ABSTRACT
Background: The tolerability of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines among people living with HIV (PLWH) has been understudied in vaccine trials. CoVPN 3008 (Ubuntu) is the largest multicenter Phase 3 efficacy trial of mRNA vaccines in sub-Saharan Africa. Method(s): We enrolled adults age >=18 years living with HIV or another comorbidity associated with severe COVID-19. Previously vaccinated individuals were excluded. Baseline testing included HIV, CD4 count and HIV viral load (VL) (if HIV+), anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and nasal swab SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT). All participants receive vaccinations at months 0 and 6, and SARS-CoV-2 seronegative individuals also receive vaccination at month 1. This analysis includes mRNA-1273 vaccinations at months 0 and 1. Reactogenicity (solicited adverse events [AEs]) was assessed among a representative subset of participants (Safety Subset, SS) for 7 days post-vaccination. Baseline characteristics associated with moderate/severe reactogenicity events were assessed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Result(s): 14002 participants were enrolled in the trial (1510 into the SS) at 46 sites from 2 Dec 2021 to 9 Sep 2022. At baseline in the SS, 71% (1065) were female, median age 38 years (IQR 32-46), and median BMI 25.0 (IQR 20.7-30.2). 73% (1108) were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive, and 8.7% (131) had a positive nasal NAAT swab. 16% (197) had a history of tuberculosis. 84% (1267) were PLWH, with median CD4 count of 614 cells/muL (IQR 414-861);7.8% had CD4 count < 200. 21% (238) had detectable HIV VL (>=50 copies/mL), with median VL 1660 (IQR 182-23932). 14% (172/1262) and 12% (64/542) of PLWH reported moderate/severe reactogenicity after the 1st and 2nd vaccination (Figure), with no hospitalizations. Female PLWH and CD4 count >500 had 35% (p=0.03) and 44% (p=0.04) increased odds of moderate/severe reactogenicity, respectively. Other baseline characteristics were not associated with the odds of reporting moderate/severe reactogenicity among PLWH after 1st vaccination. Similar trends were seen after the 2nd vaccination, but none reached statistical significance. In multivariate models, female sex remained associated with increased odds of moderate/severe reactogenicity after the 2nd vaccination. Conclusion(s): Similar to observations in HIV-negative populations, mRNA-1273 was well tolerated by PLWH with more reactogenicity in females. Impaired inflammatory responses among participants with CD4 counts < 500 cell/muL may explain less moderate/severe reactions.
ABSTRACT
Medical practitioners are confronted on a daily basis with decisions about patients' capacity to consent to interventions. To address some of the pertinent issues with these assessments, the end-of-life decision-making capacity in a 72-year old lady with treatment resistant schizophrenia and terminal cancer will be discussed. In the case discussed there were differences in opinion about the patients decision-making capacity. In light of this, the role of the treating clinician and importance of health-related values in capacity assessment are highlighted. It is recommended that the focus of these assessments can rather be on practical outcomes, especially when capacity issues arise. This implies that the decision-making capacity of the patient is only practically important when the treatment team is willing to proceed against the patient's wishes. This shifts the focus from a potentially difficult assessment to the simpler question of whether the patient's capacity will change the treatment approach. Compared to the general population, people with serious mental illness have higher rates of physical illness and die at a younger age, but they do not commonly access palliative care services and are rarely engaged in end-of-life care discussions. Older people with serious mental illness can engage in advance care planning. Conversations about end-of-life care can occur without fear that a person's psychiatric symptoms or related vulnerabilities will undermine the process. Clinicians are also advised to attend to any possible underlying issues, instead of focusing strictly on capacity. Routine documentation of endof-life care preferences can support future decision making for family and clinicians at a time when patients are unable to express their decisions. More research about palliative care and advance care planning for people with serious mental illness is needed. This is even more urgent in light of the COVID-2019 pandemic, as there are potential needs for rationing of health care in the context of scarce resources. Health services should consider recommendations that advanced care planning should be routinely implemented. These recommendations should not only focus on the general population and should include patients with serious mental illness.