ABSTRACT
Rationale: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses elicited by infection or vaccination vary among individuals and over time. Their knowledge is of particular importance in, amongst others, elite sport. Can dried blood spots serve as a minimally-invasive, low-cost, decentralized tool to monitor the quantitative antibody response and thus represent an alternative to full blood tests? › Methods: Cross-validation of dried blood and venous blood samples of 27 individuals post-infection and 96 individuals post-vaccination, longitudinal antibody monitoring of 27 individuals after vaccination using different vaccines and vaccine schedules and detection of seropositive individuals in a cohort of 557 people using self-collected DBS (dried blood spots) and two commercial immunoassays. › Findings: Plasma and DBS values were highly correlated allowing for extrapolation of plasma values from DBS using a factor of a least 10 following the presented procedure. Capillary volumetric sampling and self-sampling produced reliable results. After vaccination, participants showed heterogenous antibody responses but a consistent increase after the second dose. DBS allowed for the analysis of a huge sample volume in a timely manner by limited laboratory personnel. › Discussion: DBS offer the possibility of infection and vaccination traceability of individuals and cohorts via minimally-invasive self-sampling. This way, they allow to screen and monitor the presence and evolution of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a qualitative and quantitative manner. Using two commercial, automated assays enables large-scale and frequent testing, global implementation and comparability of results. © 2022, Dynamic Media Sales Verlag. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cancer patients are vulnerable to infections, are older and often have comorbidities in comparison to the general population, which increases the risk for severe outcomes related to COVID-19 diagnosis. METHODS: This study is a prospective, nationwide study in patients with solid cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection included between 10 March to 15 June 2020. Patient's baseline characteristics were collected. The study's primary outcome was overall survival within 30 days of verified SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondary outcomes were hospital admission, admission to an ICU, and need for supplemental oxygen. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients with a cancer diagnosis and verified SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified. After one month of follow up, hospitalization was required for 54% (n = 61) and 21% of the patients had died and 14 of the 23 deceased cancer patients were ≥70 years. Most patients were classified with mild COVID-19 symptoms (66%, n = 74); however, 48% (n = 23) of the ≥70-year-olds patients were classified with severe or critical COVID-19 symptoms. Among the total study population, 61% (n = 68) had comorbidities and comorbidity were more frequently observed among the deceased (91%, n = 21) and older cancer patients (≥70 years, 81%, n = 39). CONCLUSIONS: Acknowledging the low sample size in this study, our work shows that age and comorbidities, but not recent cytotoxic therapy, are associated with adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection for patients with solid cancer. Particularly, patients with progressive disease seem to be at greater risk of a fatal outcome from COVID-19.HighlightsAge, performance status, and comorbidities are strong predictors of adverse outcome in cancer patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.Patients with progressive cancer disease seem to be at greater risk of a fatal outcome from COVID-19.Recent cytotoxic therapy, however, did not seem to be associated with increased risk for adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection for patients with solid cancer.