ABSTRACT
Objectives: To evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). Method(s): These data are from the 'SAFER (Safety and Efficacy on COVID-19 Vaccine in Rheumatic Diseases)' study, a Brazilian multicentric longitudinal phase IV study to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine in immunomediated rheumatic diseases (IMRDs). Adverse events (AEs) in patients with RA were assessed after two doses of ChAdOx1 or CoronaVac. Stratification of postvaccination AEs was performed using a diary, filled out daily. The titers of neutralizing antibodies against the receptor-biding domain of SARS-CoV-2 (anti-RBD) were measured by chemilumine scence test after each dose of immunizers. Proportions between groups were compared using the Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables. Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) before and after vaccination was assessed using the McNemar test. Result(s): A total of 188 patients with RA were included in the study, most of them were female. CoronaVac was used in 109 patients and ChAdOx1 in 79. Only mild AEs were observed. The more common AEs after the first dose were pain at injection site (46,7%), headache (39,4%), arthralgia (39,4%) and myalgia (30,5%), and ChAdOx1 had a higher frequency of pain at the injection site (66% vs 32 %, p alpha 0.001) arthralgia (62% vs 22%, p alpha 0.001) and myalgia (45% vs 20%, p alpha 0.001) compared to CoronaVac. The more common AEs after the second dose were pain at the injection site (37%), arthralgia (31%), myalgia (23%) and headache (21%). Arthralgia (41,42 % vs 25 %, p = 0.02) and pain at injection site (51,43% vs 27%, p = 0.001) were more common with ChAdOx1. No patients had a flare after vaccination. The titers of anti-RBDafter two doses of ChAdOx1 were higher compared to two doses of CoronaVac (6,03 BAU/mL vs 4,67 BAU/mL, p alpha 0,001). Conclusion(s): The frequency of local adverse effects, particularly pain at injection site, was high. AEs were more frequent with ChAdOx1, especially after the first dose. The use of the immunizers dis not change the degree of inflammatory activity of the disease. In patients with RA, ChAdOx1 was more immunogenic than CoronaVac. .
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disease which presents infections as one of the most frequent complications, including more severe outcomes of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Immunization of these patients has been strongly recommended, however, data on safety are still scarce. In this study we evaluate the safety after vaccination against SARS-CoV2 in patients with SLE. Method(s): Safety and Efficacy on COVID-19 Vaccine in Rheumatic Disease - the 'SAFER' study, is a longitudinal Brazilian multicenter phase IV study. In this study patients with SLE (according to the 2019 ACR/EULAR criteria), older than 18 years who received vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 CoronaVac (Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine), ChadOx-1 (AstraZeneca) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) were included. The evaluation of adverse events (AEs) was done by telephone contact, symptom diaries and a face-to-face visit on the 28th day after each dose. Patients were followed up also by disease activity, assessed using SLEDAI-2 K score. Result(s): A total of 367 individuals with SLE were included, 207 received CoronaVac, 128 received ChadOx-1 and 32 received BNT162b2. Ninety percent of the subjects were female with a mean age of 37 years. About 50% (182) of patients were using oral glucocorticoids and azathioprine was the most frequent immunosuppressive therapy. Regarding disease activity parameters, 38%(140) of patients had zero SLEDAI-2Kat baseline and 41%(147) had zero SLEDAI-2 K 28 days after the 2nd dose. After the first and second dose the most frequent AEs were pain at injection site (58%/44%), headache (48%/33%) and pruritus (42%/37%). Comparing the three vaccines, after the first dose, local symptoms, myalgia, and fever were less frequent in patients who received CoronaVac (p alpha 0.001) as well as headache, tiredness (p = 0.001) and arthralgia (p = 0.003). After the second dose, only local symptoms such as pain at the application site and thickening of the skin around the application site were less frequent in the CoronaVac group (p alpha 0.05). Headache, tiredness, musculoskeletal symptoms and fever were more common in patients receiving AstraZeneca. No serious adverse events were reported regardless of the vaccination schedule used. Conclusion(s): This study suggests that vaccines against SARS-COV-2 are safe in SLE patients. Neither severe AEs were reported nor worsening of disease activity were reported. Comparing the different vaccines, CoronaVac had fewer adverse events.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: The use of glucocorticoids (GC) has been associated with increased risk of hospitalization for coronavirus infection and reduced immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in immune-mediated diseases (IMD) patients. However, there is still controversy of which dose of GC is correlated with impaired vaccine response on each of the diverse COVID-19 vaccines available, as well as the possible influence of other concurrent immunosuppressants. This study aimed at evaluating the effect of GC on serological response after two doses of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech), CoronaVac (inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine) and ChadOx1 (AstraZeneca) and after the booster dose in patients with IMD. Method(s): The data were extracted from a multicenter longitudinal observational Brazilian cohort (SAFER: Safety and Efficacy on COVID19 Vaccine in Rheumatic Disease). Patients >18 years of age with IMD were evaluated after 2 doses of the same vaccine against COVID-19 and after a booster vaccine, applied according to Brazilian National Immunization Program. All patients underwent clinical examination and collected blood samples for immunogenicity tests. Serological response was evaluated by Anti-RBD titers (IgG) at baseline and 4 weeks after each vaccine dose. Result(s): Among the 1009 patients evaluated, 301 were using GC (196/401 SLE, 52/199 RA and 27/74 vasculitis). Patients using GC were younger (38.2 vs 40,8 years, p = 0,002), had higherBMI (27,6 vs 26,4 p = 0,008), higher prevalence of kidney disease (3,3% vs 0,5%, p = 0,001) and of thrombosis (11,6% vs 5,9%, p = 0,002) than non-users. Regarding the type of vaccine, most of the GC users received CoronaVac (61.7%), while only 31.9%of non-users received this vaccine (p alpha 0.001). Although there were similar rates of pre-vaccination infections among them, patients with GC tended to have a higher incidence of confirmed COVID-19 infection after the 2nd dose of the vaccine compared to non-users (4.5% vs 2.0% p = 0.054). The antibody titers after the 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccines were similar between groups, but there was a worse response in the GC group after the 2nd dose (p = 0.039). However, this difference was not statistically significant after the 3rd dose (Figure). Conclusion(s): GC use may compromise vaccine-induced immunogenicity after a 2-dose regimen;however, this effect does not remain significant after the booster dose. Multivariate analysis is still pending to assess the potential difference in the impact of GC on the immune response depending on GC dose, type of vaccine and associated drugs.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: To evaluate the immunogenicity of ChAdOx1, Coronavac and BNT162B2 vaccines in SLE patients, including homologous and heterologous immunizations. Method(s): The 'Safety and efficacy on COVID-19 Vaccine in Rheumatic Disease-SAFER study' is a Brazilian multicentric longitudinal phase IV study to evaluate COVID-19 Vaccine in immune-mediated rheumatic diseases (IMRD) in real life, started on May 2021. SLE patients (according to the 2012 SLICC classification criteria), older than 18 years of age were recruited after 2 or 3 doses of vaccine against COVID-19 (ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and CoronaVac) and were evaluated at baseline and on the 28th day after each dose. Homologous immunization was considered if they received three doses of the same vaccine and heterologous if a different one was applied. IgG antibody against SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain were measured by chemiluminescence (SARS-CoV-2-IgG-II Quant assay, Abbott-Laboratories) at baseline and 28 days after the first, 2nd and 3rd doses (Seropositivity IgGSpike>= 7.1BAU/mL). Statistical analysis: ANOVA and pairwise comparisons tests Results: 316 SLE patients were included (255 heterologous and 61 homologous immunization), 89.2% were female and the mean age was 37.6 +/- 11.2 years. The two groups were homogeneous regarding demographical data, disease activity and immunosuppressive treatment. 49.7% used corticosteroids (alpha 5 mg/day in 52.3%), 83.5% antimalarials, 22.8% azathioprine and 20.3% mycophenolate mofetil. 207 patients received the first two doses with CoronaVac, 128 ChadOx-1 and 32 BNT162b2. Regarding the first two doses of the same vaccine, there was no difference in IgG titers over time between CoronaVac or ChadOx-1 (p = 0.313). IgG titers increased in all vaccine groups, with difference only after 2nd dose: 4.96 +/- 1.71BAU/mL CoronaVac vs. 6.00 +/- 1.99BAU/mL ChadOx-1 vs. 7.31 +/- 1.49BAU/mL BNT162b2 (p alpha 0.001). There was no difference in IgG titers over time between homologous or heterologous vaccine schedule (p = 0.872). IgG titers also increased in all groups, with difference only after 2nd dose: 5.49 +/- 1.96BAU/mL heterologous vs. 6.30 +/- 2.10BAU/mL homologous (p = 0.009). Conclusion(s): Induction of immunogenicity occurred in different vaccine regimens in SLE patients. Future research to explore different heterologous schemes in IMRD must be performed.
ABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate the incidence of COVID-19 and its main outcomes in rheumatic disease (RD) patients on hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) compared to household cohabitants (HC).Methods This is a 24-week nationwide prospective multi-centre cohort with a control group without RD and not using HCQ. All participants were monitored through scheduled phone interviews performed by health professionals. Details regarding COVID-19 symptoms, and epidemiological, clinical, and demographic data were recorded on a specific web-based platform. COVID-19 was defined according to the Brazilian Ministry of Health criteria and classified as mild, moderate or severe.Results A total of 9,585 participants, 5,164 (53.9%) RD patients on HCQ and 4,421 (46.1%) HC were enrolled from March 29th, 2020 to September 30th, 2020, according to the eligibility criteria. COVID-19 confirmed cases were higher in RD patients than in cohabitants [728 (14.1%) vs. 427 (9.7%), p<0.001] in a 24-week follow-up. However, there was no significant difference regarding outcomes related to moderate/ severe COVID-19 (7.1% and 7.3%, respectively, p=0.896). After multiple adjustments, risk factors associated with hospitalisation were age over 65 (HR=4.5;95%CI 1.35-15.04, p=0.014) and cardiopathy (HR=2.57;95%CI 1.12-5.91, p=0.026). The final survival analysis demonstrated the probability of dying in 180 days after a COVID-19 diagnosis was significantly higher in patients over 65 years (HR=20.8;95%CI 4.5-96.1) and with 2 or more comorbidities (HR=10.8;95%CI 1.1-107.9 and HR=24.8;95%CI 2.5-249.3, p=0.006, respectively).Conclusion Although RD patients have had a higher COVID-19 incidence than individuals from the same epidemiological background, the COVID-19 severity was related to traditional risk factors, particularly multiple comorbidities and age, and not to underlying RD and HCQ.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. Conclusion: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use. © 2022 Associacao de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Introdução: O novo coronavírus, SARS-CoV-2, causador da doença COVID-19, foi detectado em 31 de dezembro de 2019 em Wuhan, na China. A COVID-19 apresenta alta morbidade e mortalidade, e aproximadamente 15% dos casos confirmados progridem para fase severa da doença. A síndrome respiratória aguda grave (SRAG) e a falência múltipla de órgãos são as principais causas de morte pela COVID-19, provocadas pela resposta inflamatória sistêmica descontrolada. Estudos recentes sugerem que pacientes com COVID-19 internados em UTI apresentaram contagens reduzidas de linfócitos TCD4 e TCD8, mas ainda não está clara a relação das demais células como preditoras de gravidade da doença. Objetivo: Avaliar possíveis diferenças no perfil linfocitário de pacientes positivos para COVID-19 com quadro severo e não severo da doença. Material e métodos: Pacientes admitidos no Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA) entre junho/2020 e maio/2021 foram divididos em dois grupos quanto à severidade da COVID-19;grupo severo (GS): saturação de SpO2 < 93% em ar ambiente e/ou aumento da frequência respiratória > 30 batimentos/min e/ou relação PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 300 mmHg e grupo não severo (GNS): pacientes que não se enquadraram nesses critérios. A análise imunofenotípica da população linfocitária foi realizada na amostra de sangue periférico do hemograma no momento da admissão dos pacientes com resultado de RT-PCR positivo para o vírus. Foram adquiridos 100.000 eventos na região dos linfócitos no citômetro de fluxo FACSCanto II®. A aquisição foi realizada no software FACSDiva e os dados analisados no software Infinicyt TM 2.0. Foi utilizada plataforma dupla para a obtenção de valores absolutos das células, a partir da contagem de leucócitos. Resultados: Foram incluídos no estudo 72 indivíduos, com média de idade de 60,2 anos (25-94), desses, 39 foram do sexo masculino (54,2%). Foram incluídos 25 (18%) pacientes no GNS e 47 (82%) no GS. Em relação ao GNS, o GS apresentou um aumento na contagem de neutrófilos/μL (P = 0,002) e na relação neutrófilos/linfócitos (P < 0,001);além disso, apresentou diminuição na contagem de linfócitos/μL totais (P = 0,043). Quanto às subpopulações linfocitárias, as contagens de células CD3/μL (P = 0,020), CD8/μL (P = 0,020) e NK/μL (P = 0,029) encontraram-se diminuídas, assim como das células TCD4/μL de memória central (P = 0,047), memória efetora (P = 0,020), e TCD8/μL de memória central (P = 0,002), memória efetora (P = 0,013) e efetora tardia (P = 0,032). Não foram encontradas diferenças significativas na contagem de CD4/μL, nem de linfócitos B entre os dois grupos. Discussão: Sabe-se que os linfócitos TCD8 desempenham função importante no clearance viral, sendo capazes de secretar moléculas como perforina, granzimas e IFN-γ. A redução dos linfócitos tem sido explicada tanto pela ação direta do vírus, como pela redistribuição das células para os órgãos alvo. Nossos resultados confirmaram a redução do número de linfócitos TCD8 e do número de células NK no grupo de indivíduos com a forma severa da COVID-19, o que sugere que a resposta imune contra as infecções virais depende da ativação de linfócitos TCD8 e que isto é crítico para a recuperação dos pacientes. Entretanto, outros estudos avaliando marcadores de ativação celular e em demais amostras, como lavado broncoalveolar, são necessários para confirmar esses achados.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: To determine the main risk factors associated with COVID-19 in SLE patients. Methods: The Reuma CoV Brazil is a multicenter, observational, prospective cohort designed to monitor immune-mediated rheumatic diseases patients during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Brazil. SLE adult patients according to SLE SLICC criteria classification (2012), with and without (control group-CG) COVID-19 diagnosis were matched. Demographic data, managing of COVID-19, comorbidities, clinical characteristics (disease activity: Patient Report Outcomes-PROs, Physician Global Assessment and SLEDAI-2 K)were collected. Results: From May 2020 to January 2021, 604 SLE patients were included, 317 (52.4%) with COVID-19 and 287 (47.6%) in the CG. Both groups were homogeneous and comparable regarding sex and comorbidities. SLE patients with COVID-19 declared a lower level of social isolation (49.5% vs. 61.9%;p = 0.002), worked more commonly in health professions (10.4% vs. 3.5%;p = 0.002), presented more frequently joint (32.5% vs. 22.0%;p = 0.004) and hematological manifestations (18.0% vs. 11.5%;p = 0.025). SLEDAI-2 K did not differ among groups prior and after COVID-19 infection. However, considering the mean duration of COVID-19 symptoms (12.1 ± 8.8 days), infected patients had more severe disease activity's PROs after resolution of COVID-19 symptoms (2.9 ± 2.9 vs. 2.3 ± 2.6;p = 0.031). The hospitalization rate was 20.5% (n = 65), of whom 23 (7.2%) needed intensive care unit and 14 (4.4%) patients died. Hypertension [5,26 (1,9714,07);p = 0.001] and recently cyclophosphamide pulses [39,21 (4,17-368,53);p = 0.001] were associated with hospitalization and patients who received telemedicine medical care presented 72% less chance of hospitalization [0.28 (0.09-0.83);p = 0.023). Conclusion: COVID-19 was associated with a lower level of declared social isolation and more severe disease activity perception after SARS-CoV-2 infection according to PROs. Hypertension and cyclophosphamide were associated with hospitalization and telemedicine can be a useful tool for SLE patients with COVID-19. These data should be considered to perform public health policy and national guidelines to manage SLE patients during the pandemic, as well as to prioritize some special groups for the immunization program.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the incidence of COVID-19 and its main outcomes in rheumatic disease (RD) patients on hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) compared to household cohabitants (HC). METHODS: This is a 24-week nationwide prospective multi-centre cohort with a control group without RD and not using HCQ. All participants were monitored through scheduled phone interviews performed by health professionals. Details regarding COVID-19 symptoms, and epidemiological, clinical, and demographic data were recorded on a specific web-based platform. COVID-19 was defined according to the Brazilian Ministry of Health criteria and classified as mild, moderate or severe. RESULTS: A total of 9,585 participants, 5,164 (53.9%) RD patients on HCQ and 4,421 (46.1%) HC were enrolled from March 29th, 2020 to September 30th, 2020, according to the eligibility criteria. COVID-19 confirmed cases were higher in RD patients than in cohabitants [728 (14.1%) vs. 427 (9.7%), p<0.001] in a 24-week follow-up. However, there was no significant difference regarding outcomes related to moderate/ severe COVID-19 (7.1% and 7.3%, respectively, p=0.896). After multiple adjustments, risk factors associated with hospitalisation were age over 65 (HR=4.5;95%CI 1.35-15.04, p=0.014) and cardiopathy (HR=2.57;95%CI 1.12-5.91, p=0.026). The final survival analysis demonstrated the probability of dying in 180 days after a COVID-19 diagnosis was significantly higher in patients over 65 years (HR=20.8;95%CI 4.5-96.1) and with 2 or more comorbidities (HR=10.8;95%CI 1.1-107.9 and HR=24.8;95%CI 2.5-249.3, p=0.006, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although RD patients have had a higher COVID-19 incidence than individuals from the same epidemiological background, the COVID-19 severity was related to traditional risk factors, particularly multiple comorbidities and age, and not to underlying RD and HCQ.