Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.08.10.22278577

ABSTRACT

Background The COVIH study is a prospective SARS-CoV-2 vaccination study in people living with HIV (PLWH). Of the 1154 PLWH enrolled, 14% showed a reduced or absent antibody response after a primary vaccination regimen. As the response to an additional vaccination in PLWH with hyporesponse is unknown, we evaluated whether an additional vaccination boosts immune responses in these hyporesponders. Methods Consenting hyporesponders received an additional 100 g of mRNA-1273. Hyporesponse was defined as [≤]300 spike(S)-specific binding antibody units [BAU]/mL. The primary endpoint was the increase in antibodies 28 days after the additional vaccination. Secondary endpoints were the correlation between patient characteristics and antibody response, levels of neutralizing antibodies, S-specific T-cell and B-cell responses, and reactogenicity. Results Of the 75 PLWH enrolled, five were excluded as their antibody level had increased to >300 BAU/mL at baseline, two for a SARS-CoV-2 infection before the primary endpoint evaluation and two were lost to follow-up. Of the 66 remaining participants, 40 previously received ChAdOx1-S, 22 BNT162b2, and four Ad26.COV2.S. The median age was 63[IQR:60-66], 86% were male, pre-vaccination and nadir CD4+ T-cell counts were 650/L[IQR:423-941] and 230/L[IQR:145-345] and 96% had HIV-RNA <50 copies/mL. The mean antibody level before the additional vaccination was 35 BAU/mL (SEM 5.4) and 45/66 (68%) were antibody negative. After the additional mRNA-1273 vaccination, antibodies were >300 BAU/mL in 64/66 (97%) with a mean increase of 4282 BAU/mL (95%CI:3241-5323). No patient characteristics correlated with the magnitude of the antibody response, nor did the primary vaccination regimen. The additional vaccination significantly increased the proportion of participants with detectable ancestral S-specific B-cells (p=0.016) and CD4+ T-cells (p=0.037). Conclusion An additional mRNA-1273 vaccination induced a robust serological response in 97% of the PLWH with a hyporesponse after a primary vaccination regimen. This response was observed regardless of the primary vaccination regimen or patient characteristics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections
2.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.03.31.22273221

ABSTRACT

BackgroundVaccines can be less immunogenic in people living with HIV (PLWH), but for SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations this is unknown. Methods and FindingsA prospective cohort study to examine the immunogenicity of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, ChAdOx1-S and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines in adult PLWH, without prior COVID-19, compared to HIV-negative controls. The primary endpoint was the anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 IgG response after mRNA vaccination. Secondary endpoints included the serological response after vector vaccination, anti-SARS-CoV-2 T-cell response and reactogenicity. Between February-September 2021, 1154 PLWH (median age 53 [IQR 44-60], 86% male) and 440 controls (median age 43 [IQR 33-53], 29% male) were included. 884 PLWH received BNT162b2, 100 mRNA-1273, 150 ChAdOx1-S, and 20 Ad26.COV2.S. 99% were on antiretroviral therapy, 98% virally suppressed, and the median CD4+T-cell count was 710 cells/{micro}L [IQR 520-913]. 247 controls received mRNA-1273, 94 BNT162b2, 26 ChAdOx1-S and 73 Ad26.COV2.S. After mRNA vaccination, geometric mean concentration was 1418 BAU/mL in PLWH (95%CI 1322-1523), and after adjustment for age, sex, and vaccine type, HIV-status remained associated with a decreased response (0.607, 95%CI 0.508-0.725). In PLWH vaccinated with mRNA-based vaccines, higher antibody responses were predicted by CD4+T-cell counts 250-500 cells/{micro}L (2.845, 95%CI 1.876-4.314) or >500 cells/{micro}L (2.936, 95%CI 1.961-4.394), whilst a viral load >50 copies/mL was associated with a reduced response (0.454, 95%CI 0.286-0.720). Increased IFN-{gamma}, CD4+, and CD8+T-cell responses were observed after stimulation with SARS-CoV-2 spike peptides in ELISpot and activation induced marker assays, comparable to controls. Reactogenicity was generally mild without vaccine-related SAE. ConclusionAfter vaccination with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels were reduced in PLWH. To reach and maintain the same serological responses and vaccine efficacy as HIV-negative controls, additional vaccinations are probably required.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections
3.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.06.23.21259020

ABSTRACT

Background To define the frequency of respiratory community-acquired bacterial co-infection in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) based on a complete clinical assessment, including prior antibiotic use, clinical characteristics, inflammatory markers, chest computed tomography (CT) results and microbiological test results. Methods This study was conducted within a cohort of prospectively included patients admitted for COVID-19 in our tertiary medical centres between 1-3-2020 and 1-6-2020. A multidisciplinary study team developed a diagnostic protocol to retrospectively categorize patients as unlikely, possible or probable bacterial co-infection based on clinical, radiological and microbiological parameters in the first 72 hours of admission. Within the three categories, we summarized patient characteristics and antibiotic consumption. Results Among 281 included COVID-19 patients, bacterial co-infection was classified as unlikely in 233 patients (82.9%), possible in 35 patients (12.4%) and probable in 3 patients (1.1%). Ten patients (3.6%) could not be classified due to inconclusive data. Within 72 hours of hospital admission, 81% of the total study population and 78% of patients classified as unlikely bacterial co-infection received antibiotics. Conclusions COVID-19 patients are unlikely to have a respiratory community-acquired bacterial co-infection. Prospective studies should define the safety of restrictive antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coinfection , Bacterial Infections
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL