Vaccine Effectiveness Against SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Severe Outcomes in the Maintenance Dialysis Population in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination studies in the hemodialysis population have demonstrated decreased antibody response compared with healthy controls, but vaccine effectiveness for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease is undetermined. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in the province of Ontario, Canada, between December 21, 2020, and June 30, 2021. Receipt of vaccine, SARS-CoV-2 infection, and related severe outcomes (hospitalization or death) were determined from provincial health administrative data. Receipt of one and two doses of vaccine were modeled in a time-varying cause-specific Cox proportional hazards model, adjusting for baseline characteristics, background community infection rates, and censoring for non-COVID death, recovered kidney function, transfer out of province, solid organ transplant, and withdrawal from dialysis. RESULTS: Among 13,759 individuals receiving maintenance dialysis, 2403 (17%) were unvaccinated and 11,356 (83%) had received at least one dose by June 30, 2021. Vaccine types were BNT162b2 (n=8455, 74%) and mRNA-1273 (n=2901, 26%); median time between the first and second dose was 36 days (IQR 28-51). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe outcomes for one dose compared with unvaccinated was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46 to 0.76) and 0.54 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.77), respectively, and for two doses compared with unvaccinated was 0.31 (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.42) and 0.17 (95% CI, 0.1 to 0.3), respectively. There were no significant differences in vaccine effectiveness among age groups, dialysis modality, or vaccine type. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination is effective in the dialysis population to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe outcomes, despite concerns about suboptimal antibody responses.

An ISN-DOPPS Survey of the Global Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Peritoneal Dialysis Services.

Introduction: Home dialysis may minimize SARS-CoV2 exposure risks compared to center-based dialysis. We explored how the pandemic may have introduced challenges related to peritoneal dialysis (PD) supply availability, routine patient care, and how facility practices changed during this time. Methods: The PD/Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS/DOPPS) and International Society of Nephrology (ISN) administered a web-based survey from November 2020 to March 2021. Medical director responses were compared across 10 ISN regions. Results: One hundered sixy-five PD facilities in 51 countries returned surveys. During the initial COVID-19 wave, the reported frequency of in-person patient visits decreased in 9 of 10 ISN regions. Before the pandemic, most facilities required a mask during PD exchanges which continued over the course of the pandemic. Although most facilities in different regions did not report PD supply disruptions, sites in Africa and South Asia reported major disruptions. Reductions in laparoscopic surgical procedures for PD catheters were reported by facilities in 9 of 10 regions whereas nonsurgical percutaneous procedures increased in facilities in 6 regions. Training of new PD patients declined in facilities in each region. Increased use of remote technology by patients to communicate with clinics was observed in all regions compared to prepandemic levels. Conclusion: Marked within-region and across-region variability was noted in PD facility burden, clinical practice, and adaptation to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study highlights opportunities to improve routine PD care, adapt to the ongoing pandemic, and increase preparedness for potential future interruptions in PD care.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection during the Omicron Surge among Patients Receiving Dialysis: The Role of Circulating Receptor-Binding Domain Antibodies and Vaccine Doses.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether circulating antibody levels conferred protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients receiving dialysis during the Omicron-dominant period. METHODS: We followed monthly semiquantitative SARS-CoV-2 RBD IgG index values in a randomly selected nationwide cohort of patients receiving dialysis and ascertained SARS-CoV-2 infection during the Omicron-dominant period of December 25, 2021 to January 31, 2022 using electronic health records. We estimated the relative risk for documented SARS-CoV-2 infection by vaccination status and by circulating RBD IgG using a log-binomial model accounting for age, sex, and prior COVID-19. RESULTS: Among 3576 patients receiving dialysis, 901 (25%) received a third mRNA vaccine dose as of December 24, 2021. Early antibody responses to third doses were robust (median peak index IgG value at assay limit of 150). During the Omicron-dominant period, SARS-CoV-2 infection was documented in 340 (7%) patients. Risk for infection was higher among patients without vaccination and with one to two doses (RR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.6 to 2.8, and RR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.8 versus three doses, respectively). Irrespective of the number of vaccine doses, risk for infection was higher among patients with circulating RBD IgG <23 (506 BAU/ml) (RR range, 2.1 to 3.2, 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.4 and 95% CI, 2.2 to 4.5, respectively) compared with RBD IgG ≥23. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients receiving dialysis, a third mRNA vaccine dose enhanced protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection during the Omicron-dominant period, but a low circulating RBD antibody response was associated with risk for infection independent of the number of vaccine doses. Measuring circulating antibody levels in this high-risk group could inform optimal timing of vaccination and other measures to reduce risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Epidemiological Characteristics and Mortality Risk Factors Comparison in Dialysis and Non-Dialysis CKD Patients with COVID-19-A Single Center Experience.

