Rapid viral metagenomics using SMART-9N amplification and nanopore sequencing [version 2, peer review: 2 approved]

Emerging and re-emerging viruses are a global health concern. Genome sequencing as an approach for monitoring circulating viruses is currently hampered by complex and expensive methods. Untargeted, metagenomic nanopore sequencing can provide genomic information to identify pathogens, prepare for or even prevent outbreaks. SMART (Switching Mechanism at the 5′ end of RNA Template) is a popular approach for RNA-Seq but most current methods rely on oligo-dT priming to target polyadenylated mRNA molecules. We have developed two random primed SMART-Seq approaches, a sequencing agnostic approach ‘SMART-9N' and a version compatible rapid adapters available from Oxford Nanopore Technologies ‘Rapid SMART-9N'. The methods were developed using viral isolates, clinical samples, and compared to a gold-standard amplicon-based method. From a Zika virus isolate the SMART-9N approach recovered 10kb of the 10.8kb RNA genome in a single nanopore read. We also obtained full genome coverage at a high depth coverage using the Rapid SMART-9N, which takes only 10 minutes and costs up to 45% less than other methods. We found the limits of detection of these methods to be 6 focus forming units (FFU)/mL with 99.02% and 87.58% genome coverage for SMART-9N and Rapid SMART-9N respectively. Yellow fever virus plasma samples and SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal samples previously confirmed by RT-qPCR with a broad range of Ct-values were selected for validation. Both methods produced greater genome coverage when compared to the multiplex PCR approach and we obtained the longest single read of this study (18.5 kb) with a SARS-CoV-2 clinical sample, 60% of the virus genome using the Rapid SMART-9N method. This work demonstrates that SMART-9N and Rapid SMART-9N are sensitive, low input, and long-read compatible alternatives for RNA virus detection and genome sequencing and Rapid SMART-9N improves the cost, time, and complexity of laboratory work.

Rapid viral metagenomics using SMART-9N amplification and nanopore sequencing.

Emerging and re-emerging viruses are a global health concern. Genome sequencing as an approach for monitoring circulating viruses is currently hampered by complex and expensive methods. Untargeted, metagenomic nanopore sequencing can provide genomic information to identify pathogens, prepare for or even prevent outbreaks. SMART (Switching Mechanism at the 5' end of RNA Template) is a popular approach for RNA-Seq but most current methods rely on oligo-dT priming to target polyadenylated mRNA molecules. We have developed two random primed SMART-Seq approaches, a sequencing agnostic approach 'SMART-9N' and a version compatible rapid adapters  available from Oxford Nanopore Technologies 'Rapid SMART-9N'. The methods were developed using viral isolates, clinical samples, and compared to a gold-standard amplicon-based method. From a Zika virus isolate the SMART-9N approach recovered 10kb of the 10.8kb RNA genome in a single nanopore read. We also obtained full genome coverage at a high depth coverage using the Rapid SMART-9N, which takes only 10 minutes and costs up to 45% less than other methods. We found the limits of detection of these methods to be 6 focus forming units (FFU)/mL with 99.02% and 87.58% genome coverage for SMART-9N and Rapid SMART-9N respectively. Yellow fever virus plasma samples and SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal samples previously confirmed by RT-qPCR with a broad range of Ct-values were selected for validation. Both methods produced greater genome coverage when compared to the multiplex PCR approach and we obtained the longest single read of this study (18.5 kb) with a SARS-CoV-2 clinical sample, 60% of the virus genome using the Rapid SMART-9N method. This work demonstrates that SMART-9N and Rapid SMART-9N are sensitive, low input, and long-read compatible alternatives for RNA virus detection and genome sequencing and Rapid SMART-9N improves the cost, time, and complexity of laboratory work.

