COVID-19 in patients with B cell immune deficiency.

This article aims to describe the clinical manifestations and management of COVID-19 in patients with primary and secondary B cell deficient states. We describe the epidemiologic and clinical features as well as unique management paradigm including isolation precautions with COVID-19. We then focus upon primary and secondary preventive approaches including vaccination and pre- as well as post-exposure prophylaxis. Further, we elaborate upon the important disease specific risk factors in these patients and the need to conduct prospective clinical trials to develop individualized management strategies in this population.

Safety and tolerability of Evusheld in patients with CVID: The Mayo Clinic experience.

Background: The past 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic brought with it many unknowns for patients with immunodeficiency. Because of the concern for severe infection in those with immunocompromise, patients have been eager for effective prevention, vaccination, and treatment strategies. Preexposure prophylaxis provides another means of prevention in those with immunocompromise. A combination of tixagevimab and cilgavimab (Evusheld [AstraZeneca Cambridge, United Kingdom]) was granted emergency use authorization for preexposure prophylaxis at the end of 2021, but questions remained regarding how this would be tolerated and the side effects associated with its use. Objectives: Our aim was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of Evusheld in patients with CVID from our tri-site institution. Methods: We performed an institutional review board-approved, retrospective chart review of patients with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) who received Evusheld before March 26, 2022. Results: Of the 45 patients with CVID who received Evusheld, 41 (91%) received the recommended full dose of 600 mg. The majority of patients (39 of 45 [87%]) tolerated Evusheld without adverse events. The adverse events reported included immediate injection site pain, fatigue and cough, an episode of shingles, and chest pain. Conclusions: This is an initial report on the safety and tolerability of Evusheld injections in patients with CVID. The majority of patients tolerated the injections without adverse events. For patients with reported chest pain, the results of a subsequent cardiac workup were negative. The efficacy of Evusheld could not be evaluated owing to the short median follow-up of this study (19 days).

Predictors of seroconversion after coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine nonresponse during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has considerable individual and societal risks. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with lack of seroconversion after vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: Demographic and clinical data were collected from 805 patients who had validated antibody assays against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein at least 14 days after completion of their COVID-19 vaccination. Clinical characteristics from patients with a negative (< 0.4 U/mL) antibody response were assessed and summarized. RESULTS: A total of 622 (77.3%) patients attained seroconversion as defined by a titer of greater than or equal to 0.4 U/mL, whereas 183 out of 805 (22.7%) patients exhibited no seroconversion after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Univariately, older age (P = .02) and male sex were associated with a lower likelihood of seroconversion (P = .003). Therapy with immunosuppressive drugs was noted in 93 (50.8%) of seronegative patients with most (n = 83/93, 89.2%) receiving ongoing immunosuppressive therapy at the time of vaccination. Among the 134 (73.2%) seronegative patients with immunodeficiency, 110 (82.1%) had primary immunodeficiency. Cancer (n = 128, 69.9%), B cell depletion therapy (n = 90/115, 78.3%), and immunosuppressant steroid use (n = 71/93 on immunosuppressants, 76.3%) were the other common characteristics among the vaccine nonresponders. More importantly, our study did not evaluate the actual efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination. CONCLUSION: Vaccine responses vary by age and sex, with men showing lower rates of seroconversion as compared with women. Primary immunodeficiency along with active malignancy and ongoing immunosuppression with steroids or B cell depletion therapy appeared to be the most common characteristics for those with a lack of vaccine seroconversion after COVID-19 vaccination.

Myocarditis Following Coronavirus Disease 2019 mRNA Vaccine: A Case Series and Incidence Rate Determination.

BACKGROUND: Myocarditis following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) has been increasingly reported. Incidence rates in the general population are lacking, with pericarditis rather than myocarditis diagnostic codes being used to estimate background rates. This comparison is critical for balancing the risk of vaccination with the risk of no vaccination. METHODS: A retrospective case series was performed using the Mayo Clinic COVID-19 Vaccine Registry. We measured the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for myocarditis temporally related to COVID-19 mRNA vaccination compared with myocarditis in a comparable population from 2016 through 2020. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of the affected patients were collected. A total of 21 individuals were identified, but ultimately 7 patients met the inclusion criteria for vaccine-associated myocarditis. RESULTS: The overall IRR of COVID-19-related myocarditis was 4.18 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.63-8.98), which was entirely attributable to an increased IRR among adult males (IRR, 6.69; 95% CI, 2.35-15.52) compared with females (IRR 1.41; 95% CI, .03-8.45). All cases occurred within 2 weeks of a dose of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, with the majority occurring within 3 days (range, 1-13) following the second dose (6 of 7 patients, 86%). Overall, cases were mild, and all patients survived. CONCLUSIONS: Myocarditis is a rare adverse event associated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. It occurs in adult males with significantly higher incidence than in the background population. Recurrence of myocarditis after a subsequent mRNA vaccine dose is not known at this time.

