Six-Month Humoral and Cellular Immune Response to the Bnt162b2 Mrna Covid-19 Vaccine Booster in the Patients with Solid Tumors on Active Treatment: Focus on Variants of Concern (Vocs)

Background: The role and the durability of immunogenicity of the 3rd dose of vaccine against COVID-19 variants of concern (VOCs) in cancer patients remains to be elucidated. The aim of this study is to evaluate the immunogenicity of the 3rd dose of the SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in triggering both the humoral and the cell-mediated immune response in the patients with solid tumors undergoing active treatment 6 months after booster Methods: We have prospectively evaluated kinetics of humoral and cellular immune response elicited by booster BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose up to 6 months. Samples were collected at the enrollment (T0), 21 days after the booster (T1) and 6 months after (T2). Sera were tested for Spike trimeric IgG (cut off 33.8 BAU/mL) and SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NT Abs;cut off 1:10), T-cell response against Spike protein was detected by IFNgamma release assay (IGRA from Euroimmun). Result(s): One-hundred patients (36F/50M;median age 65, range 26-89) were included in the study. In 9 subjects, a COVID-19 infection was reported before the administration of the 1st dose of vaccine. Preliminary analyses were performed in a cohort of 79 previously unexposed subjects. The 3rd dose was administered at median 176 days (range 91-281) after the 1st dose. At T0 anti-S IgG response was median 170 (IQR 67.8-421.4) BAU/mL and it increased to median 2080 (IQR 2080-2080) BAU/mL at T1;a decrease of response was observed at T2 (median 1605 IQR 822-2080 BAU/mL). Overall, 11/79 (13.9%) patients were negative at baseline and 10/11 reached positive level of response at T1. Only 2 subjects were negative for serological response at T2. A similar trend was observed for SARS-CoV-2 NTAbs. In 65 patients we compared NT Abs levels reached against wild type (WT) strain, Delta and Omicron variants at T2. Median response against WT strain was 1:320 (IQR 1:40-1:640) while it decreased to 1:80 (IQR 1:20-1:320) and 1:10 (IQR <1:10-1:40) against Delta and Omicron variants (p value 0.08 and <0.001, respectively). Overall, 4/65 (6.2%) patients were negative for WT SARS-CoV-2 NT Abs while 6/65 (9.2%) and 17/65 (26.2%) were negative for Delta and Omicron SARSCoV- 2 NT Abs, respectively. Conclusion(s): Preliminary data suggest an enhanced immunogenicity elicited by booster in cancer patients, also against variant strains, even if a decrease NT Abs level was observed against Omicron. T-cellular response and multivariable analysis on demographic/clinical data will be presented at the meeting.

Six-month humoral and cellular immune response to the third dose of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with solid tumors: a longitudinal cohort study with a focus on the variants of concern.

BACKGROUND: The role and the durability of the immunogenicity of the third dose of vaccine against COVID-19 variants of concern in cancer patients have to be elucidated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We have prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity of the third dose of the SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine in triggering both humoral and cell-mediated immune response in patients with solid tumors undergoing active treatment 6 months after the booster. Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titers and total anti-spike immunoglobulin G concentrations were measured in serum. Heparinized whole blood samples were used for the SARS-CoV-2 interferon-γ release assay (IGRA). RESULTS: Six months after the third dose only two patients (2.4%) showed negative spike-specific immunoglobulin G antibody levels (<33.8 BAU/ml). The median level of SARS-CoV-2 NT Abs decreased and only 39/83 (47%) subjects showed maximum levels of NT Abs. T-cellular positive response was observed in 38/61 (62.3%) patients; the highest median level of response was observed 21 days after the third dose (354 mIU/ml, interquartile range 83.3-846.3 mIU/ml). The lowest median level of NT Ab response was observed against the Omicron variant (1 : 10, interquartile range 1 : 10-1 : 40) with a significant reduced rate of responder subjects with respect to the wild-type strain (77.5% versus 95%; P = 0.0022) and Delta variant (77.5% versus 93.7%; P = 0.0053). During the follow-up period, seven patients (8%) had a confirmed post-vaccination infection, but none of them required hospitalization or oxygen therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our work highlights a significant humoral and cellular immune response among patients with solid tumors 6 months after the third BNT162b2 vaccine dose, although a reduction in neutralizing activity against Omicron was observed.

Immunogenicity and safety after the third dose of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with solid tumors on active treatment: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although a full course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine is effective in cancer patients, the duration of the protection and the efficacy of a booster dose against the new variants remain unknown. We prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity of the third dose of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine in cancer patients undergoing active treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with solid cancer, vaccinated with a booster dose during active treatment, were enrolled in this study. Patients were classified into SARS-CoV-2 naïve (without previous COVID-19 infection) and SARS-CoV-2 experienced (with previous COVID-19 infection). Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titer and total anti-Spike immunoglobulin G (IgG) concentration were quantified in serum. Heparinized whole blood samples were used for SARS-CoV-2 Interferon Gamma Release Assay (IGRA). The primary endpoint was to assess the increase of IgG antibody level between baseline and 3 weeks after the booster. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-two consecutive patients were recruited. In SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects, the median level of IgG was 157 BAU/ml [interquartile range (IQR) 62-423 BAU/ml] at T0 and reached a median of 2080 BAU/ml (IQR 2080-2080 BAU/ml) at 3 weeks after booster administration (T1; P < 0.0001). A median 16-fold increase of SARS-CoV-2 NT Ab titer (IQR 4-32) was observed in naïve subjects (from median 20, IQR 10-40, to median 640, IQR 160-640; P < 0.0001). Median interferon-γ level at T1 was significantly higher than that measured at T0 in SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects (P = 0.0049) but not in SARS-CoV-2-experienced patients. The median level of SARS-CoV-2 NT Abs was 32-fold lower against Omicron compared to the wild-type strain (P = 0.0004) and 12-fold lower compared to the Delta strain (P = 0.0110). CONCLUSIONS: The third dose is able to trigger both the humoral and the cell-mediated immune response in cancer patients on active treatment. Our preliminary data about the neutralization of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine against variants of concern seem to confirm the lower vaccine activity.

Analysis of the humoral and cellular immune response after a full course of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in cancer patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with or without chemotherapy: an update after 6 months of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The durability of immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in cancer patients remains to be elucidated. We prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity of the vaccine in triggering both the humoral and the cell-mediated immune response in cancer patients treated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 with or without chemotherapy 6 months after BNT162b2 vaccine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the previous study, 88 patients were enrolled, whereas the analyses below refer to the 60 patients still on immunotherapy at the time of the follow-up. According to previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure, patients were classified as SARS-CoV-2-naive (without previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure) and SARS-CoV-2-experienced (with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection). Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titer against the B.1.1 strain and total anti-spike immunoglobulin G concentration were quantified in serum samples. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assay was used for quantification of anti-spike interferon-γ (IFN-γ)-producing cells/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Fifty patients (83.0%) were on immunotherapy alone, whereas 10 patients (7%) were on chemo-immunotherapy. We analyzed separately patients on immunotherapy and patients on chemo-immunotherapy. RESULTS: The median T-cell response at 6 months was significantly lower than that measured at 3 weeks after vaccination [50 interquartile range (IQR) 20-118.8 versus 175 IQR 67.5-371.3 IFN-γ-producing cells/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells; P < 0.0001]. The median reduction of immunoglobulin G concentration was 88% in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects and 2.1% in SARS-CoV-2-experienced subjects. SARS-CoV-2 NT Ab titer was maintained in SARS-CoV-2-experienced subjects, whereas a significant decrease was observed in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects (from median 1 : 160, IQR 1 : 40-1 : 640 to median 1 : 20, IQR 1 : 10-1 : 40; P < 0.0001). A weak correlation was observed between SARS-CoV-2 NT Ab titer and spike-specific IFN-γ-producing cells at both 6 months and 3 weeks after vaccination (r = 0.467; P = 0.0002 and r = 0.428; P = 0.0006, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our work highlights a reduction in the immune response in cancer patients, particularly in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects. Our data support administering a third dose of COVID-19 vaccine to cancer patients treated with programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors.