Prediction of intensive care admission and hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients using demographics and baseline laboratory data

Introduction Optimized allocation of medical resources to patients with COVID-19 has been a critical concern since the onset of the pandemic. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, the authors used data from a Brazilian tertiary university hospital to explore predictors of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission and hospital mortality in patients admitted for COVID-19. Our primary aim was to create and validate prediction scores for use in hospitals and emergency departments to aid clinical decisions and resource allocation. Results The study cohort included 3,022 participants, of whom 2,485 were admitted to the ICU;1968 survived, and 1054 died in the hospital. From the complete cohort, 1,496 patients were randomly assigned to the derivation sample and 1,526 to the validation sample. The final scores included age, comorbidities, and baseline laboratory data. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were very similar for the derivation and validation samples. Scores for ICU admission had a 75% accuracy in the validation sample, whereas scores for death had a 77% accuracy in the validation sample. The authors found that including baseline flu-like symptoms in the scores added no significant benefit to their accuracy. Furthermore, our scores were more accurate than the previously published NEWS-2 and 4C Mortality Scores. Discussion and conclusions The authors developed and validated prognostic scores that use readily available clinical and laboratory information to predict ICU admission and mortality in COVID-19. These scores can become valuable tools to support clinical decisions and improve the allocation of limited health resources.

Prediction of intensive care admission and hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients using demographics and baseline laboratory data.

INTRODUCTION: Optimized allocation of medical resources to patients with COVID-19 has been a critical concern since the onset of the pandemic. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, the authors used data from a Brazilian tertiary university hospital to explore predictors of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission and hospital mortality in patients admitted for COVID-19. Our primary aim was to create and validate prediction scores for use in hospitals and emergency departments to aid clinical decisions and resource allocation. RESULTS: The study cohort included 3,022 participants, of whom 2,485 were admitted to the ICU; 1968 survived, and 1054 died in the hospital. From the complete cohort, 1,496 patients were randomly assigned to the derivation sample and 1,526 to the validation sample. The final scores included age, comorbidities, and baseline laboratory data. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were very similar for the derivation and validation samples. Scores for ICU admission had a 75% accuracy in the validation sample, whereas scores for death had a 77% accuracy in the validation sample. The authors found that including baseline flu-like symptoms in the scores added no significant benefit to their accuracy. Furthermore, our scores were more accurate than the previously published NEWS-2 and 4C Mortality Scores. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The authors developed and validated prognostic scores that use readily available clinical and laboratory information to predict ICU admission and mortality in COVID-19. These scores can become valuable tools to support clinical decisions and improve the allocation of limited health resources.

Immunogenicity decay and case incidence six months post Sinovac-CoronaVac vaccine in autoimmune rheumatic diseases patients.

The determination of durability and vaccine-associated protection is essential for booster doses strategies, however data on the stability of SARS-CoV-2 immunity are scarce. Here we assess anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunogenicity decay and incident cases six months after the 2nd dose of Sinovac-CoronaVac inactivated vaccine (D210) in 828 autoimmune rheumatic diseases patients compared with 207 age/sex-balanced control individuals. The primary outcome is the presence of anti-S1/S2 SARS-CoV-2 IgG at 6 months compared to 6 weeks after 2nd vaccine dose for decay evaluation. Secondary outcomes are presence of neutralizing antibodies, percent inhibition by neutralizing, geometric mean titers and cumulative incident cases at 6 months after 2nd dose. Anti-S1/S2 IgG positivity and titers reduce to 23.8% and 38% in patients (p < 0.001) during the six-month follow up and 20% and 51% in controls (p < 0.001), respectively. Neutralizing antibodies positivity and percent inhibition declines 41% and 54% in patients (p < 0.001) and 39.7% and 47% in controls (p < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis show males (OR = 0.56;95% CI0.40-0.79), prednisone (OR = 0.56; 95% CI0.41-0.76), anti-TNF (OR = 0.66;95% CI0.45-0.96), abatacept (OR = 0.29; 95% CI0.15-0.56) and rituximab (OR = 0.32;95% CI0.11-0.90) associate with a substantial reduction in IgG response at day 210 in patients. Although cellular immunity was not assessed, a decrease of COVID-19 cases (from 27.5 to 8.1/100 person-years; p < 0.001) is observed despite the concomitant emergence and spread of the Delta variant. Altogether we show a reduction in immunity 6-months of Sinovac-CoronaVac 2nd dose, particularly in males and those under immunosuppressives therapies, without a concomitant rise in COVID-19 cases. (CoronavRheum clinicaltrials.gov:NCT04754698).

