Changes in Behavior After Vaccination and Opinions Toward Mask Wearing: Thoracic Oncology Patient-Reported Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 vaccines, face masks, and social distancing are effective interventions to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections. In this study, we aimed to determine lung cancer patients' attitudes toward vaccination, changes in behavior after vaccination, and willingness to continue mask wearing after the pandemic. Methods: We sent out questionnaires to 220 thoracic oncology patients treated at our lung cancer center in May 2021. The questionnaire focused on patients' vaccination status, self-reported experiences surrounding vaccination, and assessed changes in behaviors before and after vaccination as well as opinions toward mask wearing after the pandemic. Results are presented as absolute and relative frequencies and means with standard deviation and compared using t test, paired t test, and analysis of variance test as well as chi2 test, and Fisher exact text. Results: About 91.0% of patients reported having received at least 1 vaccination. About 73.3% of patients reported having at least 1 reaction to the vaccination. The most common reactions were pain at the injection site, fatigue, and headache. After vaccination, patients increased contact with family and friends, use of public transport, and grocery shopping. Overall, the level of willingness to wear masks beyond the end of the pandemic differed according to vaccination status. Conclusions: Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination among thoracic oncology patients in Germany was high. Overall, patients with thoracic malignancies tolerated the COVID-19 vaccination well. Rate of adverse reaction was not higher compared with the general population. After the vaccination, patients increased social contacts and usage of public transport. These changes suggest positive psychological effects on quality of life. While reducing social distancing can increase the risk of infection, our results indicate that an extension of mask mandates after the pandemic would likely be accepted by a majority of thoracic oncology patients, suggesting that our cohort was still aware and in support of other measure of protection.

Changes in Behavior After Vaccination and Opinions Toward Mask Wearing: Thoracic Oncology Patient–Reported Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background: The COVID-19 vaccines, face masks, and social distancing are effective interventions to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections. In this study, we aimed to determine lung cancer patients’ attitudes toward vaccination, changes in behavior after vaccination, and willingness to continue mask wearing after the pandemic. Methods: We sent out questionnaires to 220 thoracic oncology patients treated at our lung cancer center in May 2021. The questionnaire focused on patients’ vaccination status, self-reported experiences surrounding vaccination, and assessed changes in behaviors before and after vaccination as well as opinions toward mask wearing after the pandemic. Results are presented as absolute and relative frequencies and means with standard deviation and compared using t test, paired t test, and analysis of variance test as well as chi2 test, and Fisher exact text. Results: About 91.0% of patients reported having received at least 1 vaccination. About 73.3% of patients reported having at least 1 reaction to the vaccination. The most common reactions were pain at the injection site, fatigue, and headache. After vaccination, patients increased contact with family and friends, use of public transport, and grocery shopping. Overall, the level of willingness to wear masks beyond the end of the pandemic differed according to vaccination status. Conclusions: Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination among thoracic oncology patients in Germany was high. Overall, patients with thoracic malignancies tolerated the COVID-19 vaccination well. Rate of adverse reaction was not higher compared with the general population. After the vaccination, patients increased social contacts and usage of public transport. These changes suggest positive psychological effects on quality of life. While reducing social distancing can increase the risk of infection, our results indicate that an extension of mask mandates after the pandemic would likely be accepted by a majority of thoracic oncology patients, suggesting that our cohort was still aware and in support of other measure of protection.

Antibody response after COVID-19 vaccination in intravenous immunoglobulin-treated immune neuropathies.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study assessed the prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in therapeutic immunoglobulin and their impact on serological response to COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in patients with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg)-treated chronic immune neuropathies. METHODS: Forty-six samples of different brands or lots of IVIg or subcutaneous IgG were analyzed for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay. Blood sera from 16 patients with immune neuropathies were prospectively analyzed for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA, IgG, and IgM before and 1 week after IVIg infusion subsequent to consecutive COVID-19 mRNA vaccine doses and after 12 weeks. These were compared to 42 healthy subjects. RESULTS: Twenty-four (52%) therapeutic immunoglobulin samples contained anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG. All patients with immune neuropathies (mean age = 65 ± 16 years, 25% female) were positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG after COVID-19 vaccination. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA titers significantly decreased 12-14 weeks after vaccination (p = 0.02), whereas IgG titers remained stable (p = 0.2). IVIg did not significantly reduce intraindividual anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA/IgG serum titers in immune neuropathies (p = 0.69). IVIg-derived anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG did not alter serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG decrease after IVIg administration (p = 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that IVIg does not impair the antibody response to COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in a short-term observation, when administered a minimum of 2 weeks after each vaccine dose. The infusion of current IVIg preparations that contain anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG does not significantly alter serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers.