(1) Background: Despite some controversies between studies, chronic kidney disease (CKD) has a negative impact on COVID-19 outcomes, with patients presenting a higher mortality risk than in the general population. Studies have shown an association between COVID-19 severe cases and different inflammatory biomarkers. The aim of this study was to emphasize the epidemiological characteristics of CKD patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and to determine if the risk of mortality, and the severity of this infection might be influenced by different parameters. (2) Methods: Our retrospective study included CKD patients with COVID-19-362 in the non-dialysis group and 132 in the dialysis group. (3) Results: There were significant statistical differences between our groups regarding age (p < 0.001), hemoglobin (p < 0.001), interleukin-6 (p < 0.001), serum albumin (p = 0.016), procalcitonin (p = 0.002), ferritin (p < 0.001), and of course serum creatinine (p < 0.001). Even if the risk of death was higher in the dialysis group (Exp(b) = 1.839), the survival proportions were similar in both groups. (4) Conclusions: High values of hemoglobin, serum creatinine, and LDH at admission, age, length of hospital stay ≤ 10 days, and a pulmonary impairment > 25% are responsible for an adverse outcome in non-dialysis and dialysis patients diagnosed with COVID-19.

The Humoral Immune Response of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine in Maintenance Dialysis Patients without Prior COVID-19 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients tend to have a reduced immune response to infection and vaccination. The efficacy of current available COVID-19 vaccines in CKD patients has not been widely evaluated. METHODS: In the present study, three hundred and eight chronic dialysis patients received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca, AZ). Blood tests using an antibody against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the S1 subunit of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein had performed at four designed time points before and after the first and second vaccine. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 65.5 ± 12.38 years, and the male/female ratio was 61.4%:38.6% (189/119). Two weeks after the first vaccination, only 37.66% of patients had a positive antibody response (>50 AU/mL). However, 65.58% of the participants showed a delayed antibody response ten weeks after the first vaccine. Four weeks after the second vaccine, 94.16% of participants had positive antibody levels. Age was the most significant factor associated with antibody response. Flow cytometry analysis revealed that immune-naïve patients had significantly lower early active B cells and proliferative B cells than the age- and sex-matched immune responders. CONCLUSION: Despite a delayed response, 94.16% of chronic dialysis patients achieved a positive antibody response after two doses of the AZ vaccine. Age is the most significant factor associated with antibody response.

The Global Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on In-Center Hemodialysis Services: An ISN-Dialysis Outcomes Practice Patterns Study Survey.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic impact on hemodialysis (HD) centers, The Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study and ISN collaborated on a web-survey of centers. METHODS: A combined approach of random sampling and open invitation was used between March 2020 and March 2021. Responses were obtained from 412 centers in 78 countries and all 10 ISN regions. RESULTS: In 8 regions, rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection were <20% in most centers, but in North East Asia (NE Asia) and Newly Independent States and Russia (NIS & Russia), rates were ≥20% and ≥30%, respectively. Mortality was ≥10% in most centers in 8 regions, although lower in North America and Caribbean (N America & Caribbean) and NE Asia. Diagnostic testing was not available in 33%, 37%, and 61% of centers in Latin America, Africa, and East and Central Europe, respectively. Surgical masks were widely available, but severe shortages of particulate-air filter masks were reported in Latin America (18%) and Africa (30%). Rates of infection in staff ranged from 0% in 90% of centers in NE Asia to ≥50% in 63% of centers in the Middle East and 68% of centers in NIS & Russia. In most centers, <10% of staff died, but in Africa and South Asia (S Asia), 2% and 6% of centers reported ≥50% mortality, respectively. CONCLUSION: There has been wide global variation in SARS-CoV-2 infection rates among HD patients and staff, personal protective equipment (PPE) availability, and testing, and the ways in which services have been redesigned in response to the pandemic.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown increased anxiety, depression, and stress levels among different populations during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, the impact of the pandemic on the mental health of dialysis patients remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the mental health of dialysis patients during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the period preceding the pandemic. METHODS: Data originate from the ongoing multicentre observational Dutch nOcturnal and hoME dialysis Study To Improve Clinical Outcomes (DOMESTICO). Patients who filled in a health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaire during the pandemic and six to three months prior were included. The mean difference in Mental Component Summary (MCS) score of the Short Form 12 (SF-12) was analysed with multilevel linear regression. A McNemar test was used to compare presence of mental health-related symptoms during and prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 177 patients were included. The mean MCS score prior to COVID-19 was 48.08 ± 10.15, and 49.00 ± 10.04 during the COVID-19 pandemic. The adjusted mean MCS score was 0.93 point (95% CI - 0.57 to 2.42) higher during the COVID-19 pandemic than during the period prior to the pandemic. Furthermore, no difference in the presence of the following mental health-related symptoms was found during the COVID-19 pandemic: feeling anxious, feeling sad, worrying, feeling nervous, trouble falling asleep, and trouble staying asleep. CONCLUSIONS: The mental health of dialysis patients appears to be unaffected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Dialysis patients may be better able to cope with the pandemic, since they have high resilience and are less impacted by social distancing measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register NL6519, date of registration: 22 August 2017.

Initial impact of COVID-19 on dialysis provision; review of international guidelines and adaptation of a hub unit's service.

The COVID-19 pandemic has put a strain on many aspects of health care including the provision of dialysis. Two categories of patients have had the greatest impact on dialysis capacity. Those with COVID-19-related acute kidney injury and those chronic dialysis patients who required isolation or cohort dialysis because of the pandemic. Limited information on incidence hampers capacity planning and the rapid change in demand provides further challenges. In the 4 weeks after our first patient, the incidence of confirmed infection in our dialysis population has been 5.1%. By the third week, hemodialysis had to be provided in critical care as the in-house capacity for hemofiltration had been overwhelmed. The interventions that enabled these needs to be met are detailed in this paper alongside a review of international recommendations and how they have been adapted to meet local pressures.