Search

Extension of the interval between vaccine doses for the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine was introduced in the United Kingdom to accelerate population coverage with a single dose. At this time, trial data were lacking, and we addressed this in a study of United Kingdom healthcare workers. The first vaccine dose induced protection from infection from the circulating alpha (B.1.1.7) variant over several weeks. In a substudy of 589 individuals, we show that this single dose induces severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) neutralizing antibody (NAb) responses and a sustained B and T cell response to the spike protein. NAb levels were higher after the extended dosing interval (6-14 weeks) compared with the conventional 3- to 4-week regimen, accompanied by enrichment of CD4 + T cells expressing interleukin-2 (IL-2). Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection amplified and accelerated the response. These data on dynamic cellular and humoral responses indicate that extension of the dosing interval is an effective immunogenic protocol., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests A.J.P. is Chair of the United Kingdom Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) Joint Committee on Vaccination & Immunisation (JCVI) but does not participate in policy decisions on COVID-19 vaccines. He is a member of the WHO’s SAGE. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of the DHSC, JCVI, or WHO. A.J.P. is chief investigator on clinical trials of Oxford University’s COVID-19 vaccine funded by NIHR. Oxford University has entered a joint COVID-19 vaccine development partnership with AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Individuals with primary and secondary immunodeficiency (PID/SID) were showntobeat riskofpooroutcomesduringtheearly stagesoftheSARS-CoV-2pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines demonstrate reduced immunogenicity in these patients. Objectives: To understand whether the risk of severe COVID-19 in individuals with PID or SID has changed following the deployment of vaccination and therapeutics in the context of the emergence of novel viral variants of concern. Methods: The outcomes of two cohorts of patients with PID and SID were compared: the first, infected between March and July 2020, prior to vaccination and treatments, the second after these intervention became available between January 2021 and April 2022. Results: 22.7% of immunodeficient patients have been infected at least once with SARS-CoV-2 since the start of the pandemic, compared to over 70% of the general population. Immunodeficient patients were typically infected later in the pandemic when the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant was dominant. This delay was associated with receipt of more vaccine doses and higher pre-infection seroprevalence. Compared to March-July 2020, hospitalization rates (53.3% vs 17.9%, p<0.0001) and mortality (Infection fatality rate 20.0% vs 3.4%, p=0.0003) have significantly reduced for patients with PID but remain elevated compared to the general population. The presence of a serological response to vaccination was associated with a reduced duration of viral detection by PCR in the nasopharynx. Early outpatient treatment with antivirals or monoclonal antibodies reduced hospitalization during the Omicron wave. Conclusions: Most individuals with immunodeficiency in the United Kingdom remain SARS-CoV-2 infection naïve. Vaccination, widespread availability of outpatient treatments and, possibly, the emergence of the B.1.1.529 variant have led to significant improvements in morbidity and mortality followings SARS-CoV-2 infection since the start of the pandemic. However, individuals with PID and SID remain at significantly increased risk of poor outcomes compared to the general population; mitigation, vaccination and treatment strategies must be optimized to minimize the ongoing burden of the pandemic in these vulnerable cohorts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Vaccination prevents severe morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 in the general population. The immunogenicity and efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with antibody deficiency is poorly understood. Objectives: COVID-19 in patients with antibody deficiency (COV-AD) is a multi-site UK study that aims to determine the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in patients with primary or secondary antibody deficiency, a population that suffers from severe and recurrent infection and does not respond well to vaccination. Methods: Individuals on immunoglobulin replacement therapy or with an IgG less than 4 g/L receiving antibiotic prophylaxis were recruited from April 2021. Serological and cellular responses were determined using ELISA, live-virus neutralisation and interferon gamma release assays. SARS-CoV-2 infection and clearance were determined by PCR from serial nasopharyngeal swabs. Results: A total of 5.6% (n = 320) of the cohort reported prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, but only 0.3% remained PCR positive on study entry. Seropositivity, following two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, was 54.8% (n = 168) compared with 100% of healthy controls (n = 205). The magnitude of the antibody response and its neutralising capacity were both significantly reduced compared to controls. Participants vaccinated with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine were more likely to be seropositive (65.7% vs. 48.0%, p = 0.03) and have higher antibody levels compared with the AstraZeneca vaccine (IgGAM ratio 3.73 vs. 2.39, p = 0.0003). T cell responses post vaccination was demonstrable in 46.2% of participants and were associated with better antibody responses but there was no difference between the two vaccines. Eleven vaccine-breakthrough infections have occurred to date, 10 of them in recipients of the AstraZeneca vaccine. Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines demonstrate reduced immunogenicity in patients with antibody deficiency with evidence of vaccine breakthrough infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with primary and secondary antibody deficiency are vulnerable to COVID-19 and demonstrate diminished responses following two-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccine schedules. Third primary vaccinations have been deployed to enhance their humoral and cellular immunity. Objectives: To determine the immunogenicity of the third primary SARS-CoV-2 immunisation in a heterogeneous cohort of patients with antibody deficiency. Methods: Participants enrolled in the COV-AD study were sampled before and after their third vaccine dose. Serological and cellular responses were determined using ELISA, livevirus neutralisation and ELISPOT assays. Results: Following a two-dose schedule, 100% of healthy controls mounted a serological response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, however, 38.6% of individuals with antibody deficiency remained seronegative. A third primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccine significantly increased anti-spike glycoprotein antibody seroprevalence from 61.4% to 76.0%, the magnitude of the antibody response, its neutralising capacity and induced seroconversion in individuals who were seronegative after two vaccine doses. Vaccine-induced serological responses were broadly cross-reactive against the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 variant of concern, however, seroprevalence and antibody levels remained significantly lower than healthy controls. No differences in serological responses were observed between individuals who received AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and Pfizer BioNTech 162b2 during their initial two-dose vaccine schedule. SARS-CoV-2 infectionnaive participants who had received a heterologous vaccine as a third dose were significantly more likely to have a detectable T cell response following their third vaccine dose (61.5% vs 11.1%). Conclusion: These data support the widespread use of third primary immunisations to enhance humoral immunity against SARS-CoV-2 in individuals with antibody deficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

B-cell-depleting agents are among the most commonly used drugs to treat haemato-oncological and autoimmune diseases. They rapidly induce a state of peripheral B-cell aplasia with the potential to interfere with nascent vaccine responses, particularly to novel antigens. We have examined the relationship between B-cell reconstitution and SARS-CoV-2 vaccine responses in two cohorts of patients previously exposed to B-cell-depleting agents: a cohort of patients treated for haematological B-cell malignancy and another treated for rheumatological disease. B-cell depletion severely impairs vaccine responsiveness in the first 6 months after administration: SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence was 42.2% and 33.3% in the haemato-oncological patients and rheumatology patients, respectively and 22.7% in patients vaccinated while actively receiving anti-lymphoma chemotherapy. After the first 6 months, vaccine responsiveness significantly improved during early B-cell reconstitution; however, the kinetics of reconstitution was significantly faster in haemato-oncology patients. The AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and the Pfizer BioNTech 162b vaccine induced equivalent vaccine responses; however, shorter intervals between vaccine doses (<1 m) improved the magnitude of the antibody response in haeamto-oncology patients. In a subgroup of haemato-oncology patients, with historic exposure to B-cell-depleting agents (>36 m previously), vaccine non-responsiveness was independent of peripheral B-cell reconstitution. The findings have important implications for primary vaccination and booster vaccination strategies in individuals clinically vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2. B cell depleting drugs including rituximab are commonly used to treat haematological malignancy and autoimmune diseases but may impair the immunological response to vaccination. This study investigates SARS-CoV-2 vaccine responses in individuals with haematological and rheumatological disease with previously exposure to B cell depleting agents. Vaccination within the first 6 months of B cell depletion is associated with significant impairment of vaccine responsiveness; however, rheumatology and haemato-oncological patients display different kinetics of B cell reconstitution corresponding to differential vaccine responsiveness over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]