Neutralizing antibodies to Omicron after the fourth SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose in immunocompromised patients highlight the need of additional boosters

Immunocompromised patients have been shown to have an impaired immune response to COVID-19 vaccines. Here we compared the B-cell, T-cell and neutralizing antibody response to WT and Omicron BA.2 SARS-CoV-2 virus after the fourth dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in patients with hematological malignancies (HM, n=71), solid tumors (ST, n=39) and immune-rheumatological (ID, n=25) diseases. We show that the T-cell response is similarly boosted by the fourth dose across the different subgroups, while the antibody response is improved only in patients not receiving B-cell targeted therapies, independent on the pathology. However, 9% of patients with anti-RBD antibodies did not have neutralizing antibodies to both virus variants, while an additional 5.7% did not have neutralizing antibodies to Omicron BA.2, making these patients particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The increment of neutralizing antibodies was very similar towards Omicron BA.2 and WT virus after the third or fourth dose of vaccine, suggesting that there is no preferential skewing towards either virus variant with the booster dose. The only limited step is the amount of antibodies that are elicited after vaccination, thus increasing the probability of developing neutralizing antibodies to both variants of virus. Hence, additional booster doses are recommended to frail patients.

mRNA-COVID19 vaccination can be considered safe and tolerable for frail patients

BackgroundFrail patients are considered at relevant risk of complications due to COVID-19 infection and, for this reason, are prioritized candidates for vaccination. As these patients were originally not included in the registration trials, fear related to vaccine side-effects and disease worsening was one of the reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Herein we report the safety profile of the prospective, multicenter, national VAX4FRAIL study (NCT04848493) to evaluate vaccines in a large trans-disease cohort of patients with solid or hematological malignancies, neurological and rheumatological diseases. MethodsBetween March 3rd and September 2nd, 2021, 566 patients were evaluable for safety endpoint: 105 received the mRNA-1273 vaccine and 461 the BNT162b2 vaccine. Frail patients were defined per protocol as patients under treatment with hematological malignancies (131), solid tumors (191), immune-rheumatological diseases (86), and neurological diseases (158), including multiple sclerosis and generalized myasthenia. The impact of the vaccination on the health status of patients was assessed through a questionnaire focused on the first week after each vaccine dose. ResultsThe most frequently reported moderate-severe adverse events were pain at the injection site (60.3% after the first dose, 55.4% after the second), fatigue (30.1% - 41.7%), bone pain (27.4% - 27.2%) and headache (11.8% - 18.9%). Risk factors associated with the occurrence of severe symptoms after vaccine administration were identified through a multivariate logistic regression analysis: age was associated with severe fever presentation (younger patients vs. middle-aged vs. older ones), females presented a higher probability of severe pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, and bone pain; the mRNA-1237 vaccine was associated with a higher probability of severe pain at the injection site and fever. After the first dose, patients presenting a severe symptom were at a relevant risk of recurrence of the same severe symptom after the second one. Overall, 11 patients (1.9%) after the first dose and 7 (1.2%) after the second one required to postpone or suspend the disease-specific treatment. Finally, 2 fatal events occurred among our 566 patients. These two events were considered unrelated to the vaccine. ConclusionsOur study reports that mRNA-COVID-19 vaccination is safe also in frail patients as expected side effects were manageable and had a minimum impact on patient care path. ImportanceOur study reports the safety analysis of the trial VAX4FRAIL confirming that mRNA-COVID-19 vaccination is safe in frail immunocompromised patients: expected side effects were manageable and had a minimum impact on patient care path. ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety of mRNA-COVID-19 vaccination in vulnerable patients. DesignVAX4FRAIL is a national, multicentric, observational, prospective trial (start date March 3rd, 2021 - primary completion date September 2nd, 2021). SettingMulticenter prospective trial. ParticipantsFrail patients were defined per protocol as patients under treatment with solid tumors (191), immune-rheumatological diseases (86), hematological malignancies (131), and neurological diseases (158), including multiple sclerosis and generalized myasthenia. ExposureOverall, 105 received the mRNA-1273 vaccine and 461 the BNT162b2 vaccine. Main OutcomeThe occurrence of adverse events after 1st and 2nd m-RNA-COVID-19 vaccination was analyzed. Adverse events were collected through a questionnaire comprising both open and closed questions. ResultsThe most frequently reported moderate-severe adverse events were pain at the injection site (60.3% after the first dose, 55.4% after the second), fatigue (30.1% - 41.7%), bone pain (27.4% - 27.2%) and headache (11.8% - 18.9%). Risk factors associated with the occurrence of severe symptoms after vaccine administration were identified through a multivariate logistic regression analysis: age was associated with severe fever presentation (younger patients vs. middle-aged vs. older ones), females presented a higher probability of severe pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, and bone pain; the mRNA-1237 vaccine was associated with a higher probability of severe pain at the injection site and fever. Patients presenting a severe symptom after the first dose were at a relevant risk of recurrence of the same severe symptom after the second one. Overall, 11 patients (1.9%) after the first dose and 7 (1.2%) after the second one was required to postpone or suspend their disease-specific treatment. Finally, 2 fatal events occurred among our 566 patients, and these two events were due to disease progression and considered unrelated to the vaccine. Conclusion and RelevanceOur study reports that mRNA-COVID-19 vaccination is safe also in frail patients as expected side effects were manageable and had a minimum impact on patient care path. Study RegistrationA National, Multicentric, Observational, Prospective Study to Assess Immune Response to COVID-19 Vaccine in Frail Patients (VAX4FRAIL). NCT04848493 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04848493 Key PointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSCan m-RNA-COVID19 vaccination be considered safe for frail patients? FindingsIn this national, multicentric, observational, prospective trial (NCT04848493) that included 566 frail patients, the occurrence of both local and systemic adverse events was manageable and did not negatively impact on the general treatment program. MeaningmRNA-COVID19 vaccination is safe among frail immunocompromised patients.