ANÁLISE DA POSITIVIDADE E TÍTULOS DE NEUTRALIZAÇÃO EM PVHIV E CONTROLES NÃO VACINADOS COM IGG POSITIVO PARA SARS-COV-2

Introdução Testes de neutralização têm se tornado a principal referência para avaliar proteção após exposição ao SARS-CoV-2 ou após a vacinação. Alguns estudos sugerem que pessoas que vivem com HIV (PVHIV) têm menor probabilidade de soroconversão após a vacinação para COVID-19, porém a resposta humoral após infecção natural é pouco conhecida. Objetivo Avaliar a positividade e títulos de anticorpos neutralizantes em PVHIV e controles com IgG positivo identificados no Estudo Prevent, realizado antes da implementação das vacinas para COVID-19 no Brasil. Método O Estudo Prevent incluiu PVHIV sob tratamento ARV e contactantes próximos sem diagnóstico de infecção por HIV acompanhados por 120 dias com avaliação clínica semanal e avaliação sorológica (IgM/IgG) ao início (TS1) e final (TS2) do seguimento, entre abril/2020 e janeiro/2021. Todas as amostras com IgG reagente (+) foram submetidas a um teste correlato de anticorpos neutralizantes (TCAN). Resultados Um total de 74 amostras tiveram IgG reagente;entre PVHIV, 9 tiveram TS1+ e TS2 não reagente (NR);14 tiveram TS1+ e TS2+;e 18 tiveram TS1 NR e TS2+. No grupo controle, 6 tiveram TS1+/TS2 NR;5 tiveram TS1+ e TS2+ e apenas 2 tiveram TS1 NR e TS2+. Quanto à avaliação do TCAN, houve positividade em 39/56 (69%;IC95% 56-81) amostras de PVHIV, e em 14/18 (78%;IC95% 52-94) amostras de controles. 21 amostras foram positivas no TS e negativas no TCAN (17 PVHIV e 4 controles) além de 1 amostra TNeutrAc indeterminada após TS positivo (PVHIV). Embora as medianas de porcentagens de neutralização tenham sido mais altas entre controles em relação a PVHIV tanto nas amostras iniciais quanto ao término do estudo, essa diferença não atingiu significância estatística. Conclusão Testes de neutralização para SARS-CoV-2 ainda possuem aplicabilidade e interpretação controversos. Entretanto, até o momento consistem na metodologia mais aceita para avaliar níveis de proteção contra o vírus. Nossos resultados sugerem tendência a resposta neutralizante inferior entre PVHIV comparadas com controles.

AVALIAÇÃO DO EFEITO POTENCIAL DO USO CONTÍNUO DE MEDICAMENTOS ANTIRRETROVIRAIS SOBRE A INFECCÃO POR SARS-COV-2

Introdução Alguns estudos sugerem que medicamentos antirretrovirais (ARV) possuem efeito inibitório sobre o SARS-CoV-2 em modelos in vitro, porém não foram observados benefícios do uso de ARV no tratamento de pessoas com COVID-19. O efeito potencial do uso contínuo de medicamentos ARV sobre o risco de infecção por SARS-CoV-2 não é conhecido. Objetivo Comparar a porcentagem de infecções por SARS-CoV-2 em PVHIV e controles durante o período anterior à implementação de vacinas no Brasil. Método Estudo de coorte incluindo PVHIV sob tratamento ARV e contactantes próximos sem diagnóstico de infecção por HIV acompanhados por ?120 dias com avaliação clínica semanal e avaliação sorológica (IgM/IgG) ao início (TS1) e final (TS2) do seguimento. A infecção foi definida pela soroconversão de IgG (TS1 negativo e TS2 positiva) e/ou positividade em exame laboratorial (PCR ou antígeno) durante o período do estudo. Resultados Entre abril/2020 e janeiro/2021, foram incluídos 267 PVHIV e 175 controles com mediana de idade de 52 e 44 anos, respectivamente;desses, 25 PVHIV e 56 controles não realizaram o TS2. Sintomas gripais foram relatados por 56 PVHIV e 35 controles ao longo do estudo, e infecções confirmadas por PCR foram registradas para 6 PVHIV e 3 controles. Um total de 74 amostras tiveram IgG positivo;entre PVHIV, 14 tiveram resultado reagente no TS1 e TS2, e 18 tiveram resultado reagente somente no TS2. No grupo controle, 5 indivíduos tiveram resultado reagente no TS1 e TS2, e 2 tiveram resultado reagente somente no TS2. A incidência de infecção estimada foi de 10% entre PVHIV (23/242;IC95% 6-14) e 3% entre controles (4/119;IC95% 1-8), sugerindo ausência de efeito protetor estatisticamente significante do uso contínuo de ARV sobre o risco de infecção por SARS-CoV-2. Conclusão Apesar do efeito antiviral in vitro demonstrado em alguns estudos, o uso de ARV como profilaxia pré-exposição ao SARS-CoV-2 não parece ser relevante.