COVID-19 in Recent Lung Transplant Recipients: Clinical Outcomes and Management Strategies.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 causes a wide range of symptoms, with particularly high risk of severe respiratory failure and death in patients with predisposing risk factors such as advanced age or obesity. Recipients of solid organ transplants, and in particular lung transplantation, are more susceptible to viral infection owing to immune suppressive medication. As little is known about the SARS-CoV-2 infection in these patients, this study was undertaken to describe outcomes and potential management strategies in early COVID-19 infection early after lung transplantation. METHODS: We describe the incidence and outcome of COVID-19 in a cohort of recent lung transplant recipients in Munich. Six of 186 patients who underwent lung transplantation in the period between March 2019 and March 2021 developed COVID-19 within the first year after transplantation. We documented the clinical course and laboratory changes for all patients showing differences in the severity of the infection with COVID-19 and their outcomes. RESULTS: Three of 6 SARS-CoV-2 infections were hospital-acquired and the patients were still in inpatient treatment after lung transplantation. All patients suffered from symptoms. One patient did not receive antiviral therapy. Remdesivir was prescribed in 4 patients and the remaining patient received remdesivir, bamlanivimab and convalescent plasma. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 does not appear to cause milder disease in lung transplant recipients compared with the general population. Immunosuppression is potentially responsible for the delayed formation of antibodies and their premature loss. Several comorbidities and a general poor preoperative condition showed an extended hospital stay.

Integrating Transwomen and Female Athletes with Differences of Sex Development (DSD) into Elite Competition: The FIMS 2021 Consensus Statement.

Sport is historically designated by the binary categorization of male and female that conflicts with modern society. Sport's governing bodies should consider reviewing rules determining the eligibility of athletes in the female category as there may be lasting advantages of previously high testosterone concentrations for transwomen athletes and currently high testosterone concentrations in differences in sex development (DSD) athletes. The use of serum testosterone concentrations to regulate the inclusion of such athletes into the elite female category is currently the objective biomarker that is supported by most available scientific literature, but it has limitations due to the lack of sports performance data before, during or after testosterone suppression. Innovative research studies are needed to identify other biomarkers of testosterone sensitivity/responsiveness, including molecular tools to determine the functional status of androgen receptors. The scientific community also needs to conduct longitudinal studies with specific control groups to generate the biological and sports performance data for individual sports to inform the fair inclusion or exclusion of these athletes. Eligibility of each athlete to a sport-specific policy needs to be based on peer-reviewed scientific evidence made available to policymakers from all scientific communities. However, even the most evidence-based regulations are unlikely to eliminate all differences in performance between cisgender women with and without DSD and transwomen athletes. Any remaining advantage held by transwomen or DSD women could be considered as part of the athlete's unique makeup.

Attenuated early inflammatory response in solid organ recipients with COVID-19.

Immunosuppression leaves transplanted patients at particular risk for severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The specific features of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in immunosuppressed patients are largely unknown and therapeutic experience is lacking. Seven transplanted patients (two liver, three kidneys, one double lung, one heart) admitted to the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich because of COVID-19 and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were included. The clinical course and the clinical findings were extracted from the medical record. The two liver transplant patients and the heart transplant patient had an uncomplicated course and were discharged after 14, 18, and 12 days, respectively. Two kidney transplant recipients were intubated within 48 hours. One kidney and the lung transplant recipients were required to intubate after 10 and 15 days, respectively. Immunosuppression was adapted in five patients, but continued in all patients. Compared to non-transplanted patients at the ICU (n = 19) the inflammatory response was attenuated in transplanted patients, which was proven by decreased IL-6 blood values. This analysis might provide evidence that continuous immunosuppression is safe and probably beneficial since there was no hyperinflammation evident. Although transplanted patients might be more susceptible to an infection with SARS-CoV-2, their clinical course seems to be similar to immunocompetent patients.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in two patients following recent lung transplantation.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global health problem with pandemic character. Lung transplant recipients may be particularly at risk due to the high degree of immunosuppression and the lung being the organ primarily affected by COVID-19. We describe a 16-year-old male and a 64-year-old female recently lung transplanted patients with COVID-19 during inpatient rehabilitation. Both patients were receiving triple immunosuppressive therapy and had no signs of allograft dysfunction. Both patients had close contact with a person who developed COVID-19 and were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Subsequently, both patients underwent systematic screening and SARS-CoV-2 was ultimately detected. Although the 16-year-old boy was completely asymptomatic, the 64-year-old woman developed only mild COVID-19. Immunosuppressive therapy was unchanged and no experimental treatment was initiated. No signs of graft involvement or dysfunction were noticed. In conclusion, our report of patients with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and mild COVID-19, respectively, may indicate that lung transplant recipients are not per se at risk for severe COVID-19. Further observations and controlled trials are urgently needed to study SARS-CoV-2 infection in lung transplant recipients.