The Female-Predominant Persistent Immune Dysregulation of the Post-COVID Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical data from the first 108 patients seen in the Mayo Clinic post-COVID-19 care clinic (PCOCC). METHODS: After Institutional Review Board approval, we reviewed the charts of the first 108 patients seen between January 19, 2021, and April 29, 2021, in the PCOCC and abstracted from the electronic medical record into a standardized database to facilitate analysis. Patients were grouped into phenotypes by expert review. RESULTS: Most of the patients seen in our clinic were female (75%; 81/108), and the median age at presentation was 46 years (interquartile range, 37 to 55 years). All had post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection, with 6 clinical phenotypes being identified: fatigue predominant (n=69), dyspnea predominant (n=23), myalgia predominant (n=6), orthostasis predominant (n=6), chest pain predominant (n=3), and headache predominant (n=1). The fatigue-predominant phenotype was more common in women, and the dyspnea-predominant phenotype was more common in men. Interleukin 6 (IL-6) was elevated in 61% of patients (69% of women; P=.0046), which was more common than elevation in C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate, identified in 17% and 20% of cases, respectively. CONCLUSION: In our PCOCC, we observed several distinct clinical phenotypes. Fatigue predominance was the most common presentation and was associated with elevated IL-6 levels and female sex. Dyspnea predominance was more common in men and was not associated with elevated IL-6 levels. IL-6 levels were more likely than erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein to be elevated in patients with post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Delayed systemic urticarial reactions following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

Background: As the vaccination campaign in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues, concerns with regard to adverse reactions to the vaccine remain. Although immediate hypersensitivity reactions have received much attention, delayed systemic urticarial reactions after vaccination can occur. Objective: To describe the clinical presentation, vaccine excipient skin testing results, and outcomes of subsequent COVID-19 vaccination in patients who experienced delayed systemic urticarial reactions after messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccination. Methods: This was a retrospective case series of 12 patients referred to the Mayo Clinics in Rochester, Minnesota, and Jacksonville, Florida, between January 19, 2021, and April 30, 2021, for evaluation of delayed systemic urticarial reactions after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Demographics, medical and allergic history, reaction details, vaccine excipient skin testing results (when performed), and the outcome after subsequent vaccination were collected for each patient. Results: The mean age of the patients was 52 years, all were white, and 9 (75%) were women. Half of the patients had a history of drug allergy, and one had a history of chronic spontaneous urticaria. Seven patients reacted to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and five reacted to the Moderna vaccine. Seven patients developed symptoms between 8 and 24 hours after vaccination. Nine patients required antihistamines for treatment. The median time to symptom resolution was 4 days. Nine patients underwent allergist-directed COVID-19 vaccine excipient skin testing, all of which were negative. Ten patients chose to receive their next mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose, and four patients experienced recurrent delayed urticaria. Conclusion: Delayed systemic urticarial reactions after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination were not life-threatening, could be treated with antihistamines, and were not predicted with vaccine excipient skin testing. They were not a contraindication to subsequent vaccination, although patients should be counseled with regard to the possibility of recurrence.

Utility and futility of skin testing to address concerns surrounding messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine reactions.