Clinical, sociodemographic and environmental factors impact post-COVID-19 syndrome.

Background: Sociodemographic and environmental factors are associated with incidence, severity, and mortality of COVID-19. However, little is known about the role of such factors in persisting symptoms among recovering patients. We designed a cohort study of hospitalized COVID-19 survivors to describe persistent symptoms and identify factors associated with post-COVID-19 syndrome. Methods: We included patients hospitalized between March to August 2020 who were alive six months after hospitalization. We collected individual and clinical characteristics during hospitalization and at follow-up assessed ten symptoms with standardized scales, 19 yes/no symptoms, a functional status and a quality-of-life scale and performed four clinical tests. We examined individual exposure to greenspace and air pollution and considered neighbourhood´s population density and socioeconomic conditions as contextual factors in multilevel regression analysis. Results: We included 749 patients with a median follow-up of 200 (IQR = 185-235) days, and 618 (83%) had at least one of the ten symptoms measured with scales. Pain (41%), fatigue (38%) and posttraumatic stress disorder (35%) were the most frequent. COVID-19 severity, comorbidities, BMI, female sex, younger age, and low socioeconomic position were associated with different symptoms. Exposure to ambient air pollution was associated with higher dyspnoea and fatigue scores and lower functional status. Conclusions: We identified a high frequency of persistent symptoms among COVID-19 survivors that were associated with clinical, sociodemographic, and environmental variables. These findings indicate that most patients recovering from COVID-19 will need post-discharge care, and an additional burden to health care systems, especially in LMICs, should be expected.

Male sex rather than socioeconomic vulnerability as a determinant for COVID-19 death in Sao Paulo: A population-based study.

Objectives: To determine the role of the male sex as a risk factor for coronavirus disease deaths in Sao Paulo and to what extent socioeconomic vulnerability and individual health issues can interfere in such risk. Methods: The primary cause of death, age, sex, comorbidities, and code of the Human Development Units of the residence of 37,583 individuals in Sao Paulo, Brazil, were obtained from the records on confirmed coronavirus disease resident hospitalizations of the city of Sao Paulo from the National Influenza Surveillance Information System. A social vulnerability index was assigned to each Human Development Unit. Using "death" as the outcome variable and sex, admission to the intensive care unit, obesity, renal and heart diseases, diabetes, and social vulnerability as confounders, the odds of death for males and females were compared via logistic regression. Results: The odds of death for males were 1.242 (confidence interval 95% = 1.237, 1.247) times the corresponding odds for females with the same values for all confounders. We estimated the odds of death for patients living in regions with high social vulnerability as 2.243 (CI 95% = 2.151, 2.339) times the corresponding odds of patients living in regions with very low social vulnerability with the same values of the remaining variables. Conclusion: The male:female death ratio by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in Sao Paulo cannot be attributed only to comorbidities or social vulnerabilities. Our results suggest that the male sex is an independent biological risk factor for coronavirus disease death. Besides sex-specific factors, further research should focus on crucial biological factors in male sex coronavirus disease mortality.

Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection: relationship of central nervous system manifestations with physical disability and systemic inflammation.

BACKGROUND: Despite the multitude of clinical manifestations of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC), studies applying statistical methods to directly investigate patterns of symptom co-occurrence and their biological correlates are scarce. METHODS: We assessed 30 symptoms pertaining to different organ systems in 749 adults (age = 55 ± 14 years; 47% female) during in-person visits conducted at 6-11 months after hospitalization due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including six psychiatric and cognitive manifestations. Symptom co-occurrence was initially investigated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and latent variable modeling was then conducted using Item Response Theory (IRT). We investigated associations of latent variable severity with objective indices of persistent physical disability, pulmonary and kidney dysfunction, and C-reactive protein and D-dimer blood levels, measured at the same follow-up assessment. RESULTS: The EFA extracted one factor, explaining 64.8% of variance; loadings were positive for all symptoms, and above 0.35 for 16 of them. The latent trait generated using IRT placed fatigue, psychiatric, and cognitive manifestations as the most discriminative symptoms (coefficients > 1.5, p < 0.001). Latent trait severity was associated with decreased body weight and poorer physical performance (coefficients > 0.240; p ⩽ 0.003), and elevated blood levels of C-reactive protein (coefficient = 0.378; 95% CI 0.215-0.541; p < 0.001) and D-dimer (coefficient = 0.412; 95% CI 0.123-0.702; p = 0.005). Results were similar after excluding subjects with pro-inflammatory comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Different symptoms that persist for several months after moderate or severe COVID-19 may unite within one latent trait of PASC. This trait is dominated by fatigue and psychiatric symptoms, and is associated with objective signs of physical disability and persistent systemic inflammation.

