Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
Journal of Clinical Rheumatology ; 29(4 Supplement 1):S4, 2023.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2323776


Objectives: Patients with immune-mediated diseases achieve lower seroconversion rates to COVID19 vaccines compared to healthy controls. The aim of this study was to assess the SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and T-cell responses after a two-dose regimen of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Method(s): Observational study. Patients with RA, >=18 years of age, who were vaccinated according to the Argentine National Health Ministry's vaccination strategy were included. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, neutralizing activity and specific T-cell responses were assessed after the first and second doses. Result(s): A total of 120 RA patients were included. Mostly, homologous regimens were used, including Gam-COVID-Vac (27.5%), ChAdOx1 (24.2%), BBIBP-CorV (22.5%) and BNT162b2 (0.8%), while the most frequent combination of vaccines was Gam-COVID-Vac/mRNA-1273 (21.7%). After the second dose 81.7% presented anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, 70.0% neutralizing activity and 65.3% specific T-cell response. The use of BBIBP-CorV, treatment with abatacept (ABA) and rituximab (RTX) were associated with undetectable antibodies and no neutralizing activity after two doses of vaccine. BBIBP-CorV was also associated with the absence of T-cell response. The total incidence of adverse events was 357.1 events/1000 doses: significantly lower with BBIBP-CorV (166.7 events/1000 doses, p alpha 0.02). Conclusion(s): In this cohort of patients with RA who received 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine, according to the Argentine strategic vaccination planwhich included homologous and heterologous regimens, two of ten did not develop IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2, 70% presented neutralizing activity and 65% specific T-cell response. The use of BBIBP-CorV was associated with deficient humoral and cellular response, while treatment with ABA and RTXaffected the development of IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 and neutralizing activity.

Journal of Clinical Rheumatology ; 29(4 Supplement 1):S7-S8, 2023.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2322820


Objectives: To evaluate the association between the ABO and Rh antigens and the clinical characteristics and evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with rheumatic diseases. Method(s): SAR-COVID is a national, longitudinal, and observational registry. Patients >=18 years of age with a diagnosis of inflammatory or degenerative rheumatic disease, and confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (RT-PCR or serology) were included. Data were collected from August 2020 to June 2022. Sociodemographic, clinical data, comorbidities, underlying rheumatic disease, disease activity, and its treatment at the time of infection were recorded, aswell as symptoms, complications and treatments received for COVID-19. The WHO ordinal scale (WHO-OS) was used, and severe COVID-19was defined as WHO-OS>=5. Patients were categorized as follows: blood group A or non-A, and Rh factor positive or negative. Result(s): A total of 1356 patients were included, 547 (40,3%) had blood group A and 809 non-A (59,7%). Regarding the Rh factor, 1230 (90,7%)were positive and 126 (9,3%) negative. Age, sex, ethnicity and comorbidities were comparable between both groups. In both cases, the most frequent rheumatic diseases were rheumatoid arthritis (38,9%;p = 0,052), systemic lupus erythematosus (17,4%;p = 0,530) and osteoarthritis (10,1%;p = 0,888). Patients with non-A blood type presented a higher frequency of psoriatic arthritis (group A 5,1% vs non-A 8,7%;p = 0,015). During SARS-CoV-2 infection, more than 90% of patients in both groups were symptomatic (group A 96.0% vs non-A 94,8%;p = 0,384). Non-A blood group patients had a significantly higher frequency of arthralgia and dysgeusia. In A blood group 18.5% of the patients required hospitalization, 41,0% of them were admitted in the intensive care unit and 5.9% presented complications, while in the non-A blood group, were 16,7%, 31,1% and 5,5%, respectively (p > 0,05 in all the cases). The most frequent complications in both groups were respiratory distress syndrome and sepsis (p > 0,05). The outcome of the COVID-19 infection is detailed in Figure 1. In the multivariate analysis, adjusted for poor prognostic factors, patients with A blood type and those with negative Rh factor presented more likely severe COVID-19. (OR 1,75, 95%CI 1,20-2,56, p = 0,003 and OR 2,63, 95%CI 1,45-4,55, p = 0,001, respectively). Conclusion(s): Blood type A and negative Rh factor were associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes in this national cohort of patients with rheumatic diseases.