Search

Background: Inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines have been widely implemented in low- and middle-income countries. However, immunogenicity in immunocompromised patients has not been established. Herein, we aimed to evaluate immune response to CoronaVac vaccine in these patients., Methods: This prospective cohort study included 193 participants with 5 different immunocompromising conditions and 67 controls, receiving 2 doses of CoronaVac 8-12 weeks before enrollment. The study was conducted between May and August 2021, at Red de Salud UC-CHRISTUS, Santiago, Chile. Neutralizing antibody (NAb) positivity, total anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G antibody (TAb) concentrations, and T-cell responses were determined., Results: NAb positivity and median neutralizing activity were 83.1% and 51.2% for the control group versus 20.6% and 5.7% (both P < .001) in the solid organ transplant group, 41.5% and 19.2% (both P < .0001) in the autoimmune rheumatic diseases group, 43.3% (P < .001) and 21.4% (P<.01 or P = .001) in the cancer with solid tumors group, 45.5% and 28.7% (both P < .001) in the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection group, 64.3% and 56.6% (both differences not significant) in the hematopoietic stem cell transplant group, respectively. TAb seropositivity was also lower for the solid organ transplant (20.6%; P < .0001), rheumatic diseases (61%; P < .001), and HIV groups (70.9%; P = .003), compared with the control group (92.3%). On the other hand, the number of interferon γ spot-forming T cells specific for SARS-CoV-2 tended to be lower in all immunocompromising conditions but did not differ significantly between groups., Conclusions: Diverse immunocompromising conditions markedly reduce the humoral response to CoronaVac vaccine. These findings suggest that a boosting vaccination strategy should be considered in these vulnerable patients., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT04888793., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The causative factors for the recent increase in early-onset colorectal cancer (EO-CRC) incidence are unknown. We sought to determine if early-onset disease is clinically or genomically distinct from average-onset colorectal cancer (AO-CRC)., Methods: Clinical, histopathologic, and genomic characteristics of EO-CRC patients (2014-2019), divided into age 35 years and younger and 36-49 years at diagnosis, were compared with AO-CRC (50 years and older). Patients with mismatch repair deficient tumors, CRC-related hereditary syndromes, and inflammatory bowel disease were excluded from all but the germline analysis. All statistical tests were 2-sided., Results: In total, 759 patients with EO-CRC (35 years, n = 151; 36-49 years, n = 608) and AO-CRC (n = 687) were included. Left-sided tumors (35 years and younger = 80.8%; 36-49 years = 83.7%; AO = 63.9%; P < .001 for both comparisons), rectal bleeding (35 years and younger = 41.1%; 36-49 years = 41.0%; AO = 25.9%; P = .001 and P < .001, respectively), and abdominal pain (35 years and younger = 37.1%; 36-49 years = 34.0%; AO = 26.8%; P = .01 and P = .005, respectively) were more common in EO-CRC. Among microsatellite stable tumors, we found no differences in histopathologic tumor characteristics. Initially, differences in TP53 and Receptor Tyrosine Kinase signaling pathway (RTK-RAS)alterations were noted by age. However, on multivariate analysis including somatic gene analysis and tumor sidedness, no statistically significant differences at the gene or pathway level were demonstrated. Among advanced microsatellite stable CRCs, chemotherapy response and survival were equivalent by age cohorts. Pathogenic germline variants were identified in 23.3% of patients 35 years and younger vs 14.1% of AO-CRC (P = .01)., Conclusions: EO-CRCs are more commonly left-sided and present with rectal bleeding and abdominal pain but are otherwise clinically and genomically indistinguishable from AO-CRCs. Aggressive treatment regimens based solely on the age at CRC diagnosis are not warranted., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

To detect traces of insecticides in the environment using biosensors, we engineered Drosophila acetylcholinesterase (AChE) to increase its sensitivity and its rate of phosphorylation or carbamoylation by organophosphates or carbamates. The mutants made by site-directed mutagenesis were expressed in baculovirus. Different strategies were used to obtain these mutants: (i) substitution of amino acids at positions found mutated in AChE from insects resistant to insecticide, (ii) mutations of amino acids at positions suggested by 3-D structural analysis of the active site, (iii) Ala-scan analysis of amino acids lining the active site gorge, (iv) mutagenesis at positions detected as important for sensitivity in the Ala-scan analysis and (v) combination of mutations which independently enhance sensitivity. The results highlighted the difficulty of predicting the effect of mutations; this may be due to the structure of the site, a deep gorge with the active serine at the bottom and to allosteric effects between the top and the bottom of the gorge. Nevertheless, the use of these different strategies allowed us to obtain sensitive enzymes. The greatest improvement was for the sensitivity to dichlorvos for which a mutant was 300-fold more sensitive than the Drosophila wild-type enzyme and 288 000-fold more sensitive than the electric eel enzyme, the enzyme commonly used to detect organophosphate and carbamate.