Safety and immunogenicity of CoronaVac in people living with HIV: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: People living with HIV might have a poor or delayed response to vaccines, mainly when CD4 cell counts are low, and data concerning COVID-19 vaccines in this population are scarce. This prospective cohort study assessed the safety and immunogenicity of the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine CoronaVac in people with HIV compared with people with no known immunosuppression. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, adults (aged ≥18 years) living with HIV who were regularly followed up at the University of Sao Paulo HIV/AIDS outpatient clinic in Sao Paulo, Brazil, were included in the study. Eligibility for people with HIV was independent of antiretroviral use, HIV viral load, or CD4 cell count. Adults with no known immunosuppression with CoronaVac vaccination history were included as a control group. CoronaVac was given intramuscularly in a two-dose regimen, 28 days apart. Blood was collected before vaccine administration and 6 weeks after the second dose (day 69). Immunogenicity was assessed at baseline (day 0), before second vaccine (day 28), and 6 weeks after second vaccine dose (day 69) through SARS-CoV-2 IgG titre and seroconversion, neutralising antibody (NAb) positivity and percentage activity, and factor increase in IgG geometric mean titres (FI-GMT). We investigated whether HIV status and CD4 count (<500 or ≥500 cells per µL) were associated with CoronaVac immunogenicity by use of multivariable models adjusted for age and sex. FINDINGS: Between Feb 9, 2021, and March 4, 2021, 776 participants were recruited. Of 511 participants included, 215 (42%) were people with HIV and 296 (58%) were people with no known immunosuppression. At 6 weeks after the second vaccine dose (day 69), 185 (91%) of 204 participants with HIV and 265 (97%) of 274 participants with no known immunosuppression had seroconversion (p=0·0055). 143 (71%) of 202 participants with HIV were NAb positive compared with 229 (84%) of 274 participants with no known immunosuppression (p=0·0008). Median IgG titres were 48·7 AU/mL (IQR 26·6-88·2) in people with HIV compared with 75·2 AU/mL (50·3-112·0) in people with no known immunosuppression (p<0·0001); and median NAb activity was 46·2% (26·9-69·7) compared with 60·8% (39·8-79·9; p<0·0001). In people with HIV who had CD4 counts less than 500 cells per µL seroconversion rates, NAb positivity, and NAb activity were lower than in those with CD4 counts of at least 500 cells per µL. In multivariable models for seroconversion, NAb positivity, IgG concentration, and NAb activity after a complete two-dose regimen, adjusted for age and sex, people with HIV who had CD4 counts of at least 500 cells per µL and people with no known immunosuppression had higher immunogenicity than did people with HIV with CD4 counts less than 500 cells per µL. No serious adverse reactions were reported during the study. INTERPRETATION: Immunogenicity following CoronaVac in people with HIV seems strong but reduced compared with people with no known immunosuppression. Our findings highlight the need for strategies to improve vaccine immunogenicity in people with HIV. FUNDING: Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), and B3-Bolsa de Valores do Brasil.

Treatment of severe COVID-19 patients with either low- or high-volume of convalescent plasma versus standard of care: A multicenter Bayesian randomized open-label clinical trial (COOP-COVID-19-MCTI).

