RESUMO
Objective To study the serological response (SR) and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and its relation with IBD treatment and type of vaccine. Methods Observational, cross-sectional study in patients with IBD vaccinated against COVID-19 without known previous infection. SR was analyzed by the determination of IgG antibodies against the S1 subunit. Safety was studied using a questionnaire to identify adverse effects (AE). Results 280 patients with IBD were included. Type of vaccines: Comirnaty® 68.8%;Spikevax® 10.8%, Vaxzevria® 18.3%, Ad26.COV2-S® 2.2%. 51.3% had AE, being 100% mild. 65% developed IgG antibodies after vaccination. The SR was higher for vaccines with mRNA technology (100% Spikevax®, 68.5% Comirnaty®) compared to those based on adenovirus vector (38.0% Vaxzevria®, 33.3% Ad26.COV2-S®) (P < .001). In the multivariate analysis, SR was related to age (<60 years;OR: 3.8, 95% CI 1.9–7.0;P < .001). The SR in patients with aminosalicylates was 65.4%, 61.4% with immunosuppressants, 65.8% with anti-TNF, and 68.7% with non-anti-TNF biologicals (P = .9). Conclusions One third of patients with IBD did not develop antibodies with the initial vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. The SR to vaccines based on mRNA technology was higher, and it was related to age (higher in younger patients). Immunosuppressants and biologicals did not decrease SR. More than half of the patients presented AD, being mild in all cases.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To study the serological response (SR) and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and its relation with IBD treatment and type of vaccine. METHODS: Observational, cross-sectional study in patients with IBD vaccinated against COVID-19 without known previous infection. SR was analyzed by the determination of IgG antibodies against the S1 subunit. Safety was studied using a questionnaire to identify adverse effects (AE). RESULTS: 280 patients with IBD were included. Type of vaccines: Comirnaty® 68.8%; Spikevax® 10.8%, Vaxzevria® 18.3%, Ad26.COV2-S® 2.2%. 51.3% had AE, being 100% mild. 65% developed IgG antibodies after vaccination. The SR was higher for vaccines with mRNA technology (100% Spikevax®, 68.5% Comirnaty®) compared to those based on adenovirus vector (38.0% Vaxzevria®, 33.3% Ad26.COV2-S®) (P<.001). In the multivariate analysis, SR was related to age (<60 years; OR: 3.8, 95% CI 1.9-7.0; P<.001). The SR in patients with aminosalicylates was 65.4%, 61.4% with immunosuppressants, 65.8% with anti-TNF, and 68.7% with non-anti-TNF biologicals (P=.9). CONCLUSIONS: One third of patients with IBD did not develop antibodies with the initial vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. The SR to vaccines based on mRNA technology was higher, and it was related to age (higher in younger patients). Immunosuppressants and biologicals did not decrease SR. More than half of the patients presented AD, being mild in all cases.
RESUMO
Objective To study the serological response (SR) and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and its relation with IBD treatment and type of vaccine. Methods Observational, cross-sectional study in patients with IBD vaccinated against COVID-19 without known previous infection. SR was analyzed by the determination of IgG antibodies against the S1 subunit. Safety was studied using a questionnaire to identify adverse effects (AE). Results 280 patients with IBD were included. Type of vaccines: Comirnaty® 68.8%;Spikevax® 10.8%, Vaxzevria® 18.3%, Ad26.COV2-S® 2.2%. 51.3% had AE, being 100% mild. 65% developed IgG antibodies after vaccination. The SR was higher for vaccines with mRNA technology (100% Spikevax®, 68.5% Comirnaty®) compared to those based on adenovirus vector (38.0% Vaxzevria®, 33.3% Ad26.COV2-S®) (P < .001). In the multivariate analysis, SR was related to age (<60 years;OR: 3.8, 95% CI 1.9–7.0;P < .001). The SR in patients with aminosalicylates was 65.4%, 61.4% with immunosuppressants, 65.8% with anti-TNF, and 68.7% with non-anti-TNF biologicals (P = .9). Conclusions One third of patients with IBD did not develop antibodies with the initial vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. The SR to vaccines based on mRNA technology was higher, and it was related to age (higher in younger patients). Immunosuppressants and biologicals did not decrease SR. More than half of the patients presented AD, being mild in all cases. Resumen Objetivo Estudiar la respuesta serológica (RS) y tolerabilidad frente a la vacuna COVID-19 en pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal (EII) y su relación con el tratamiento de la EII y tipo de vacuna. Métodos Estudio observacional, transversal en pacientes con EII vacunados contra COVID-19 sin infección previa conocida. La RS se analizó mediante la determinación de anticuerpos IgG frente a la subunidad