A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Serologic Response following Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients.

Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at greater risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and have attenuated response to vaccinations. In the present meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the serologic response to the COVID-19 vaccine in SOT recipients. A search of electronic databases was conducted to identify SOT studies that reported the serologic response to COVID-19 vaccination. We analyzed 44 observational studies including 6158 SOT recipients. Most studies were on mRNA vaccination (mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2). After a single and two doses of vaccine, serologic response rates were 8.6% (95% CI 6.8-11.0) and 34.2% (95% CI 30.1-38.7), respectively. Compared to controls, response rates were lower after a single and two doses of vaccine (OR 0.0049 [95% CI 0.0021-0.012] and 0.0057 [95% CI 0.0030-0.011], respectively). A third dose improved the rate to 65.6% (95% CI 60.4-70.2), but in a subset of patients who had not achieved a response after two doses, it remained low at 35.7% (95% CI 21.2-53.3). In summary, only a small proportion of SOT recipients achieved serologic response to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, and that even the third dose had an insufficient response. Alternative strategies for prophylaxis in SOT patients need to be developed. Key Contribution: In this meta-analysis that included 6158 solid organ transplant recipients, the serologic response to the COVID-19 vaccine was extremely low after one (8.6%) and two doses (34.2%). The third dose of the vaccine improved the rate only to 66%, and in the subset of patients who had not achieved a response after two doses, it remained low at 36%. The results of our study suggest that a significant proportion of solid organ transplant recipients are unable to achieve a sufficient serologic response after completing not only the two series of vaccination but also the third booster dose. There is an urgent need to develop strategies for prophylaxis including modified vaccine schedules or the use of monoclonal antibodies in this vulnerable patient population.

Serologic response following SARS-COV2 vaccination in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer have an increased risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and an attenuated responses to various vaccines. This meta-analysis aims to assess the serologic response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer. METHODS: Electronic databases were systematically searched on August 1, 2021 for studies that reported the serologic response to COVID-19 vaccine in cancer patients. Random effects models were used to achieve pooled serologic response rates and odds ratios (ORs). RESULTS: We analyzed 16 observational studies with a total of 1453 patients with cancer. A majority of studies used mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273). The proportion of patients achieving a serologic response after a single and two doses of COVID-19 vaccine were 54.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 41.0-66.9) and 87.7% (95% CI 82.5-91.5), respectively. Patients with hematologic cancers had a lower response rate after the second dose of vaccine compared to those with solid organ cancers (63.7% vs. 94.9%), which was attributable to the low response rates associated with certain conditions (chronic lymphocytic leukemia, lymphoma) and therapies (anti-CD20, kinase inhibitors). A lower proportion of patients with cancer achieved a serologic response compared to control patients after one and two doses of vaccine (OR0.073 [95% CI 0.026-0.20] and 0.10 [95% CI 0.039-0.26], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer, especially those with hematologic B-cell malignancies, have a lower serologic response to COVID-19 vaccines. The results suggest that cancer patients should continue to follow safety measures including mask-wearing after vaccination and suggest the need for additional strategies for prophylaxis.

Serologic Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination in Patients With Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) have an increased risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), primarily attributed to the use of immunosuppressive drugs such as glucocorticoids, which may attenuate the response to vaccines. This meta-analysis assessed the serologic response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with IMIDs. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched on August 1, 2021, for observational studies. Data extracted included reference population, medications, vaccination, and proportion of patients achieving a serologic response. RESULTS: The analysis included 25 observational studies (5360 patients). Most of the studies used messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273), with a small number of studies including other types of vaccines (AZD1222, CoronaVac, BBV152, Ad26.COV2.S). Serologic response after 1 dose (6 studies) and 2 doses (17 studies) of mRNA vaccine were 73.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.7%-79.5%) and 83.4% (95% CI, 76.8%-88.4%), respectively. On meta-regression, anti-CD20 therapy was associated with lower response rates (P < .001) and anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy also showed a trend toward lower response rates (P = .058). Patients with IMIDs were less likely to achieve a serologic response compared with controls after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine (6 studies; odds ratio, 0.086; 95% CI, 0.036-0.206; P < .001). There were not enough studies to assess response to the adenoviral or inactivated vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that patients with IMIDs have a reduced response to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. These results suggest that IMID patients receiving mRNA vaccines should complete the vaccine series without delay and support the strategy of providing a third dose of the vaccine.

Worldwide association of lifestyle-related factors and COVID-19 mortality.

BACKGROUND: Several lifestyle-related factors, such as obesity and diabetes, have been identified as risk factors for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality. The objective of this study was to examine the global association between lifestyle-related factors and COVID-19 mortality using data from each individual country. METHODS: The association between prevalence of seven lifestyle-related factors (overweight, insufficient physical activity, smoking, type-2 diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, and age over 65) and COVID-19 mortality was assessed by linear and multivariable regression among 186 countries. The cumulative effect of lifestyle-related factors on COVID-19 mortality was assessed by dividing countries into four categories according to the number of lifestyle-related factors in the upper half range and comparing the mean mortality between groups. RESULTS: In linear regression, COVID-19 mortality was significantly associated with overweight, insufficient physical activity, hyperlipidaemia, and age ≥65. In multivariable regression, overweight and age ≥65 demonstrated significant association with COVID-19 mortality (p = .0039, .0094). Countries with more risk factors demonstrated greater COVID-19 mortality (P for trend <.001). CONCLUSION: Lifestyle-related factors, especially overweight and elderly population, were associated with increased COVID-19 mortality on a global scale. Global effort to reduce burden of lifestyle-related factors along with protection and vaccination of these susceptible groups may help reduce COVID-19 mortality.