Background: Administration of convalescent plasma may serve as an adjunct to supportive treatment to prevent COVID-19 progression and death. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 volumes of intravenous convalescent plasma (CP) with high antibody titers for the treatment of severe cases of COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a Bayesian, randomized, open-label, multicenter, controlled clinical trial in 7 Brazilian hospitals. Adults admitted to hospital with positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV2, within 10 days of the symptom onset, were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive standard of care (SoC) alone, or in combination with 200 mL (150-300 mL) of CP (Low-volume), or 400 mL (300-600 mL) of CP (High-volume); infusion had to be performed within 24 h of randomization. Randomization was centralized, stratified by center. The primary outcome was the time until clinical improvement up to day 28, measured by the WHO ten-point scale, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Interim and terminal analyses were performed in a Bayesian framework. Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04415086. Findings: Between June 2, 2020, and November 18, 2020, 129 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to SoC (n = 42), Low-volume (n = 43) or High-volume (n = 44) CP. Donors presented a median titer of neutralizing antibodies of 1:320 (interquartile range, 1:160 to 1:1088). No evidence of any benefit of convalescent plasma was observed, with Bayesian estimate of 28-day clinical improvement of 72.7% (95%CI, 58.8 to 84.7) in the SoC versus 64.1% (95%ci, 53.8 to 73.7) in the pooled experimental groups (mean difference of -8.7%, 95%CI, -24.6 to 8.2). There was one case of cutaneous mild allergic reaction related to plasma transfusion and one case of suspected transfusion-related acute lung injury but deemed not to be related to convalescent plasma infusion. Interpretation: In this prospective, randomized trial of adult hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19, convalescent plasma was not associated with clinical benefits. Funding: Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo.

The Abbott Pandemic Defense Coalition: a unique multisector approach adds to global pandemic preparedness efforts.

Detection and epidemiologic characterization of infectious disease outbreaks are key for early identification and response to potential pandemic threats. The rapid global spread of severe SARS-CoV-2 in 2020 highlighted the critical role of diagnostics in understanding the epidemiology of the virus early in the pandemic. As a natural extension of Abbott's work in diagnostics, virus discovery, and virus surveillance, the Abbott Pandemic Defense Coalition (APDC) was launched in early 2021. The APDC is a global multisector scientific and public health partnership whose primary objective is the early detection and mitigation of infectious disease threats of pandemic potential. As of January 2022, the APDC network has partners on 5 continents including academic institutions, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations. A novel element of the APDC is the capacity for early development and rapid deployment of scalable, quality diagnostics targeting newly identified pathogens of pandemic potential.

Immunogenicity and safety of two doses of the CoronaVac SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in SARS-CoV-2 seropositive and seronegative patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases in Brazil: a subgroup analysis of a phase 4 prospective study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine the immunogenicity pattern induced by the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine CoronaVac (Sinovac Life Sciences, Beijing, China) in SARS-CoV-2 seropositive patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases compared with seropositive controls, seronegative patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, and seronegative controls. METHODS: CoronavRheum is an ongoing, prospective, controlled, phase 4 study, in which patients aged 18 years or older with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, and healthy controls were recruited from a single site (Rheumatology Division of Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo) in São Paulo, Brazil Participants were vaccinated with two doses of CoronaVac (intramuscular injection, 3 µg in 0·5 mL of ß-propiolactone inactivated SARS-CoV-2) on day 0 and on day 28. Blood samples were taken pre-vaccination on day 0, day 28, and also on day 69. For this subgroup analysis, participants were defined as being SARS-CoV-2 seropositive or seronegative prevaccination via anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S)1 or S2 IgG (cutoff of 15·0 arbitrary units [AU] per mL) or neutralising antibody titres (cutoff of ≥30%) and were matched for age and sex, via convenience sampling, in a 1:3:1:1 ratio (seropositive patients to seronegative patients to seropositive controls to seronegative controls). The primary outcomes were rates of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 and S2 IgG seropositivity and SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibody positivity at day 28 and day 69 and immunogenicity dynamics assessed by geometric mean titres (GMTs) of IgG and median neutralising activity in seropositive patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases compared with seronegative patients and seropositive and seronegative controls. We assessed safety in all participants randomly selected for this subgroup analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04754698, and is ongoing for long-term immunogenicity evaluation. FINDINGS: Between Feb 4 and Feb 8, 2021, 1418 patients and 542 controls were recruited, of whom 1685 received two vaccinations (1193 patients and 492 controls). After random sampling, our immunogenicity analysis population comprised 942 participants, of whom 157 were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, 157 were seropositive controls, 471 were seronegative patients, and 157 were seronegative controls; the median age was 48 years (IQR 38-56) and 594 (63%) were female and 348 (37%) were male. For seropositive patients and controls, an increase in anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 and S2 IgG titres (seropositive patients GMT 52·3 [95% CI 42·9-63·9] at day 0 vs 128·9 [105·6-157·4] at day 28; seropositive controls 53·3 [45·4-62·5] at day 0 vs 202·0 [174·8-233·4] at day 28) and neutralising antibody activity (seropositive patients 59% [IQR 39-83] at day 0 vs 82% [54-96] at day 28; seropositive controls 58% [41-79] at day 0 vs 92% [79-96] at day 28), was observed from day 0 to day 28, without further increases from day 28 to day 69 (at day 69 seropositive patients' GMT was 137·1 [116·2-161·9] and neutralising antibody activity was 79% [57-94]); and seropositive controls' GMT was 188·6 [167·4-212·6] and neutralising antibody activity was 92% [75-96]). By contrast, for seronegative patients and controls, the second dose was required for maximum response at day 69, which was lower in seronegative patients than in seronegative controls. GMTs in seronegative patients were 2·3 (95% CI 2·2-2·3) at day 0, 5·7 (5·1-6·4) at day 28, and 29·6 (26·4-33·3) at day 69, and in seronegative controls were 2·3 (2·1-2·5) at day 0, 10·6 (8·7-13·1) at day 28, and 71·7 (63·5-81·0) at day 69; neutralising antibody activity in seronegative patients was 15% (IQR 15-15) on day 0, 15% (15-15) at day 28, and 39% (15-65) at day 69, and in seronegative controls was 15% (15-15) at day 0, 24% (15-37) at day 28, and 61% (37-79) at day 69. Neither seronegative patients nor seronegative controls reached the GMT or antibody activity levels of seropositive patients at day 69. INTERPRETATION: By contrast with seronegative patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, seropositive patients have a robust response after a single dose of CoronaVac. Our findings raise the possibility that the reduced immunogenicity observed in seronegative patients might not be the optimum response potential to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, and therefore emphasise the importance of at least a single booster vaccination in these patients. FUNDING: Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, and B3-Bolsa de Valores do Brasil. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Impact of Distinct Therapies on Antibody Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

