Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-316788

ABSTRACT

Background: Cancer patients are vulnerable populations for COVID-19 complications and mortality. We previously reported on the poor single-dose immunogenicity of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in cancer patients, particularly those with haematological malignancies. Methods: In this prospective, observational study relating to the safety and immunogenicity of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, 201 vaccinated cancer patients (solid cancer n=125;haematological cancer n=76) and 54 healthy controls (mostly health-care workers “HCW”) were recruited between December 8th, 2020, and April 23rd, 2021. The previously reported interim results covered a period of 101 days since first patient recruitment, during which time 47 subjects received a second “boost” vaccination on day 21. Because of the change in UK Government policy, all others received a delayed vaccine boost at about 12 weeks after their first vaccination, and had their blood sampled 2 weeks’ later. Here, we describe immunogenicity data following the delayed boost in 31 HCWs, 72 solid cancer and 56 haematological cancer patients. Seroconversion, virus neutralisation, and T cell assays were as described previously, with an additional test for neutralisation of the B.1.617.2 (delta) variant-ofconcern (VOC). The primary endpoint of the study was the impact on seroconversion following delayed (>21days) vaccine boosting in solid and haematological cancer patients. The secondary endpoints were: safety following delayed vaccine boost;T cell responses;and neutralisation of SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan (“wild type” [WT]), B.1.1.7 (alpha), and B.1.617.2 (delta) variants.Findings: Delayed (>21days) boost vaccination of solid cancer patients and haematological cancer patients with the BNT162b2 vaccine was well tolerated, as the primary vaccination had been. There was no vaccine-associated death. Boosting significantly increased solid cancer patients’ seroconversion responses, that had been strikingly poor in response to a single dose: from 38% to 84%. Boosting also significantly improved vaccine immunogenicity for haematological cancer patients, but most (57%) still failed to seroconvert. Seroconversion correlated strongly with the capacity to neutralise SARSCoV- 2 cell entry, although neutralisation of the WT variant was typically greater than of the VOC. Neutralisation was significantly increased by boosting for HCWs but not for cancer patients. In comparison to seroconversion, boosting achieved higher rates of functional T cell responsiveness (de novo responses) but had little impact on the magnitude of T cell responses for those who had responded to first-dose vaccination. When patients were scored as showing both seroconversion and T cell responses, the unfavourable situation of haematological cancer patients was overt with only 36% (12/33) defined as being responders compared to 78% (25/32) of solid cancer patients and 88% (15/17) of HCWs. There was no significant difference in any aspect of immunogenicity for HCWs or solid cancer patients receiving the delayed boost versus the day 21 boost (this comparison could not be made for haematological cancer patients because too few received an early boost). Chemotherapy within 15 days either side of the boost exacerbated the likelihood of non-responsiveness to the vaccine.Interpretation: Boosting at either 3 weeks or longer (up to 12 weeks) post-primary vaccination shows high efficacy in terms of seroconversion of solid cancer patients and increases in their SARS-CoV-2 Spike-specific antibody titres. By contrast, delayed boosting left most haematological cancer patients without serological protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection. These data support the ongoing adjustment of health care measures to limit the evident vulnerability of such individuals to SARS-CoV- 2, and to limit their potential to transmit virus variants that might develop in the context of absent or partial immunoprotection. The absence of any clear improvements in immunogenicity of a delayed boost relative to boosting on day 21 emphasizes the importan e of early boosting for cancer patients, and potentially of doing so repeatedly, particularly given how well the vaccine was tolerated. Chemotherapy, if possible should be withheld 15 days before and 15 days after the vaccination date.Trial Registration: The trial is registered with the NHS Health Research Authority (HRA) and Health and Care Research Wales (HCRW) (REC ID: 20/HRA/2031).Funding: KCL, CRUK, Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Wellcome Trust, Rosetrees Trust, Francis Crick Institute.Declaration of Interest: None to declare. Ethical Approval: The trial was approved by the institutional review boards of the participating institutions (IRAS ID: 282337 REC ID: 20/HRA/2031).