COVID-19 reinfection: a rapid systematic review of case reports and case series.

The COVID-19 pandemic has infected millions of people worldwide and many countries have been suffering from a large number of deaths. Acknowledging the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to mutate into distinct strains as an RNA virus and investigating its potential to cause reinfection is important for future health policy guidelines. It was thought that individuals who recovered from COVID-19 generate a robust immune response and develop protective immunity; however, since the first case of documented reinfection of COVID-19 in August 2020, there have been a number of cases with reinfection. Many cases are lacking genomic data of the two infections, and it remains unclear whether they were caused by different strains. In the present study, we undertook a rapid systematic review to identify cases infected with different genetic strains of SARS-CoV-2 confirmed by PCR and viral genome sequencing. A total of 17 cases of genetically confirmed COVID-19 reinfection were found. One immunocompromised patient had mild symptoms with the first infection but developed severe symptoms resulting in death with the second infection. Overall, 68.8% (11/16) had similar severity; 18.8% (3/16) had worse symptoms; and 12.5% (2/16) had milder symptoms with the second episode. Our case series shows that reinfection with different strains is possible, and some cases may experience more severe infections with the second episode. The findings also suggest that COVID-19 may continue to circulate even after achieving herd immunity through natural infection or vaccination, suggesting the need for longer-term transmission mitigation efforts.

Population Difference in Allele Frequency of HLA-C*05 and Its Correlation with COVID-19 Mortality.

BACKGROUND: coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes severe illness including cytokine storms, but mortality among countries differs largely. In the present study, we investigated the association between human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class I, which plays a major role in susceptibility to viral infections, and the mortality of COVID-19. METHODS: data of allele frequencies of HLA-A, -B and -C and COVID-19 mortality were obtained for 74 countries from the Allele Frequency Net Database and worldometer.info. Association between allele frequency of each HLA and mortality was assessed by linear regression followed by multivariable regression. Subsequently, association of HLA-C*05 to its receptor KIR2DS4fl, expressed on natural killer (NK) cells, and differential mortality to historic pandemics were analyzed. RESULTS: HLA-A*01, -B*07, -B*08, -B*44 and -C*05 were significantly associated with the risk of deaths (adjusted p = 0.040, 0.00081, 0.047, 0.0022, 0.00032, respectively), but only HLA-C*05 remained statistically significant (p = 0.000027) after multivariable regression. A 1% increase in the allele frequency of HLA-C*05 was associated with an increase of 44 deaths/million. Countries with different mortality could be categorized by the distribution of HLA-C*05 and its receptor KIR2DS4fl, which in combination cause NK cell-induced hyperactive immune response. Countries with similar ethnic and/or geographic background responded in a similar pattern to each pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: we demonstrated that allele frequency of HLA-C*05 and the distribution pattern with its receptor KIR2DS4fl strongly correlated with COVID-19 mortality. Host genetic variance of innate immunity may contribute to the difference in mortality among various countries and further investigation using patient samples is warranted.

Prevalence and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The prevalence and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune diseases who are frequently treated with disease modifying therapies remains poorly understood. This meta-analysis aims to assess the prevalence and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in autoimmune diseases. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for observational and case-controlled studies. We sorted medications into glucocorticoids, conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) and biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARDs), which was also divided into monotherapy and b/tsDMARDs-csDMARDs combination therapy. RESULTS: We analysed 62 observational studies with a total of 319 025 patients with autoimmune diseases. The prevalence of COVID-19 was 0.011 (95% CI: 0.005 to 0.025). Meta-analysis of seven case-controlled studies demonstrated that the risk of COVID-19 in autoimmune diseases was significantly higher than in control patients (OR: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.05 to 4.58, p=0.038). Meta-regression analysis showed glucocorticoids were significantly associated with the risk of COVID-19. For clinical outcomes, we assessed 65 studies with 2766 patients with autoimmune diseases diagnosed with COVID-19. The rates of hospitalisation and mortality were 0.35 (95% CI: 0.23 to 0.50) and 0.066 (95% CI: 0.036 to 0.12), respectively. Glucocorticoids, csDMARDs and b/tsDMARDs-csDMARDs combination therapy increased the risk of these outcomes, whereas b/tsDMARDs monotherapy, particularly antitumour necrosis factor agents, were associated with a lower risk of hospitalisation and death. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that patients with autoimmune diseases had an increased risk of COVID-19, primarily attributed to glucocorticoid use. b/tsDMARDs monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of severe COVID-19 suggesting its safety in the COVID-19 pandemic.