T-Cell Response and Antibody Production Induced by the COVID-19 Booster Vaccine in Japanese Chronic Kidney Disease Patients Treated with Hemodialysis.

Humoral and cellular responses are critical in understanding immune responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination. Here, we evaluated these responses in hemodialysis (HD) patients after the booster vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin (IgG) levels, neutralizing antibody titers, and the T-SPOT®.COVID test (T-SPOT) were measured prior to, three weeks after, and three months after the booster administration. The HD group had significantly higher SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels and neutralizing antibody titers against the original strain at three weeks and three months after the booster vaccination compared to the control group, albeit the HD group had lower SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels and neutralizing antibody titers before the booster administration. Moreover, the HD group had significantly higher T-SPOT levels at all three time points compared to the control group. The HD group also had significantly higher local and systemic adverse reaction rates than the control group. By booster vaccination, HD patients could acquire more effective SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and cellular immunity than the control group.

Investigation for the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccine in Japanese CKD patients treated with hemodialysis

Background Dialysis patients are predisposed to severe disease and have a high mortality rate in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to their comorbidities and immunocompromised conditions. Therefore, dialysis patients should be prioritized for vaccination. This study aimed to examine how long the effects of the vaccine are maintained and what factors affect antibody titers. Methods Hemodialysis patients (HD group) and age- and sex-matched non-dialysis individuals (Control group), receiving two doses of BNT162b2 vaccine, were recruited through the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy (JSDT) Web site in July 2021. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin (IgG) (SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers) was measured before vaccination, 3 weeks after the first vaccination, 2 weeks after the second vaccination, and 3 months after the second vaccination, and was compared between Control group and HD group. Factors affecting SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers were also examined using multivariable regression analysis and stepwise regression analysis (least AIC). In addition, we compared adverse reactions in Control and HD groups and examined the relationship between adverse reactions and SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers. Results Our study enrolled 123 participants in the Control group (62.6% men, median age 67.0 years) and 206 patients in the HD group (64.1% men, median age 66.4 years). HD group had significantly lower SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers at 3 weeks after the first vaccination (p < 0.0001), 2 weeks after second vaccination (p = 0.0002), and 3 months after the second vaccination (p = 0.045) than Control group. However, the reduction rate of SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers between 2 weeks and 3 months after the second vaccination was significantly smaller in HD group than in Control (p = 0.048). Stepwise regression analysis revealed that dialysis time was identified as the significant independent factors for SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers at 2 weeks after the second vaccination in HD group (p = 0.002) and longer dialysis time resulted in higher maximum antibody titers. The incidences of fever and nausea after the second vaccination were significantly higher in the HD group (p = 0.039 and p = 0.020). Antibody titers in those with fever were significantly higher than those without fever in both groups (HD: p = 0.0383, Control: p = 0.0096). Conclusion HD patients had significantly lower antibody titers than age- and sex-matched non-dialysis individuals over 3 months after vaccination. Dialysis time was identified as a factor affecting SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers in HD group, with longer dialysis time resulting in higher maximum SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers.

Committee report: Questionnaire survey on the treatment of COVID-19 in patients receiving dialysis therapy.

Background: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who receive dialysis therapy develop more severe disease and have a poorer prognosis than patients who do not. Although various data on the treatment of patients not receiving dialysis therapy have been reported, clinical practice for patients on dialysis is challenging as data is limited. The Infection Control Committee of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy decided to clarify the status of treatment in COVID-19 patients on dialysis. Methods: A questionnaire survey of 105 centers that had treated at least five COVID-19 patients on dialysis was conducted in August 2021. Results: Sixty-six centers (62.9%) responded to the questionnaire. Antivirals were administered in 27.7% of facilities treating mild disease (most patients received favipiravir) and 66.7% of facilities treating moderate disease (most patients with moderate or more severe conditions received remdesivir). Whether and how remdesivir is administered varies between centers. Steroids were initiated most frequently in moderate II disease (50.8%), while 43.1% of the facilities initiated steroids in mild or moderate I disease. The type of steroid, dose, and the duration of administration were generally consistent, with most facilities administering dexamethasone 6 mg orally or 6.6 mg intravenously for 10 days. Steroid pulse therapy was administered in 48.5% of the facilities, and tocilizumab was administered in 25.8% of the facilities, mainly to patients on ventilators or equivalent medications, or to the cases of exacerbations. Furthermore, some facilities used a polymethylmethacrylate membrane during dialysis, nafamostat as an anticoagulant, and continuous hemodiafiltration in severe cases. There was limited experience of polymyxin B-immobilized fiber column-direct hemoperfusion and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The discharge criteria for patients receiving dialysis therapy were longer than those set by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare in 22.7% of the facilities. Conclusions: Our survey revealed a variety of treatment practices in each facility. Further evidence and innovations are required to improve the prognosis of patients with COVID-19 receiving dialysis therapy.