BACKGROUND: The mechanism of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hypersensitivity reactions is unknown. COVID-19 vaccine excipient skin testing has been used in evaluation of these reactions, but its utility in predicting subsequent COVID-19 vaccine tolerance is also unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient skin testing in both patients with an allergic reaction to their first messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccine dose and patients with a history of polyethylene glycol allergy who have not yet received a COVID-19 vaccine dose. METHODS: In this multicenter, retrospective review, COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient skin testing was performed in patients referred to 1 of 3 large tertiary academic institutions. Patient medical records were reviewed after skin testing to determine subsequent COVID-19 vaccine tolerance. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients underwent skin testing, in whom 12 patients (9.3%) had positive results. There were 101 patients who received a COVID-19 vaccine after the skin testing, which was tolerated in 90 patients (89.1%) with no allergic symptoms, including 5 of 6 patients with positive skin testing results who received a COVID-19 vaccine after the skin testing. The remaining 11 patients experienced minor allergic symptoms after COVID-19 vaccination, none of whom required treatment beyond antihistamines. CONCLUSION: The low positivity rate of COVID-19 vaccine excipient skin testing and high rate of subsequent COVID-19 vaccine tolerance suggest a low utility of this method in evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine hypersensitivity reactions. Focus should shift to the use of existing vaccine allergy practice parameters, with consideration of graded dosing when necessary. On the basis of these results, strict avoidance of subsequent COVID-19 vaccination should be discouraged.

Role of senescence in the chronic health consequences of COVID-19.

While the full impact of COVID-19 is not yet clear, early studies have indicated that upwards of 10% of patients experience COVID-19 symptoms longer than 3 weeks, known as Long-Hauler's Syndrome or PACS (postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection). There is little known about risk factors or predictors of susceptibility for Long-Hauler's Syndrome, but older adults are at greater risk for severe outcomes and mortality from COVID-19. The pillars of aging (including cellular senescence, telomere dysfunction, impaired proteostasis, mitochondrial dysfunction, deregulated nutrient sensing, genomic instability, progenitor cell exhaustion, altered intercellular communication, and epigenetic alterations) that contribute to age-related dysfunction and chronic diseases (the "Geroscience Hypothesis") may interfere with defenses against viral infection and consequences of these infections. Heightening of the low-grade inflammation that is associated with aging may generate an exaggerated response to an acute COVID-19 infection. Innate immune system dysfunction that leads to decreased senescent cell removal and/or increased senescent cell formation could contribute to accumulation of senescent cells with both aging and viral infections. These processes may contribute to increased risk for long-term COVID-19 sequelae in older or chronically ill patients. Hence, senolytics and other geroscience interventions that may prolong healthspan and alleviate chronic diseases and multimorbidity linked to fundamental aging processes might be an option for delaying, preventing, or alleviating Long-Hauler's Syndrome.

Colchicine for community-treated patients with COVID-19 (COLCORONA): a phase 3, randomised, double-blinded, adaptive, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests a role for excessive inflammation in COVID-19 complications. Colchicine is an oral anti-inflammatory medication beneficial in gout, pericarditis, and coronary disease. We aimed to investigate the effect of colchicine on the composite of COVID-19-related death or hospital admission. METHODS: The present study is a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, adaptive, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. The study was done in Brazil, Canada, Greece, South Africa, Spain, and the USA, and was led by the Montreal Heart Institute. Patients with COVID-19 diagnosed by PCR testing or clinical criteria who were not being treated in hospital were eligible if they were at least 40 years old and had at least one high-risk characteristic. The randomisation list was computer-generated by an unmasked biostatistician, and masked randomisation was centralised and done electronically through an automated interactive web-response system. The allocation sequence was unstratified and used a 1:1 ratio with a blocking schema and block sizes of six. Patients were randomly assigned to receive orally administered colchicine (0·5 mg twice per day for 3 days and then once per day for 27 days thereafter) or matching placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of death or hospital admission for COVID-19. Vital status at the end of the study was available for 97·9% of patients. The analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. The COLCORONA trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04322682) and is now closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Trial enrolment began in March 23, 2020, and was completed in Dec 22, 2020. A total of 4488 patients (53·9% women; median age 54·0 years, IQR 47·0-61·0) were enrolled and 2235 patients were randomly assigned to colchicine and 2253 to placebo. The primary endpoint occurred in 104 (4·7%) of 2235 patients in the colchicine group and 131 (5·8%) of 2253 patients in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR] 0·79, 95·1% CI 0·61-1·03; p=0·081). Among the 4159 patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19, the primary endpoint occurred in 96 (4·6%) of 2075 patients in the colchicine group and 126 (6·0%) of 2084 patients in the placebo group (OR 0·75, 0·57-0·99; p=0·042). Serious adverse events were reported in 108 (4·9%) of 2195 patients in the colchicine group and 139 (6·3%) of 2217 patients in the placebo group (p=0·051); pneumonia occurred in 63 (2·9%) of 2195 patients in the colchicine group and 92 (4·1%) of 2217 patients in the placebo group (p=0·021). Diarrhoea was reported in 300 (13·7%) of 2195 patients in the colchicine group and 161 (7·3%) of 2217 patients in the placebo group (p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: In community-treated patients including those without a mandatory diagnostic test, the effect of colchicine on COVID-19-related clinical events was not statistically significant. Among patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19, colchicine led to a lower rate of the composite of death or hospital admission than placebo. Given the absence of orally administered therapies to prevent COVID-19 complications in community-treated patients and the benefit of colchicine in patients with PCR-proven COVID-19, this safe and inexpensive anti-inflammatory agent could be considered for use in those at risk of complications. Notwithstanding these considerations, replication in other studies of PCR-positive community-treated patients is recommended. FUNDING: The Government of Quebec, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the US National Institutes of Health, the Montreal Heart Institute Foundation, the NYU Grossman School of Medicine, the Rudin Family Foundation, and philanthropist Sophie Desmarais.