S1. La seguridad se estudió mediante cuestionario para identificación de efectos adversos (EA). Resultados Se incluyeron 280 pacientes con EII. Tipo de vacunas: Comirnaty® 68,8%;Spikevax® 10,8%, Vaxzevria® 18,3%, Ad26.COV2-S® 2,2%. Un 51,3% tuvo EA, siendo el 100% leves. Un 65% desarrolló anticuerpos IgG tras la vacunación. La RS fue superior para vacunas con tecnología ARNm (100% Spikevax®, 68,5% Comirnaty®) frente a las basadas en vector con adenovirus (38,0% Vaxzevria®, 33,3% Ad26.COV2-S®) (P < ,001). En el análisis multivariante la RS se relacionó con la edad (<60 años;OR: 3,8, IC 95% 1,9–7,0;P < ,001). La RS en pacientes con aminosalicilatos fue del 65,4%, 61,4% con inmunosupresor, 65,8% con anti-TNF y 68,7% con biológicos no anti-TNF (P = ,9). Conclusiones Un tercio de pacientes con EII no desarrolló anticuerpos con la pauta vacunal inicial frente a SARS-CoV-2. La RS a las vacunas basadas en tecnología ARNm fue superior, y estuvo relacionada con la edad (mayor en pacientes más jóvenes). Los inmunosupresores y biológicos no disminuyeron la RS. Más de la mitad de los pacientes presentaron EA, leves en todos los casos.
RESUMO
[...]specific policy issues made the difference, not party loyalty or personalities. [...]in the fall of 2019, the Latino unemployment rate was at a historic low.8 Two years prior in 2017, the Latino poverty rate was similarly low-its lowest level since estimates were first published during the Nixon administration.9 And on the eve of the pandemic, the National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals released a report showing the Hispanic homeownership rate had increased for the fifth year in a row.10 These positive economic conditions did not happen in a vacuum. Since taking office, President Donald Trump worked with Congress to embrace pro-growth economic policies that helped spur the private sector to create jobs and expand economic opportunity. According to an analysis by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, in President Trump's first 21 months in office, 281,000 new manufacturing jobs were created.13 These number help explain why Roberto Barrera, a resident of Zapata County, Texas, voted for President Trump in 2020 and helped the Republican Party win the county for the first time in 100 years.14 As someone employed in the oil and gas industry, Zapata told a reporter that he made his decision after hearing then-Vice President Joe Biden say he would "transition from the fossil fuel industry. According to one analysis, around 8 in 10 Americans reaped the benefits of tax relief.16 It is easy to gloss over this point, but it is worth repeating: a large majority ofAmericans, including Latinos, were able to keep more of their hard-earned money to save, spend, and invest as they saw fit thanks to policies enacted by the Trump administration.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There are scarce data about SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Our aim was to analyze the incidence, clinical presentation, and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with IBD. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, observational study. We contacted all the patients being treated at our IBD unit to identify those patients with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, following the World Health Organization case definition. Data were obtained by patient electronical medical records and by phone interview. RESULTS: Eighty-two of 805 patients with IBD (10.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3-12.5) were diagnosed as having confirmed (28 patients, 3.5%; 95% CI, 2.4-5.0) or suspected (54 patients, 6.7%) infection. Patient age was 46 ± 14 years, 44 patients were female (53.7%), 17.3% were smokers, 51.2% had Crohn disease (CD), and 39.0% had comorbidities. Digestive symptoms were reported in 41 patients (50.0%), with diarrhea as the most common (42.7%). One patient (1.2%) was diagnosed with IBD flare-up during SARS-CoV-2 infection. Twenty-two patients (26.8%) temporarily withdrew from their IBD treatment because of COVID-19. Most of the patients had mild disease (79.3%), and 1 patient died (1.2%). In the multivariate analysis, the presence of dyspnea was associated with moderate to severe infection (odds ratio, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.6-17.7; P = 0.01) and myalgias (odds ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.3-17.9; P = 0.02) were related to a milder clinical course. Immunosuppression was not related to severity. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with IBD is not rare. Dyspnea is associated with a more severe infection. Therapy for IBD, including immunomodulators and biologic therapy, is not related to a greater severity of COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 infections do not appear to be related to IBD flare-ups.