OBJECTIVE: To date, the only study that has assessed the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 mRNA) vaccine in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) observed a moderate response, but the sample size precluded an accurate analysis of the effect of individual drugs. Therefore, we evaluated the immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (Sinovac-CoronaVac) and the influence of different medications in SLE. Safety was also assessed. METHODS: We conducted a prospective controlled study of 232 SARS-CoV-2-naive SLE patients and 58 SARS-CoV-2-naive controls who were vaccinated with 2 doses of Sinovac-CoronaVac with a 28-day interval (day 0/day 28 [D0/D28]). Immunogenicity analysis at D0/D28 and D69 included anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG seroconversion (SC) and neutralizing antibodies (NAb) positivity. The influence of individual drugs on immune response and safety was assessed. RESULTS: Patients and controls were well balanced for age (P = 0.771). At D69, SLE patients showed a moderate SC (70.2% versus 98.1%; P < 0.001) and moderate frequency of NAb positivity (61.5% versus 84.6%; P = 0.002), although both frequencies were lower than in controls. Factors associated with lower SC in univariate analysis at D69 were prednisone use (odds ratio [OR] 0.215 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.108-0.427], P < 0.001) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) use (OR 0.201 [95% CI 0.107-0.378], P < 0.001), whereas hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) use led to a 2.5 increase in SC (P = 0.011). SLE patients who were receiving HCQ monotherapy had similar SC to controls at D69 (100% versus 98.1%; P = 1.000). In multivariate analysis, prednisone and MMF use were independently associated with lower SC (P < 0.001) and NAb positivity (P < 0.001). Safety analysis revealed no moderate/severe adverse events. CONCLUSION: Sinovac-CoronaVac has a moderate immunogenicity in SARS-CoV-2-naive SLE patients with an excellent safety profile. We further demonstrate that HCQ may improve SC, whereas prednisone and MMF had a major deleterious effect in vaccine response, reinforcing the need to investigate the role of temporary MMF withdrawal or a vaccine-booster dose (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04754698).

Immunogenicity and safety of the CoronaVac inactivated vaccine in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases: a phase 4 trial.