A snapshot of the immunogenicity, efficacy and safety of a full course of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in cancer patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors: a longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Very few cancer patients were enrolled in coronavirus disease-2019 vaccine studies. In order to address this gap of knowledge, real-world studies are mandatory. The aim of this study was to assess both humoral and cellular response after a messenger RNA vaccination schedule. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-eight consecutive cancer patients treated with programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors were enrolled from the beginning of the vaccination campaign for frail patients. Blood samples for humoral and cell-mediated immune response evaluation were obtained before vaccination (T0), before the second administration (T1) and 21 days after the second dose (T2). The primary endpoint was the evaluation of the percentage of participants showing a significant increase in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific T cells, measured by an enzyme-linked immunospot assay, after the second dose of BNT162b2 vaccine. The proportion of patients who reached the primary endpoint is computed together with its exact binomial 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: In SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects, spike-specific T-cell response was almost undetectable at T0 [median 0.0 interferon-γ (IFN-γ) spot forming units (SFU)/million peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) interquartile range (IQR) 0-7.5] and significantly increased at T1 and T2 (median 15.0 IFN-γ SFU/million PBMC, 25th-75th 0-40 versus 90 IFN-γ SFU/million PBMC, 25th-75th 32.5-224, respectively) (P < 0.001). Focusing on naïve and experienced SARS-CoV-2 subjects, no differences were reported both in terms of CD4- and CD8-specific T-cell response, suggesting that BNT162b2 is able to elicit both adaptive responses after complete vaccination schedule, regardless of previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure. The level of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies was low at T1 in SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects [median 1 : 5 (IQR 1 : 5-1 : 20)] but reached a significantly higher median of 1 : 80 (25th-75th 1 : 20-1 : 160) at T2 (P < 0.0001). Moreover, no COVID-19 cases were documented throughout the period of study. CONCLUSIONS: Our data have demonstrated that the administration of a full course of BNT162b2 vaccine elicited a sustained immune response against SARS-CoV-2 regardless of the type of cancer and/or the type of immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Estimating COVID-19 recovery time in a cohort of Italian healthcare workers who underwent surveillance swab testing.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic is putting a huge strain on the provision and continuity of care. The length of sickness absence of the healthcare workers as a result of SARS-CoV-2 infection plays a pivotal role in hospital staff management. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the timing of COVID-19 recovery and viral clearance, and its predictive factors, in a large sample of healthcare workers. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. METHODS: The analysis was conducted on data collected during the hospital health surveillance programme for healthcare staff at the University Hospital of Verona; healthcare workers were tested for SARS-CoV-2 through RT-PCR with oronasopharyngeal swab samples. The health surveillance programme targeted healthcare workers who either had close contact with SARS-CoV-2-infected patients or were tested as part of the screening-based strategy implemented according to national and regional requirements. Recovery time was estimated from the first positive swab to two consecutive negative swabs, collected 24 h apart, using survival analysis for both right-censored and interval-censored data. Cox proportional hazard was used for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: During the health surveillance programme, 6455 healthcare workers were tested for SARS-CoV-2 and 248 (3.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.4-4.3) reported positive results; among those who tested positive, 49% were asymptomatic, with a median age of 39.8 years, which is significantly younger than symptomatic healthcare workers (48.2 years, P < 0.001). Screening tests as part of the health surveillance programme identified 31 (12.5%) of the positive cases. Median recovery time was 24 days (95% CI: 23-26) and 21.5 days (95% CI: 15.5-30.5) in right- and interval-censoring analysis, respectively, with no association with age, sex or presence of symptoms. Overall, 63% of participants required >20 days to test negative on two consecutive swabs. Hospitalised healthcare workers (4.8%) were older and had a significantly longer recovery time compared with non-hospitalised healthcare workers in both analyses (33.5 vs 24 days, P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Recovery from COVID-19 and viral clearance may take a long time, especially in individuals who are hospitalised. To detect asymptomatic cases, screening programmes for healthcare workers is recommended.

Organizational challenges and oncological activity volumes during the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic peak in Verona, Italy

Background: On February 23rd the first case of SARS-CoV-2 infection was diagnosed at the University Hospital Trust of Verona, Italy. On March 13th, the Oncology Section was converted into a 22 inpatient beds COVID unit and we had to reshape our organization and personnel to face the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, while maintaining our oncological activity. Methods: We tracked down oncological activity from January 1st to March 31st, 2020, in relationship to the organizational changes implemented and in comparison to the same period of 2019. We also recorded cases of SARS-CoV-2 infections observed in oncology health professionals and hospital admissions of active oncology patients for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: Progressive restrictions in patients', visitors', and caregivers' access to the inpatient and outpatient facilities of the Oncology section and organizational changes were adopted early on during the epidemic peak. Since March 13th, segregated personnel teams were created, one dedicated to the COVID unit and a "clean" one dedicated to oncological patients, resulting in an overall 40% and 43% reduction in oncology-dedicated medical and nursing/auxiliary staff, respectively. As compared with the same trimester in 2019, the overall reduction in total numbers of inpatient admissions, chemotherapy administrations, and specialty visits in the period January-March 2020 was 8%, 6%, and 3%, respectively;based on the weekly average of daily accesses, reduction in some of the oncological activities became statistically significant from week 11. Patient's acceptance of adopted measures was very high (see abstract by Tregnago D). Overall, 8/85 (9%) health professionals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (no hospital admissions and no treatment required) and 7/525 (1.3%) active oncology patients were admitted for SARS-CoV-2 infection (of whom, 2 died of infection-related complications). Conclusions: A minimal (<10%) reduction in Oncology activity was registered during the peak of SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in Verona, Italy. Organizational and protective measures adopted appear to have contributed to keep infections in both health professionals and oncological patients to a minimum. Legal entity responsible for the study: University of Verona. Funding: Has not received any funding. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.