Humoral and T-cell immune response after three doses of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in fragile patients: the Italian VAX4FRAIL study

BackgroundPatients with solid or hematological tumors, neurological and immune-inflammatory disorders represent potentially fragile subjects with increased risk to experience severe COVID-19 and inadequate response to SARS-CoV2 vaccination. MethodsWe designed a prospective Italian multicentric study to assess humoral and T-cell response to SARS-CoV2 vaccination in patients (n=378) with solid tumors (ST), hematological malignancies (HM), neurological (ND) and immuno-rheumatological diseases (ID). The immunogenicity of primary vaccination schedule and of the booster dose were analyzed. ResultsOverall, patient seroconversion rate after two doses was 62.1%. A significant lower rate was observed in HM (52.4%) and ID (51.9%) patients compared to ST (95.6%) and ND (70.7%); a lower median level of antibodies was detected in HM and ID versus the others (p<0.0001). A similar rate of patients with a positive SARS-CoV2 T-cell response was observed in all disease groups, with a higher level observed in the ND group. The booster dose improved humoral responses in all disease groups, although with a lower response in HM patients, while the T-cell response increased similarly in all groups. In the multivariable logistic model, the independent predictors for seroconversion were disease subgroups, type of therapies and age. Notably, the ongoing treatment known to affect the immune system was associated with the worst humoral response to vaccination (p<0.0001), but had no effects on the T-cell responses. ConclusionsImmunosuppressive treatment more than disease type per se is a risk factor for low humoral response after vaccination. The booster dose can improve both humoral and T-cell response. Articles main point- Lower rate of seroconversion was observed in fragile patients as compared to healthy controls - The booster dose improves humoral and T-cell response in all fragile patient groups - Immunosuppressive treatment was associated with the worst humoral response to vaccination, but had no effects on T-cell responses.