Direct hemoperfusion using a polymyxin B-immobilized polystyrene column for COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct hemoperfusion using a polymyxin B-immobilized polystyrene column (PMX-DHP) in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-positive pneumonia patients. METHODS: This study was a case series conducted at a designated infectious diseases hospital. Twelve SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with partial pressure of arterial oxygen/percentage of inspired oxygen (P/F) ratio < 300 were treated with PMX-DHP on two consecutive days each during hospitalization. We defined day 1 as the first day when PMX-DHP was performed. PMX-DHP efficacy was assessed on days 7 and 14 after the first treatment based on eight categories. Subsequently, improvement in P/F ratio and urinary biomarkers on days 4 and 8, malfunctions, and ventilator and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation avoidance rates were also evaluated. RESULTS: On day 14 after the first treatment, disease severity decreased in 58.3% of the patients. P/F ratio increased while urine ß2-microglobulin decreased on days 4 and 8. Cytokine measurement pre- and post-PMX-DHP revealed decreased levels of interleukin-6 and the factors involved in vascular endothelial injury, including vascular endothelial growth factor. Twenty-two PMX-DHPs were performed, of which seven and five PMX-DHPs led to increased inlet pressure and membrane coagulation, respectively. When the membranes coagulated, the circuitry needed to be reconfigured. Circuit problems were usually observed when D-dimer and fibrin degradation product levels were high before PMX-DHP. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are expected to determine the therapeutic effect of PMX-DHP on COVID-19. Because of the relatively high risk of circuit coagulation, coagulation capacity should be assessed beforehand.

Evaluation of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Severity Using Urine Biomarkers.

SUBJECTS: Early detection of coronavirus disease 2019 in patients likely to develop severe manifestations enables appropriate interventions, including rapid ICU admission. This study was conducted to determine whether noninvasive urine biomarkers can predict the clinical severity of coronavirus disease 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: This is single-center study, national center hospital designated for infectious disease. Fifty-eight patients who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in respiratory specimens through real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction were retrospectively studied. Urinary ß2-microglobulin, liver-type fatty acid-binding protein were serially measured. Serum interferon-γ and monocyte chemotactic protein-1 were also evaluated. The 58 patients were assigned into three groups. Patients requiring intensive care were assigned to the severe group (n = 12). Patients treated with oxygen were assigned to the moderate group (n = 13). Other patients were assigned to the mild group (n = 33). Urine tests revealed that low ß2-microglobulin and liver-type fatty acid-binding protein levels were associated with mild disease, whereas high levels were associated with severe disease. In severe cases, liver-type fatty acid-binding protein tended to be persistently high. The resulting cutoff values were ß2-microglobulin; severe versus moderate + mild: 2,457 µg/dL (specificity 76.9% and sensitivity 90.0%, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 85.9%), liver-type fatty acid-binding protein; severe versus moderate + mild: 22.0 µg/gCre (specificity 84.6% and sensitivity 90%, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 91.8%). Urinary ß2-microglobulin and serum interferon-γ/monocyte chemotactic protein-1 showed a similar trend. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluating urinary biomarkers such as ß2-microglobulin and liver-type fatty acid-binding protein may allow determination of coronavirus disease 2019 patients with active cytokines and recognition of patients likely to become critically ill and requiring careful observation and early intervention.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Hemodialysis Effluent of Patient with COVID-19 Pneumonia, Japan.

We report detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 RNA in hemodialysis effluent from a patient in Japan with coronavirus disease and prolonged inflammation. Healthcare workers should observe strict standard and contact precautions and use appropriate personal protective equipment when handling hemodialysis circuitry from patients with diagnosed coronavirus disease.

Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy for a Patient with Severe COVID-19.

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global health threat. It is a respiratory disease, and acute kidney injury (AKI) is rare; however, if a patient develops severe AKI, renal replacement therapy (RRT) should be considered. Recently, we had a critically ill COVID-19 patient who developed severe AKI and needed continuous RRT (CRRT). To avoid the potential risk of infection from CRRT effluents, we measured severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) genetic material in the effluents by qRT-PCR, and low copy numbers of the viral genome were detected. Due to unstable hemodynamic status in critically ill patients, CRRT should be the first choice for severe AKI in COVID-19 patients. We suggest prevention of clinical infection and control during administration of RRT in the acute phase of COVID-19 patients with AKI or multiple organ failure.