3.
Lancet Oncol ; 22(6): 765-778, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1531901

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety profiles of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with cancer is unknown. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine in patients with cancer. METHODS: For this prospective observational study, we recruited patients with cancer and healthy controls (mostly health-care workers) from three London hospitals between Dec 8, 2020, and Feb 18, 2021. Participants who were vaccinated between Dec 8 and Dec 29, 2020, received two 30 µg doses of BNT162b2 administered intramuscularly 21 days apart; patients vaccinated after this date received only one 30 µg dose with a planned follow-up boost at 12 weeks. Blood samples were taken before vaccination and at 3 weeks and 5 weeks after the first vaccination. Where possible, serial nasopharyngeal real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR) swab tests were done every 10 days or in cases of symptomatic COVID-19. The coprimary endpoints were seroconversion to SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein in patients with cancer following the first vaccination with the BNT162b2 vaccine and the effect of vaccine boosting after 21 days on seroconversion. All participants with available data were included in the safety and immunogenicity analyses. Ongoing follow-up is underway for further blood sampling after the delayed (12-week) vaccine boost. This study is registered with the NHS Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales (REC ID 20/HRA/2031). FINDINGS: 151 patients with cancer (95 patients with solid cancer and 56 patients with haematological cancer) and 54 healthy controls were enrolled. For this interim data analysis of the safety and immunogenicity of vaccinated patients with cancer, samples and data obtained up to March 19, 2021, were analysed. After exclusion of 17 patients who had been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 (detected by either antibody seroconversion or a positive rRT-PCR COVID-19 swab test) from the immunogenicity analysis, the proportion of positive anti-S IgG titres at approximately 21 days following a single vaccine inoculum across the three cohorts were 32 (94%; 95% CI 81-98) of 34 healthy controls; 21 (38%; 26-51) of 56 patients with solid cancer, and eight (18%; 10-32) of 44 patients with haematological cancer. 16 healthy controls, 25 patients with solid cancer, and six patients with haematological cancer received a second dose on day 21. Of the patients with available blood samples 2 weeks following a 21-day vaccine boost, and excluding 17 participants with evidence of previous natural SARS-CoV-2 exposure, 18 (95%; 95% CI 75-99) of 19 patients with solid cancer, 12 (100%; 76-100) of 12 healthy controls, and three (60%; 23-88) of five patients with haematological cancers were seropositive, compared with ten (30%; 17-47) of 33, 18 (86%; 65-95) of 21, and four (11%; 4-25) of 36, respectively, who did not receive a boost. The vaccine was well tolerated; no toxicities were reported in 75 (54%) of 140 patients with cancer following the first dose of BNT162b2, and in 22 (71%) of 31 patients with cancer following the second dose. Similarly, no toxicities were reported in 15 (38%) of 40 healthy controls after the first dose and in five (31%) of 16 after the second dose. Injection-site pain within 7 days following the first dose was the most commonly reported local reaction (23 [35%] of 65 patients with cancer; 12 [48%] of 25 healthy controls). No vaccine-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: In patients with cancer, one dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine yields poor efficacy. Immunogenicity increased significantly in patients with solid cancer within 2 weeks of a vaccine boost at day 21 after the first dose. These data support prioritisation of patients with cancer for an early (day 21) second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine. FUNDING: King's College London, Cancer Research UK, Wellcome Trust, Rosetrees Trust, and Francis Crick Institute.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/immunology , Neoplasms/immunology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Dose-Response Relationship, Immunologic , Female , Humans , Immunogenicity, Vaccine/immunology , London/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/blood , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/virology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Wales
5.
Br J Cancer ; 125(7): 939-947, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1360191

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Using an updated dataset with more patients and extended follow-up, we further established cancer patient characteristics associated with COVID-19 death. METHODS: Data on all cancer patients with a positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) at Guy's Cancer Centre and King's College Hospital between 29 February and 31 July 2020 was used. Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to identify which factors were associated with COVID-19 mortality. RESULTS: Three hundred and six SARS-CoV-2-positive cancer patients were included. Seventy-one had mild/moderate and 29% had severe COVID-19. Seventy-two patients died of COVID-19 (24%), of whom 35 died <7 days. Male sex [hazard ratio (HR): 1.97 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15-3.38)], Asian ethnicity [3.42 (1. 59-7.35)], haematological cancer [2.03 (1.16-3.56)] and a cancer diagnosis for >2-5 years [2.81 (1.41-5.59)] or ≥5 years were associated with an increased mortality. Age >60 years and raised C-reactive protein (CRP) were also associated with COVID-19 death. Haematological cancer, a longer-established cancer diagnosis, dyspnoea at diagnosis and raised CRP were indicative of early COVID-19-related death in cancer patients (<7 days from diagnosis). CONCLUSIONS: Findings further substantiate evidence for increased risk of COVID-19 mortality for male and Asian cancer patients, and those with haematological malignancies or a cancer diagnosis >2 years. These factors should be accounted for when making clinical decisions for cancer patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hematologic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/virology , Female , Hematologic Neoplasms/complications , Hematologic Neoplasms/pathology , Hematologic Neoplasms/virology , Hospitals , Humans , London/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/pathology , Neoplasms/virology , Risk Factors
6.
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.

7.
Blood ; 138(18): 1768-1773, 2021 11 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1322916
8.
Cancer Cell ; 39(2): 257-275.e6, 2021 02 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1009339

ABSTRACT

Given the immune system's importance for cancer surveillance and treatment, we have investigated how it may be affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection of cancer patients. Across some heterogeneity in tumor type, stage, and treatment, virus-exposed solid cancer patients display a dominant impact of SARS-CoV-2, apparent from the resemblance of their immune signatures to those for COVID-19+ non-cancer patients. This is not the case for hematological malignancies, with virus-exposed patients collectively displaying heterogeneous humoral responses, an exhausted T cell phenotype and a high prevalence of prolonged virus shedding. Furthermore, while recovered solid cancer patients' immunophenotypes resemble those of non-virus-exposed cancer patients, recovered hematological cancer patients display distinct, lingering immunological legacies. Thus, while solid cancer patients, including those with advanced disease, seem no more at risk of SARS-CoV-2-associated immune dysregulation than the general population, hematological cancer patients show complex immunological consequences of SARS-CoV-2 exposure that might usefully inform their care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , Neoplasms/immunology , Neoplasms/virology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/immunology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/etiology , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Hematologic Neoplasms/immunology , Hematologic Neoplasms/mortality , Hematologic Neoplasms/therapy , Hematologic Neoplasms/virology , Humans , Immunophenotyping , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Neoplasms/mortality , Neoplasms/therapy , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/etiology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/mortality , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/virology , T-Lymphocytes/virology , Virus Shedding , Young Adult
9.
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