Tocilizumab for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The TOCIVID-19 phase 2 trial

BackgroundTocilizumab blocks pro-inflammatory activity of interleukin-6 (IL-6), involved in pathogenesis of pneumonia the most frequent cause of death in COVID-19 patients. MethodsA multicentre, single-arm, hypothesis-driven phase 2 trial was planned to study the effect of Tocilizumab on lethality rates at 14 and 30 days (co-primary endpoints). A cohort of patients consecutively enrolled after phase 2 was used as a validation dataset. A multivariable logistic regression was performed to generate hypotheses, while controlling for possible confounders. Resultsout of 301 patients in phase 2 intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, 180 (59.8%) received tocilizumab. With 67 death events, lethality rates were 18.4% (97.5%CI: 13.6-24.0, P=0.52) and 22.4% (97.5%CI: 17.2-28.3, P<0.001) at 14 and 30 days. Lethality rates were lower in the validation dataset, including 920 patients. No signal of specific drug toxicity was reported. The multivariable logistic regression suggests tocilizumab might be more effective in patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline. Also, it supports a positive effect on lethality rate of the use of corticosteroids. ConclusionsTocilizumab reduced lethality rate at 30 days compared with null hypothesis, without significant toxicity. Such result support the use of tocilizumab while waiting for ongoing phase 3 trials. RegistrationEudraCT (2020-001110-38); clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04317092)

Response and role of palliative care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national telephone survey of hospices in Italy

BackgroundPalliative care is an important component of healthcare in pandemics, contributing to symptom control, psychological support, and supporting triage and complex decision making. AimTo examine preparedness for, and impact of, the COVID-19 pandemic on hospices in Italy to inform the response in other countries. DesignCross-sectional telephone survey, carried out in March 2020. SettingSixteen Italian hospices, purposively sampled according to COVID-19 risk into high (more than 25 COVID-19 cases per 100,000 inhabitants), medium (15-25 cases per 100,000), and low risk (fewer than 15 cases per 100,000) regions. A brief questionnaire was developed to guide the interviews. Descriptive analysis was undertaken. ResultsSeven high risk, five medium risk and four low risk hospices provided data. Two high risk hospices had experienced COVID-19 cases among both patients and staff. All hospices had implemented policy changes, and several had rapidly implemented changes in practice including transfer of staff from inpatient to community settings, change in admission criteria, and daily telephone support for families. Concerns included scarcity of personal protective equipment, a lack of hospice-specific guidance on COVID-19, anxiety about needing to care for children and other relatives, and poor integration of palliative care in the acute setting. ConclusionThe hospice sector is capable of responding flexibly and rapidly to the COVID-19 pandemic. Governments must urgently recognise the essential contribution of hospice and palliative care to the COVID-19 pandemic, and ensure these services are integrated into the health care system response. Availability of personal protective equipment and setting-specific guidance is essential. What is already knownO_LIThe Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has estimated global mortality of 3.4%, and numbers of cases are rapidly escalating worldwide. C_LIO_LIHospice services face unprecedented pressure, with resources rapidly stretched beyond normal bounds. C_LIO_LINo data exist on the response and role of hospice and palliative care teams to COVID-19. C_LIO_LIWithin Europe, Italy has been most affected by COVID-19. C_LI What this paper addsO_LIWe surveyed 16 Italian hospices in March 2020, all of which had implemented rapid policy changes in response to COVID-19. C_LIO_LIChanges to practice included moving to more support in community settings, change in admission criteria, and daily telephone support for families. C_LIO_LIPersonal protective equipment and guidance were lacking. C_LIO_LIAssessments of risk and potential impact on staff varied greatly. C_LI Implications for policy and practiceO_LIGovernments must recognise the hospice and palliative care sector as an essential component of the health care system response to COVID-19. C_LIO_LIThe hospice sector is capable of responding rapidly to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the potential of this response will be undermined unless hospices can access personal protective equipment. C_LIO_LIConsiderations for hospice services during the COVID-19 pandemic are changes to visitor policies, interruption of volunteering, shifting roles and responsibilities such as greater community working and telephone support for relatives. C_LI