ABSTRACT
The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 has raised considerable concern about the detrimental effects it can induce in public health, with the interest of the scientific community being focused on the development of preventive and therapeutic approaches. Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are amongst vulnerable populations for critical illness owing to the presence of other comorbidities, their defective immune system, and their inability of self-isolation. To date, vaccination constitutes the most promising method to manage viral dispersion. Therefore, it is particularly important to investigate the effectiveness of available vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in this risk group. Here, we summarize initial experience regarding the humoral and cellular immune responses elicited in dialysis patients after completion of the recommended vaccination regimen, as well as after booster dose administration, with one of the two mRNA vaccines, namely, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273. In conclusion, a significantly diminished and delayed immune pattern was observed in ESRD patients compared to healthy population, with a peak in antibody titers occurring 3-5 weeks after the second dose. A booster dose significantly augmented the immune response in dialysis patients with either mRNA-based vaccine. Variables adversely correlating with the weak immunogenicity observed in dialysis patients include immunosuppressive therapy, older age, comorbidities, longer time in hemodialysis treatment, and higher body mass index. On the contrary, previous COVID-19 infection and administration of the mRNA-1273 vaccine are deemed to induce a more favorable immune response. Further investigation is needed to thoroughly understand the efficacy of mRNA-based vaccines in hemodialysis patients and define predictive factors that can influence it.
ABSTRACT
The increased demand for SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in shortage of reagents and consumables. Pooling of specimens could be an alternative strategy to overcome these problems. Initial evaluation of the pooling strategy was performed using known positive specimens, previously tested individually, and their respective pools of plus four (5X), five (6X) and nine (10X) known negative specimens. Subsequently, 35 positive 5X and 35 positive 6X pools containing only one positive specimen per pool were analyzed prospectively regarding the difference in Ct values in pooled versus individual specimens. When the number of samples in the pool were five or six, the average deviation of Ct differences was < 1; therefore, this strategy was followed in the prospective study. Significant difference in Ct values was observed in positive specimens when tested individually and in 5X pools (p = 0.006), while the difference was not significant when positive specimens were tested individually and in 6X pools (p = 0.07). The difference in Ct values was not significant between the 5X and 6X pools. Testing in pools of five or six specimens is a reliable option for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection when mass testing is needed.