Outcomes among patients with COVID-19 and asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: It remains unclear if asthma is a risk factor associated with worse outcomes among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: We performed a comprehensive database search for studies published from January 1, 2019, to October 2, 2020. We included studies that evaluated outcomes among patients with COVID-19 and underlying asthma. Outcomes of interest included the need for hospitalization, length of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and death. The meta-analysis was conducted by using random-effects methodology. Results: A total of 389 studies were identified through data base searches. After abstract and full-text screening, 16 observational studies with 92,275 patients were included in the analysis. Of the 16 studies, 15 were retrospective and 1 was a prospective cohort study. The average age was 39.6 years, with 48% female patients. Six of the studies included pediatric patients, and one of these studies only evaluated pediatric patients. One study only evaluated pregnant patients. Among patients with COVID-19, the presence of asthma was not associated with any significant increase in risk of hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] 1.46 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.29-7.28]), length of hospitalization (1.59 days [-0.55 to 3.74]), ICU admission (OR 1.65 [95% CI, 0.56-4.17]), or death (OR 0.73 [95% CI, 0.38-1.40]). The overall risk of bias of the included studies was high. Conclusion: Among the patients with COVID-19, asthma did not seem to significantly increase the risk of hospitalization, length of hospitalization, ICU admission, or death.

Considerations for asthma management and viral transmission in the era of COVID-19.

Background: As the global COVID-19 pandemic has unfolded, there has been much debate surrounding the optimal management of patients with asthma who are at risk of or contract COVID-19, whether asthma and steroids are risk factors for severe COVID-19, and how transmissible the virus is among children. Objective: The objective of this study is to provide allergists and other clinicians with pearls pertaining to the management of patients with asthma in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic and to provide some information regarding the risk of transmission among the pediatric population. Methods: Utilizing the case of one of our own patients with asthma who developed COVID-19 as context, we review the recent literature discussing the risk of COVID-19 in patients with asthma, the management of asthma medications in the time of the pandemic, and the risk of viral transmission. Results: Despite initial reports that asthma was a risk factor for developing severe COVID-19, subsequent investigation has shown that this is likely not true. Additionally, the use of systemic or inhaled glucocorticoids does not appear to increase the risk of severe COVID-19, but there is no evidence guiding the use of biologic therapy. There is conflicting evidence regarding the ability of children to transmit the virus. Conclusion: We provide pearls that asthma does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 and continued use of inhaled corticosteroids appears to be safe. While there is no evidence guiding the use of biologic therapies, a recent position paper suggests that they should be continued unless a patient contracts COVID-19, at which point they should be held until clinical recovery occurs.

Successful treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 in a patient with asthma.

Underlying lung disease, especially asthma, has recently been found to be associated with a higher risk of hospitalization with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the most commonly used controller medications in patients with asthma. It is unclear whether ICS use increases the risk for severe COVID-19 infection. At the current time, asthma organizations are still recommending the continued use of ICS and other asthma medications to minimize the risk of uncontrolled asthma. However, for patients with asthma and who have recovered from COVID-19 infection, the timing of resumption of asthma therapy is equally uncertain. Pulmonary function testing and exhaled oral nitric oxide testing are aerosol-generating procedures and are currently being severely restricted at most health-care facilities. We presented a case of a patient with cough-variant asthma who developed severe COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome with the need for intubation and prolonged mechanical ventilation. We highlighted the potential utility of using COVID-19 RNA detection as well as immunoglobulin G antibody testing to help guide the timing of resumption of asthma therapy.