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

IntroductionImmunocompromised patients have been shown to have an impaired immune response to COVID-19 vaccines.MethodsHere 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 (IR, n=25) diseases. The humoral and T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were analyzed by quantifying the anti-RBD antibodies, their neutralization activity and the IFN-γ released after spike specific stimulation.ResultsWe 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 either 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.DiscussionThese data support the recommendation of additional booster doses in frail patients to enhance the development of a B-cell response directed against Omicron and/or to enhance the T-cell response in patients treated with anti-CD20

Safety of third dose of COVID-19 vaccination in frail patients: Results from the prospective Italian VAX4FRAIL study

ImportanceDespite people with impaired immune competence due to an underlying disease or ongoing therapy, hereinafter frail patients, are (likely to be) the first to be vaccinated, they were usually excluded from clinical trials. ObjectiveTo report adverse reactions of frail patients after receipt of the third dose (booster) administered after completion of a two-dose mRNA vaccination and to compare with those reported after the receipt of the first two doses. DesignA multicenter, observational, prospective study aimed at evaluating both the safety profile and the immune response of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines in frail patients. SettingNational Project on Vaccines, COVID-19 and Frail Patients (VAX4FRAIL) ParticipantsPeople consenting and included in the VAX4FRAIL trial. ExposureA series of three doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination from the same manufacturer. Main outcome(s) and measure(s)Evaluation of a self-assessment questionnaire addressing a predefined list of eight symptoms on a five-item Likert scale. Symptoms were classified as severe if the patient rated them as severe or overwhelming. ResultsAmong 320 VAX4FRAIL participants diagnosed/treated for hematological malignancies (N=105; 32.8%), solid tumors (N=48; 15.0%), immune-rheumatological diseases (N=60; 18.8%), neurological diseases (N=107; 33.4%), and receiving the booster dose, 70.3% reported at least one loco-regional or systemic reactions. Adverse events were mostly mild or moderate, none being life-threatening. Only six of the 320 (1.9%) patients had their treatment postponed due to the vaccine. The safety profile of the booster compared to previously administered two doses showed a stable prevalence of patients with one or more adverse events (73.5%, 79.7% and 73.9% respectively), and a slightly increment of patients with one or more severe adverse events (13.4%, 13.9% and 19.2% respectively). Conclusions and relevanceThe booster of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was safely administered in the largest prospective cohort of frail patients reported so far. VAX4FRAIL will continue to monitor the safety of additional vaccine doses, especially systemic adverse events that can be easily prevented to avoid interruption of continuity of care

Pharmacokinetics of remdesivir and GS-441524 in two critically ill patients who recovered from COVID-19

Background Remdesivir is a prodrug of the nucleoside analogue GS-441524 and is under evaluation for treatment of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. Objectives To evaluate the pharmacokinetics of remdesivir and GS-441524 in plasma, bronchoalveolar aspirate (BAS) and CSF in two critically ill COVID-19 patients. Methods Remdesivir was administered at 200 mg loading dose on the first day followed by 12 days of 100 mg in two critically ill patients. Blood samples were collected immediately after (C0) and at 1 (C1) and 24 h (C24) after intravenous administration on day 3 until day 9. BAS samples were collected on Days 4, 7 and 9 from both patients while one CSF on Day 7 was obtained in one patient. Remdesivir and GS-441524 concentrations were measured in these samples using a validated UHPLC-MS/MS method. Results We observed higher concentrations of remdesivir at C0 (6- to 7-fold higher than EC50 from in vitro studies) and a notable decay at C1. GS-441524 plasma concentrations reached a peak at C1 and persisted until the next administration. Higher concentrations of GS-441524 were observed in the patient with mild renal dysfunction. Mean BAS/plasma concentration ratios of GS-441524 were 2.3% and 6.4% in Patient 1 and Patient 2, respectively. The CSF concentration found in Patient 2 was 25.7% with respect to plasma. GS-441524 levels in lung and CNS suggest compartmental differences in drug exposure. Conclusions We report the first pharmacokinetic evaluation of remdesivir and GS-441524 in recovered COVID-19 patients. Further study of the pharmacokinetic profile of remdesivir, GS-441524 and the intracellular triphosphate form are required

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

IntroductionImmunocompromised patients have been shown to have an impaired immune response to COVID-19 vaccines. MethodsHere 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 (IR, n=25) diseases. The humoral and T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were analyzed by quantifying the anti-RBD antibodies, their neutralization activity and the IFN-gamma released after spike specific stimulation. ResultsWe 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 either 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. DiscussionThese data support the recommendation of additional booster doses in frail patients to enhance the development of a B-cell response directed against Omicron and/or to enhance the T-cell response in patients treated with anti-CD20

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

Background Patients with solid or hematological tumors or neurological and immune-inflammatory disorders are potentially fragile subjects at increased risk of experiencing severe coronavirus disease 2019 and an inadequate response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination. Methods We designed a prospective Italian multicenter study to assess humoral and T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients (n = 378) with solid tumors (ST), hematological malignancies (HM), neurological disorders (ND), and immunorheumatological diseases (ID). A group of healthy controls was also included. We analyzed the immunogenicity of the primary vaccination schedule and booster dose. Results The overall seroconversion rate in patients after 2 doses was 62.1%. Significantly lower rates were observed in HM (52.4%) and ID (51.9%) than in ST (95.6%) and ND (70.7%); a lower median antibody level was detected in HM and ID versus ST and ND (P < .0001). Similar rates of patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 T-cell response were found in all disease groups, with a higher level observed in ND. The booster dose improved the humoral response in all disease groups, although to a lesser extent in HM patients, whereas the T-cell response increased similarly in all groups. In the multivariable logistic model, independent predictors of seroconversion were disease subgroup, treatment type, and age. Ongoing treatment known to affect the immune system was associated with the worst humoral response to vaccination (P < .0001) but had no effect on T-cell responses. Conclusions Immunosuppressive treatment more than disease type per se is a risk factor for a low humoral response after vaccination. The booster dose can improve both humoral and T-cell responses.Compared with healthy individuals, fragile patients have a lower rate of humoral and cellular response after primary vaccination schedule and booster dose. The type of immunosuppressive treatment has greater impact on humoral response than disease subtype, but it has a lower influence on T-cell response

Tocilizumab for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The single-arm TOCIVID-19 prospective 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 multicenter, single-arm, hypothesis-driven trial was planned, according to a phase 2 design, to study the effect of tocilizumab on lethality rates at 14 and 30 days (co-primary endpoints, a priori expected rates being 20 and 35%, respectively). A further prospective cohort of patients, consecutively enrolled after the first cohort was accomplished, was used as a secondary validation dataset. The two cohorts were evaluated jointly in an exploratory multivariable logistic regression model to assess prognostic variables on survival.ResultsIn the primary intention-to-treat (ITT) phase 2 population, 180/301 (59.8%) subjects received tocilizumab, and 67 deaths were observed overall. Lethality rates were equal to 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, respectively. Lethality rates were lower in the validation dataset, that included 920 patients. No signal of specific drug toxicity was reported. In the exploratory multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age and lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio negatively affected survival, while the concurrent use of steroids was associated with greater survival. A statistically significant interaction was found between tocilizumab and respiratory support, suggesting that tocilizumab might be more effective in patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline.ConclusionsTocilizumab reduced lethality rate at 30 days compared with null hypothesis, without significant toxicity. Possibly, this effect could be limited to patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline.Registration EudraCT (2020-001110-38); clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04317092)