RESUMEN
Chronic hemodialysis patients are at high risk of morbidity and mortality in case of SARS-CoV-2 infection and they may need to be treated with monoclonal antibodies, either because they have not been vaccinated, or because they have a low anti spike antibody titer. Administration of Sotrovimab has recently been proposed for hemodialysis patients, but data are on the results lacking. We report on four cases of chronic dialysis patients who received Sotrovimab during intermittent dialysis sessions. In our series, no adverse reactions were recorded; intradialytic administration resulted safe and allowed an adequate observation time without prolonging hospital stay in chronic hemodialysis outpatients.
RESUMEN
Introduction One of the major criticisms facing the research community during SARS-CoV2 pandemic was the lack of large-scale, longitudinal data on the efficacy of the SARS-CoV2 mRNA vaccines. Currently, even if COVID-19 antiviral treatments have been authorized by European Medicine Agency, prevention through approved specific vaccines is the best approach available in order to contain the ongoing pandemic. Objectives Here, we studied the antibody kinetic over a one-year period from vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech (Pfizer) vaccines and subsequent boosting with either the BioNTech or Moderna (Spikevax) vaccines in a large cohort of 8,071 healthcare workers (HCW). We also described the impact of SARS-CoV2 infection on antibody kinetic over the same period. Methods We assessed the anti SARS-CoV2 Spike IgG antibody kinetic by the high throughput dried blood spot (DBS) collection method and the GSP®/DELFIA® Anti-SARS-CoV2 IgG assay (PerkinElmer®). Results Our data support existing models showing that SARS-CoV2 vaccination elicits strong initial antibodies responses that decline with time but are transitorily increased by administering a vaccine booster. We also showed that using heterologous vaccine/booster combinations a stronger antibody response was elicited than utilizing a booster from the same vaccine manufacturer. Furthermore, by considering the impact of SARS-CoV2 infection occurrence in proximity to the scheduled booster administration, we confirmed that booster dose did not contribute significantly to elicit higher antibody responses. Conclusion DBS sampling in our large population of HCWs was fundamental to collect a large number of specimens and to clarify the effective mRNA vaccine-induced antibody kinetic and the role of both heterologous boosters and SARS-CoV2 infection in modulating antibody responses.
RESUMEN
Introduction: One of the major criticisms facing the research community during SARS-CoV2 pandemic was the lack of large-scale, longitudinal data on the efficacy of the SARS-CoV2 mRNA vaccines. Currently, even if COVID-19 antiviral treatments have been authorized by European Medicine Agency, prevention through approved specific vaccines is the best approach available in order to contain the ongoing pandemic. Objectives: Here, we studied the antibody kinetic over a one-year period from vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech (Pfizer) vaccines and subsequent boosting with either the BioNTech or Moderna (Spikevax) vaccines in a large cohort of 8,071 healthcare workers (HCW). We also described the impact of SARS-CoV2 infection on antibody kinetic over the same period. Methods: We assessed the anti SARS-CoV2 Spike IgG antibody kinetic by the high throughput dried blood spot (DBS) collection method and the GSP®/DELFIA® Anti-SARS-CoV2 IgG assay (PerkinElmer®). Results: Our data support existing models showing that SARS-CoV2 vaccination elicits strong initial antibodies responses that decline with time but are transitorily increased by administering a vaccine booster. We also showed that using heterologous vaccine/booster combinations a stronger antibody response was elicited than utilizing a booster from the same vaccine manufacturer. Furthermore, by considering the impact of SARS-CoV2 infection occurrence in proximity to the scheduled booster administration, we confirmed that booster dose did not contribute significantly to elicit higher antibody responses. Conclusion: DBS sampling in our large population of HCWs was fundamental to collect a large number of specimens and to clarify the effective mRNA vaccine-induced antibody kinetic and the role of both heterologous boosters and SARS-CoV2 infection in modulating antibody responses.
RESUMEN
Literature offers plenty of cases of immunocompromised patients, who develop chronic and severe SARS-CoV-2 infections. The aim of this study is to provide further insight into SARS-CoV-2 evolutionary dynamic taking into exam a subject suffering from follicular lymphoma, who developed a persistent infection for over 7 months. Eight nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained, and were analyses by qRT-PCR for diagnostic purposes. All of them were considered eligible (Ct < 30) for NGS sequencing. Sequence analysis showed that all sequences matched the B.1.617.2 AY.122 lineage, but they differed by few mutations identifying three genetically similar subpopulations, which evolved during the course of infection, demonstrating that prolonged replication is paralleled with intra-host virus evolution. These evidences support the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 adaptive capacities are able to shape a heterogeneous viral population in the context of immunocompromised patients. Spill-over of viral variants with enhanced transmissibility or immune escape capacities from these subjects is plausible.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Huésped Inmunocomprometido , MutaciónRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Although the decision of which ventilation strategy to adopt in COVID-19 patients is crucial, yet the most appropriate means of carrying out this undertaking is not supported by strong evidence. We therefore described the organization of a province-level healthcare system during the occurrence of the COVID-19 epidemic and the 60-day outcomes of the hospitalized COVID-19 patients according to the respiratory strategy adopted given the limited available resources. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All COVID-19 patients (26/02/2020-18/04/2020) in the Rimini Province of Italy were included in this population-based cohort study. The hospitalized patients were classified according to the maximum level of respiratory support: oxygen supplementation (Oxygen group), non-invasive ventilation (NIV-only group), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV-only group), and IMV after an NIV trial (IMV-after-NIV group). Sixty-day mortality risk was estimated with a Cox proportional hazard analysis adjusted by age, sex, and administration of steroids, canakinumab, and tocilizumab. RESULTS: We identified a total of 1,424 symptomatic patients: 520 (36.5%) were hospitalized, while 904 (63.5%) were treated at home with no 60-day deaths. Based on the respiratory support, 408 (78.5%) were assigned to the Oxygen group, 46 (8.8%) to the NIV-only group, 25 (4.8%) to the IMV-after-NIV group, and 41 (7.9%) to the IMV-only group. There was no significant difference in the PaO2/FiO2 at IMV inception in the IMV-after-NIV and IMV-only groups (p=0.9). Overall 60-day mortality was 24.2% (Oxygen: 23.0%; NIV-only: 19.6%; IMV-after-NIV: 32.0%; IMV-only: 36.6%; p=0.165). Compared with the Oxygen group, the adjusted 60-day mortality risk significantly increased in the IMV-after-NIV (HR 2.776; p=0.024) and IMV-only groups (HR 2.966; p=0.001). CONCLUSION: This study provided a population-based estimate of the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak in a severely affected Italian province. A similar 60-day mortality risk was found for patients undergoing immediate IMV and those intubated after an NIV trial with favorable outcomes after prolonged IMV.