CoronaVac, an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, has been approved for emergency use in several countries. However, its immunogenicity in immunocompromised individuals has not been well established. We initiated a prospective phase 4 controlled trial (no. NCT04754698, CoronavRheum) in 910 adults with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) and 182 age- and sex-frequency-matched healthy adults (control group, CG), who received two doses of CoronaVac. The primary outcomes were reduction of ≥15% in both anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroconversion (SC) and neutralizing antibody (NAb) positivity 6 weeks (day 69 (D69)) after the second dose in the ARD group compared with that in the CG. Secondary outcomes were IgG SC and NAb positivity at D28, IgG titers and neutralizing activity at D28 and D69 and vaccine safety. Prespecified endpoints were met, with lower anti-SARS-Cov-2 IgG SC (70.4 versus 95.5%, P < 0.001) and NAb positivity (56.3 versus 79.3%, P < 0.001) at D69 in the ARD group than in the CG. Moreover, IgG titers (12.1 versus 29.7, P < 0.001) and median neutralization activity (58.7 versus 64.5%, P = 0.013) were also lower at D69 in patients with ARD. At D28, patients with ARD presented with lower IgG frequency (18.7 versus 34.6%, P < 0.001) and NAb positivity (20.6 versus 36.3%, P < 0.001) than that of the CG. There were no moderate/severe adverse events. These data support the use of CoronaVac in patients with ARD, suggesting reduced but acceptable short-term immunogenicity. The trial is still ongoing to evaluate the long-term effectiveness/immunogenicity.

COVID-19 convalescent plasma cohort study: Evaluation of the association between both donor and recipient neutralizing antibody titers and patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence regarding COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) transfusion practices is limited and heterogeneous. We aimed to determine the impact of the use of CCP transfusion in patients with previous circulating neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) in COVID-19. METHODS: Prospective cohort including 102 patients with COVID-19 transfused with ABO compatible CCP on days 0-2 after enrollment. Clinical status of patients was assessed using the adapted World Health Organization (WHO) ordinal scale on days 0, 5, and 14. The nAbs titration was performed using the cytopathic effect-based virus neutralization test with SARS-CoV-2 (GenBank MT126808.1). The primary outcome was clinical improvement on day 14, defined as a reduction of at least two points on the adapted WHO ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were the number of intensive care unit (ICU)-free days and the number of invasive mechanical ventilation-free days. RESULTS: Both nAbs of CCP units transfused (p < 0.001) and nAbs of patients before CCP transfusions (p = 0.028) were associated with clinical improvements by day 14. No significant associations between nAbs of patients or CCP units transfused were observed in the number of ICU or mechanical ventilation-free days. Administration of CCP units after 10 days of symptom onset resulted in a decrease in ICU-free days (p < 0.001) and mechanical ventilation-free days (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Transfusion of high titer nAbs CCP units may be a determinant in clinical strategies against COVID-19. We consider these data as useful parameters to guide future CCP transfusion practices.

Platelet Reactivity and Coagulation Markers in Patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUTION: COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of thrombotic events. However, the contribution of platelet reactivity (PR) to the aetiology of the increased thrombotic risk associated with COVID-19 remains unclear. Our aim was to evaluate PR in stable patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and hospitalized with respiratory symptoms (mainly dyspnoea and dry cough), in comparison with a control group comprised of non-hospitalized healthy controls. METHODS: Observational, case control study that included patients with confirmed COVID-19 (COVID-19 group, n = 60) and healthy individuals matched by age and sex (control group, n = 60). Multiplate electrode aggregometry (MEA) tests were used to assess PR with adenosine diphosphate (MEA-ADP, low PR defined as < 53 AUC), arachidonic acid (MEA-ASPI, low PR < 86 AUC) and thrombin receptor-activating peptide 6 (MEA-TRAP, low PR < 97 AUC) in both groups. RESULTS: The rates of low PR with MEA-ADP were 27.5% in the COVID-19 group and 21.7% in the control group (OR = 1.60, p = 0.20); with MEA-ASPI, the rates were, respectively, 37.5% and 22.5% (OR = 3.67, p < 0.001); and with MEA-TRAP, the incidences were 48.5% and 18.8%, respectively (OR = 9.58, p < 0.001). Levels of D-dimer, fibrinogen, and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) were higher in the COVID-19 group in comparison with the control group (all p < 0.05). Thromboelastometry was utilized in a subgroup of patients and showed a hypercoagulable state in the COVID-19 group. CONCLUSION: Patients hospitalized with non-severe COVID-19 had lower PR compared to healthy controls, despite having higher levels of D-dimer, fibrinogen, and PAI-1, and hypercoagulability by thromboelastometry. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04447131.