disease, 23 psoriatic arthritis, 18 psoriasis, 11 ankylosing spondylarthritis and 4 rheumatoid arthritis. Of these, 44 used anti-TNF, 9 IMM, 18 anti-TNF+IMM, 33 anti-IL-12/23, 9 anti-IL-17, 10 anti-IL-23 therapy and 10 no therapy. All subjects received 2 doses of mRNA vaccines (2x Pfizer, 2x Moderna or mixed) between December 2020 and September 2021. The vast majority of subjects had minimal binding antibody and T cell responses to N, indicating they were COVID-19 naïve. After dose 1, anti-TNF group had lower IL-2 vs untreated IMID (p<0.01), and the anti-IL-23 group had lower IFN-g vs HC (p<0.01), though there was wide variation in responses within groups. Following dose 2, median responses between groups were mostly similar, but antibody responses were significantly lower in patients on anti-TNF as compared to HC in subjects that received two doses of Pfizer (p=0.01). Pooled data for all subjects combined show a higher response to Moderna over Pfizer in ELISA, neutralization and T cell readouts, and a lower response for those over 60 years of age after dose 2. Longer follow-up is in process to monitor the durability of these responses over time and after third dose. CONCLUSION Immune responses after 2 doses of mRNA vaccines in immunocompromised IMID patients largely reach the level of that of HC albeit antibody responses in the anti-TNF group are weaker and with wide variability between subjects within some groups

4.
Multiple Sclerosis Journal ; 26(3 SUPPL):169-170, 2020.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1067111

ABSTRACT

Background: Natalizumab (NZB) is a disease-modifying treatment (DMT) used in persons with MS (PwMS) with an active relapsing course, either as a first-line, or after previous treatments. The principal biological effect of NZB is thought to be the blockade of the molecular interaction between β4β1-integrin (also known as very late antigen-4) expressed by mononuclear inflammatory cells, and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (CAM-1) expressed by cerebral vascular endothelial cells. NZB is a potent DMT which must be monitored with caution, its use being hampered by the risk of opportunistic infections, mostly progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). Objectives: To document the efficacy and safety of NZB for the treatment of RRMS in a population of persons with MS (PwMS) followed in a regular MS Clinic setting. Methods: We report our single-centre experience over a period of 13 years: from JAN 2007 through the end of May 2020. All PwMS treated with NZB were included, regardless of the treatment duration. The retainment of patients in our MS Clinic is 95%. We use the iMed database, an international MS registry. . Results: We report on 230 PwMS, 159 women, 71 men treated with NZB since 2007, up to 30 April 2020. We had no PML case. We had 2 PML 'clinical alerts', but CSF search for JC virus (JCV) was negative. There was no rebound of activity, nor IRIS, after NZB cessation, as we usually quickly switch to an alternative DMT. Median age at MS onset: 26.3 years. Median age at NZB initiation: 35 years. Median disease duration before treatment: 8.07 years. First line use: 94. Previous BRACE DMT: 136. Risk factors: previous immuno-suppression: 7;NZB duration > 24 months: 112;JCV index > 1: 81. Median treatment duration: 23 months;still active: 71 including 7 after > 6 years. ARR at NZB onset: 1.5;during NZB: 0.27;current: 0.89. Median EDSS at NZB start: 3.0. Current median EDSS: 2.8. EDSS stable: 65, worsened: 58;improved: 60. MRI: stable: 133 (58%) ;improved: 5 (2%);worsened: 35 (25%). Conversion to SPMS: 48 (20%) 29 W, 19 M. Reasons for NZB cessation: planned: 27;pregnancy: 3;loss of efficacy: 39;increased JCV index: 62. No blood toxicity (CBC, ALT). We had 9 pregnancies: 4 planned interruptions;5 full term, with normal babies. Treatment after NZB cessation: 48 fingolimod, glatiramer: 17;ocrelizumab: 16;others: 29;none: 32 (no rebound observed). One patient had COVID 1 year after NZB: complete recovery;needed only nasal O2 during 3 day hospital admission. Conclusions: NZB, when used with caution, is an effective and safe MS DMT during the RRMS phase, even after extended disease and treatment durations. NZB is most effective to reduce relapse frequency, less effective against progression, as 20% of PwMS transited to the secondary progressive phase. Gender, disease duration, and age do not influence outcomes. We encountered no significant toxicity, in particular no PML. Clinical, JCV index measures, and MRI monitoring are paramount to maintain safety.

5.
Ethics Med Public Health ; 16: 100621, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-988332

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 epidemic has led to the intense mobilization of all health professionals, including those involved in research. From the very beginning, research ethics committees (RECs) have been called upon and mobilized to carry out the scientific and ethical evaluations of research projects to achieve a sound analysis of their risk/benefit balance. The aim of this article is to present an ethical reflection on the challenges and consequences of the fast-track procedure for the evaluation of COVID-19 research projects in the context of a public health emergency. Indeed, a large number of protocols of reduced rigor were hastily prepared without collaboration between researchers and in the absence of national regulation. As a result, a number of ethical dilemmas have emerged concerning the opposing needs of pragmatism imposed by the emergency context and the ethical principles that should govern the conduct of research. Moreover, the dispersion of these individual projects, aggravated by excessive media coverage of specific treatments, has resulted in a weakened impact of the research in the epidemic context. This article provides suggestions for the ethical management of ongoing and upcoming research, giving RECs the opportunity to adapt their evaluations to avoid allowing the pragmatism of the emergency context to subvert the inviolability of the epistemological and ethical principles of research on humans. This reflection may strengthen the ethical basis for the formulation of their decisions.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL