Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Elife ; 102021 09 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1468709

ABSTRACT

Age is the major risk factor for mortality after SARS-CoV-2 infection and older people have received priority consideration for COVID-19 vaccination. However, vaccine responses are often suboptimal in this age group and few people over the age of 80 years were included in vaccine registration trials. We determined the serological and cellular response to spike protein in 100 people aged 80-96 years at 2 weeks after the second vaccination with the Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. Antibody responses were seen in every donor with high titers in 98%. Spike-specific cellular immune responses were detectable in only 63% and correlated with humoral response. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection substantially increased antibody responses after one vaccine and antibody and cellular responses remained 28-fold and 3-fold higher, respectively, after dual vaccination. Post-vaccine sera mediated strong neutralization of live Victoria infection and although neutralization titers were reduced 14-fold against the P.1 variant first discovered in Brazil they remained largely effective. These data demonstrate that the mRNA vaccine platform delivers strong humoral immunity in people up to 96 years of age and retains broad efficacy against the P.1 variant of concern.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , RNA, Messenger/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Age Factors , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Broadly Neutralizing Antibodies/immunology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/metabolism , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Female , Humans , Immunity, Cellular , Immunity, Humoral/immunology , Male , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Vaccination/methods
2.
Lancet Healthy Longev ; 2(9): e554-e560, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1433992

ABSTRACT

Background: In several countries, extended interval COVID-19 vaccination regimens are now used to accelerate population coverage, but the relative immunogenicity of different vaccines in older people remains uncertain. In this study we aimed to assess the antibody and cellular responses of older people after a single dose of either the BNT162b2 vaccine (tozinameran; Pfizer-BioNTech) or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (Oxford University-AstraZeneca). Methods: Participants aged 80 years or older, who did not live in a residential or care home or require assisted living, and had received a single dose of either the BNT162b2 vaccine or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine were eligible to participate. Participants were recruited through local primary care networks in the West Midlands, UK. Blood samples and dried blood spots were taken 5-6 weeks after vaccination to assess adaptive immune responses using Elecsys electrochemiluminescence immunoassay and cellular responses by ELISpot. Primary endpoints were percentage response and quantification of adaptive immunity. Findings: Between Dec 29, 2020, and Feb 28, 2021, 165 participants were recruited and included in the analysis. 76 participants had received BNT162b2 (median age 84 years, IQR 82-89; range 80-98) and 89 had received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (median age 84 years, 81-87; 80-99). Antibody responses against the spike protein were detectable in 69 (93%) of 74 BNT162b2 vaccine recipients and 77 (87%) of 89 ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine recipients. Median antibody titres were of 19·3 U/mL (7·4-79·4) in the BNT162b2 vaccine recipients and 19·6 U/mL (6·1-60·0) in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine recipients (p=0·41). Spike protein-specific T-cell responses were observed in nine (12%) of 73 BNT162b2 vaccine recipients and 27 (31%) of 88 ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine recipients, and median responses were three-times higher in ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine recipients (24 spots per 1 × 106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells) than BNT162b2 vaccine recipients (eight spots per 1 × 106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells; p<0·0001). Humoral and cellular immune responses against spike protein were correlated in both cohorts. Evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was seen in eight participants (n=5 BNT162b2 recipients and n=3 ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 recipients), and was associated with 691-times and four-times increase in humoral and cellular immune responses across the whole cohort. Interpretation: Single doses of either BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in older people induces humoral immunity in most participants, and is markedly enhanced by previous infection. Cellular responses were weaker, but showed enhancement after the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine at the 5-6 week timepoint. Funding: Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, and National Core Studies.

4.
Immun Ageing ; 18(1): 34, 2021 Aug 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1363561

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have shown clinical efficacy against Covid-19 infection but there remains uncertainty about the immune responses elicited by different regimens. This is a particularly important question for older people who are at increased clinical risk following infection and in whom immune senescence may limit vaccine responses. The BNT162b2 mRNA and ChAdOx1 adenovirus vaccines were the first two vaccines deployed in the UK programme using an 8-12 week 'extended interval'. OBJECTIVES: We undertook analysis of the spike-specific antibody and cellular immune response in 131 participants aged 80+ years after the second dose of 'extended interval' dual vaccination with either BNT162b2 mRNA (n = 54) or ChAdOx1 (n = 77) adenovirus vaccine. Blood samples were taken 2-3 weeks after second vaccine and were paired with samples taken at 5-weeks after first vaccine which have been reported previously. Antibody responses were measured using the Elecsys® electrochemiluminescence immunoassay assay and cellular responses were assessed by IFN-γ ELISpot. RESULTS: Antibody responses against spike protein became detectable in all donors following dual vaccination with either vaccine. 4 donors had evidence of previous natural infection which is known to boost vaccine responses. Within the 53 infection-naïve donors the median antibody titre was 4030 U/ml (IQR 1892-8530) following BNT162b2 dual vaccination and 1405 (IQR 469.5-2543) in the 74 patients after the ChAdOx1 vaccine (p = < 0.0001). Spike-specific T cell responses were observed in 30% and 49% of mRNA and ChAdOx1 recipients respectively and median responses were 1.4-times higher in ChAdOx1 vaccinees at 14 vs 20 spots/million respectively (p = 0.022). CONCLUSION: Dual vaccination with BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 induces strong humoral immunity in older people following an extended interval protocol. Antibody responses are 2.9-times higher following the mRNA regimen whilst cellular responses are 1.4-times higher with the adenovirus-based vaccine. Differential patterns of immunogenicity are therefore elicited from the two vaccine platforms. It will be of interest to assess the relative stability of immune responses after these homologous vaccine regimens in order to assess the potential need for vaccine boosting. Furthermore, these findings indicate that heterologous vaccine platforms may offer the opportunity to further optimize vaccine responses.

5.
Roeker, Lindsey E.; Scarfo, Lydia, Chatzikonstantinou, Thomas, Abrisqueta, Pau, Eyre, Toby A.; Cordoba, Raul, Muntañola Prat, Ana, Villacampa, Guillermo, Leslie, Lori A.; Koropsak, Michael, Quaresmini, Giulia, Allan, John N.; Furman, Richard R.; Bhavsar, Erica B.; Pagel, John M.; Hernandez-Rivas, Jose Angel, Patel, Krish, Motta, Marina, Bailey, Neil, Miras, Fatima, Lamanna, Nicole, Alonso, Rosalia, Osorio-Prendes, Santiago, Vitale, Candida, Kamdar, Manali, Baltasar, Patricia, Österborg, Anders, Hanson, Lotta, Baile, Mónica, Rodríguez-Hernández, Ines, Valenciano, Susana, Popov, Viola Maria, Barez Garcia, Abelardo, Alfayate, Ana, Oliveira, Ana C.; Eichhorst, Barbara, Quaglia, Francesca M.; Reda, Gianluigi, Lopez Jimenez, Javier, Varettoni, Marzia, Marchetti, Monia, Romero, Pilar, Riaza Grau, Rosalía, Munir, Talha, Zabalza, Amaya, Janssens, Ann, Niemann, Carsten U.; Perini, Guilherme Fleury, Delgado, Julio, Yanez San Segundo, Lucrecia, Gómez Roncero, Ma Isabel, Wilson, Matthew, Patten, Piers, Marasca, Roberto, Iyengar, Sunil, Seddon, Amanda, Torres, Ana, Ferrari, Angela, Cuéllar-García, Carolina, Wojenski, Daniel, El-Sharkawi, Dima, Itchaki, Gilad, Parry, Helen, Mateos-Mazón, Juan José, Martinez-Calle, Nicolas, Ma, Shuo, Naya, Daniel, Van Der Spek, Ellen, Seymour, Erlene K.; Gimeno Vázquez, Eva, Rigolin, Gian Matteo, Mauro, Francesca Romana, Walter, Harriet S.; Labrador, Jorge, De Paoli, Lorenzo, Laurenti, Luca, Ruiz, Elena, Levin, Mark-David, Šimkovič, Martin, Špaček, Martin, Andreu, Rafa, Walewska, Renata, Perez-Gonzalez, Sonia, Sundaram, Suchitra, Wiestner, Adrian, Cuesta, Amalia, Broom, Angus, Kater, Arnon P.; Muiña, Begoña, Velasquez, César A.; Ujjani, Chaitra S.; Seri, Cristina, Antic, Darko, Bron, Dominique, Vandenberghe, Elisabeth, Chong, Elise A.; Lista, Enrico, García, Fiz Campoy, Del Poeta, Giovanni, Ahn, Inhye, Pu, Jeffrey J.; Brown, Jennifer R.; Soler Campos, Juan Alfonso, Malerba, Lara, Trentin, Livio, Orsucci, Lorella, Farina, Lucia, Villalon, Lucia, Vidal, Maria Jesus, Sanchez, Maria Jose, Terol, Maria Jose, De Paolis, Maria Rosaria, Gentile, Massimo, Davids, Matthew S.; Shadman, Mazyar, Yassin, Mohamed A.; Foglietta, Myriam, Jaksic, Ozren, Sportoletti, Paolo, Barr, Paul M.; Ramos, Rafael, Santiago, Raquel, Ruchlemer, Rosa, Kersting, Sabina, Huntington, Scott F.; Herold, Tobias, Herishanu, Yair, Thompson, Meghan C.; Lebowitz, Sonia, Ryan, Christine, Jacobs, Ryan W.; Portell, Craig A.; Isaac, Krista, Rambaldi, Alessandro, Nabhan, Chadi, Brander, Danielle M.; Montserrat, Emili, Rossi, Giuseppe, Garcia-Marco, Jose A.; Coscia, Marta, Malakhov, Nikita, Fernandez-Escalada, Noemi, Skånland, Sigrid Strand, Coombs, Callie C.; Ghione, Paola, Schuster, Stephen J.; Foà, Robin, Cuneo, Antonio, Bosch, Francesc, Stamatopoulos, Kostas, Ghia, Paolo, Mato, Anthony R.; Patel, Meera.
Blood ; 136(Supplement 1):45-49, 2020.
Article in English | PMC | ID: covidwho-1338959

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Patients (pts) with CLL may be at particular risk of severe COVID-19 given advanced age and immune dysregulation. Two large series with limited follow-up have reported outcomes for pts with CLL and COVID-19 (Scarfò, et al. Leukemia 2020;Mato, et al. Blood 2020). To provide maximal clarity on outcomes for pts with CLL and COVID-19, we partnered in a worldwide effort to describe the clinical experience and validate predictors of survival, including potential treatment effects.Methods: This international collaboration represents a partnership between investigators at 141 centers. Data are presented in two cohorts. Cohort 1 (Co1) includes pts captured through efforts by European Research Initiative on CLL (ERIC), Italian CAMPUS CLL Program, and Grupo Español de Leucemia Linfática Crónica. The validation cohort, Cohort 2 (Co2), includes pts from US (66%), UK (23%), EU (7%), and other countries (4%). There is no overlap in cases between cohorts.CLL pts were included if COVID-19 was diagnosed by PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 and they required inpatient hospitalization. Data were collected retrospectively 2/2020 - 5/2020 using standardized case report forms. Baseline characteristics, preexisting comorbidities (including cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS) score ≥6 vs. <6), CLL treatment history, details regarding COVID-19 course, management, and therapy, and vital status were collected.The primary endpoint of this study was to estimate the case fatality rate (CFR), defined as the proportion of pts who died among all pts hospitalized with COVID-19. Chi-squared test was used to compare frequencies;univariable and multivariable analyses utilized Cox regression. Predictors of inferior OS in both Co1 and Co2 were included in multivariable analyses. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) from time of COVID-19 diagnosis (dx).Results: 411 hospitalized, COVID-19 positive CLL pts were analyzed (Co1 n=281, Co2 n=130). Table 1 describes baseline characteristics. At COVID-19 dx, median age was 72 in Co1 (range 37-94) and 68 in Co2 (range 41-98);31% (Co1) and 45% (Co2) had CIRS ≥6. In Co1, 48% were treatment-naïve and 26% were receiving CLL-directed therapy at COVID-19 dx (66% BTKi ± anti-CD20, 19% Venetoclax ± anti-CD20, 9.6% chemo/chemoimmunotherapy (CIT), 1.4% PI3Ki, 4% other). In Co2, 36% were never treated and 49% were receiving CLL-directed therapy (65% BTKi ± anti-CD20, 19% Venetoclax ± anti-CD20, 9.4% multi-novel agent combinations, 1.6% CIT, 1.6% PI3Ki, 1.6% anti-CD20 monotherapy, 1.6% other). Most pts receiving CLL-directed therapy had it held at COVID-19 diagnosis (93% in Co1 and 81% in Co2).Frequency of most COVID-19 symptoms/laboratory abnormalities were similar in the two cohorts including fever (88% in both), lymphocytosis (ALC ≥30 x 109/L;27% vs. 21%), and lymphocytopenia (ALC <1.0 x 109/L;18% vs. 28%), while others varied between Co1 and Co2 (p<0.0001), including cough (61% vs. 93%), dyspnea (60% vs. 84%), fatigue (13% vs. 77%).Median follow-up was 24 days (range 2-86) in Co1 and 17 days (1-43) in Co2. CFRs were similar in Co1 and Co2, 30% and 34% (p=0.45). 54% and 43% were discharged while 16% and 23% remained admitted at last follow-up in Co1 and Co2, respectively. The proportion of pts requiring supplemental oxygen was similar (89% vs. 92%) while rate of ICU admission was higher in Co2 (20% vs. 48%, p<0.0001). Figure 1 depicts OS in each cohort. Univariable analyses demonstrated that age and CIRS ≥6 significantly predicted inferior OS in both cohorts, while only age remained an independent predictor of inferior OS in multivariable analyses (Table 2). Prior treatment for CLL (vs. observation) predicted inferior OS in Co1 but not Co2.Conclusions : In the largest cancer dx-specific cohort reported, pts with CLL hospitalized for COVID-19 had a CFR of 30-34%. Advanced patient age at COVID-19 diagnosis was an independent predictor of OS in two large cohorts. This CFR will serve as a benchmark for mortality for future outcomes studies, including thera eutic interventions for COVID-19 in this population. The effect of CLL treatment on OS was inconsistent across cohorts;COVID-19 may be severe regardless of treatment status. While there were no significant differences in distribution of current lines of therapy between cohorts, prior chemo exposure was more common in Co1 vs. Co2, which may account for difference in OS. Extended follow-up will be presented.

6.
Blood ; 138(18): 1768-1773, 2021 11 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1322916
7.
Euro Surveill ; 26(12)2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1154193

ABSTRACT

Sera were collected from 185 adults aged ≥ 70 years in London to evaluate the immune response to COVID-19 vaccines. A single dose of Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine resulted in > 94% seropositivity after 3 weeks in naïve individuals using the Roche Spike antibody assay, while two doses produced very high spike antibody levels, significantly higher than convalescent sera from mild-to-moderate PCR-confirmed adult cases. Our findings support the United Kingdom's approach of prioritising the first dose and delaying the second dose of COVID-19 vaccine.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibody Formation , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Humans , London
8.
Blood ; 136(10): 1134-1143, 2020 09 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-656981

ABSTRACT

Given advanced age, comorbidities, and immune dysfunction, chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients may be at particularly high risk of infection and poor outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Robust analysis of outcomes for CLL patients, particularly examining effects of baseline characteristics and CLL-directed therapy, is critical to optimally manage CLL patients through this evolving pandemic. CLL patients diagnosed with symptomatic COVID-19 across 43 international centers (n = 198) were included. Hospital admission occurred in 90%. Median age at COVID-19 diagnosis was 70.5 years. Median Cumulative Illness Rating Scale score was 8 (range, 4-32). Thirty-nine percent were treatment naive ("watch and wait"), while 61% had received ≥1 CLL-directed therapy (median, 2; range, 1-8). Ninety patients (45%) were receiving active CLL therapy at COVID-19 diagnosis, most commonly Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi's; n = 68/90 [76%]). At a median follow-up of 16 days, the overall case fatality rate was 33%, though 25% remain admitted. Watch-and-wait and treated cohorts had similar rates of admission (89% vs 90%), intensive care unit admission (35% vs 36%), intubation (33% vs 25%), and mortality (37% vs 32%). CLL-directed treatment with BTKi's at COVID-19 diagnosis did not impact survival (case fatality rate, 34% vs 35%), though the BTKi was held during the COVID-19 course for most patients. These data suggest that the subgroup of CLL patients admitted with COVID-19, regardless of disease phase or treatment status, are at high risk of death. Future epidemiologic studies are needed to assess severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection risk, these data should be validated independently, and randomized studies of BTKi's in COVID-19 are needed to provide definitive evidence of benefit.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/complications , Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Adult , Agammaglobulinaemia Tyrosine Kinase/antagonists & inhibitors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...