Search

BackgroundIndividuals on hemodialysis are more vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection than the general population due to end-stage kidney disease-induced immunosuppression.Methods26 hemodialysis patients experiencing SARS-CoV-2 infection after 3rdvaccination were matched 1:1 to 26 out of 92 SARS-CoV-2 naïves by age, sex, dialysis vintage and immunosuppressive drugs receiving a 4thvaccination with an mRNA-based vaccine. A competitive surrogate neutralization assay was used to monitor vaccination success. To determine infection neutralization titers, Vero-E6 cells were infected with SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoC), Omicron sub-lineage BA.1, BA.5, and BQ.1.1. 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50, serum dilution factor 1:x) was determined before, four weeks after and 6 months after the 4thvaccination.Results52 hemodialysis patients received four COVID-19 vaccinations and were followed up for a median of 6.3 months. Patient characteristics did not differ between the matched cohorts. Patients without a SARS-CoV-2 infection had a significant reduction of real virus neutralization capacity for all Omicron sub-lineages after six months (pConclusionsSARS-CoV-2-naïve hemodialysis patients had significantly decreased virus neutralization capacity six months after the 4thvaccination whereas patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection had no change in neutralization capacity. This was independent of age, sex, dialysis vintage and immunosuppression. Therefore, in infection-naïve hemodialysis patients a fifth COVID-19 vaccination might be reasonable 6 months after the 4thvaccination.

ZUSAMMENFASSUNGIm Rahmen der Vorbereitung eines Lebendspenders für eine Organspende soll ein ausreichender Gesundheitszustand des Spenders dokumentiert werden, insbesondere auch hinsichtlich einer „normalen“ Nierenfunktion. Um diese richtig einzuschätzen, bedarf es einiger Überlegungen, die in diesem Beitrag erläutert werden. Zur weiteren Abklärung gehören der Ausschluss von Infektionen, Tumorerkrankungen, Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen sowie Einschränkungen der Funktion der Organe oder der Psyche, die eine Lebendspende verhindern. Zusätzlich müssen immunologische Voraussetzungen (Verträglichkeitsprüfung mittels Crossmatch und die Untersuchung der Blutgruppenkompatibilität) nachgewiesen und die Vorgaben nach dem Transplantationsgesetz erfüllt werden. Vonseiten der Transplantationschirurgie gilt es dabei, möglichst früh zu klären, ob der mögliche Spender aufgrund von den bereits erwähnten Vorerkrankungen, Voroperationen oder anatomischen Gegebenheiten überhaupt für eine Spenderoperation geeignet ist. Das interdisziplinäre Team begleitet das Lebendspendenpaar in der Vorbereitungsphase eng, um alle Besonderheiten der Spender kennenzulernen und sie mit einem maximal möglichen Maß an Sicherheit zur Spende bzw. Transplantation zu führen.

ZUSAMMENFASSUNGDie Nachsorge der Lebendnierenspender kann in 3 Phasen unterteilt werden. In der postoperativen Phase, die im Wesentlichen den Klinikaufenthalt umfasst, steht das übliche postoperative Management im Vordergrund. In der Frühphase, die etwa ein Jahr andauert, werden die Weichen für die korrekte Lebensweise gestellt, Lifestyle-Modifikationen durchgeführt, die Entwicklung der Nierenfunktion überwacht und die berufliche Wiedereingliederung des Spenders einschl. psychosozialer Aspekte unterstützt. In der Langzeitphase steht weiterhin die Optimierung aller eine chronische Niereninsuffizienz begünstigenden Faktoren im Vordergrund. Zudem müssen alle Komplikationen einer selten auftretenden, aber möglichen, Nierenfunktionsverschlechterung frühzeitig erkannt und behandelt werden. Spenderinnen, die eine Schwangerschaft planen, müssen über die erhöhten Risiken erneut aufgeklärt werden. Für die jeweiligen Therapie- und Präventionsstrategien stehen die nephrologischen 1, transplantationsmedizinischen 2, 3, hypertensiologischen 4, internistischen 5 und urologischen 6 Leitlinien und Manuale 7 zur Verfügung.

High efficacy in terms of protection from severe COVID-19 has been demonstrated for several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. However, patients with compromised immune status develop a weaker and less stable immune response to vaccination. Strong immune response may not always translate into clinical benefit, therefore it is important to synthesise evidence on modified schemes and types of vaccination in these population subgroups for guiding health decisions. As the literature on COVID-19 vaccines continues to expand, we aimed to scope the literature on multiple subgroups to subsequently decide on the most relevant research questions to be answered by systematic reviews.To provide an overview of the availability of existing literature on immune response and long-term clinical outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination, and to map this evidence according to the examined populations, specific vaccines, immunity parameters, and their way of determining relevant long-term outcomes and the availability of mapping between immune reactivity and relevant outcomes.We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, the Web of Science Core Collection, and the World Health Organization COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease on 6 December 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that published results on immunity outcomes after vaccination with BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222, Ad26.COV2.S, Sputnik V or Sputnik Light, BBIBP-CorV, or CoronaVac on predefined vulnerable subgroups such as people with malignancies, transplant recipients, people undergoing renal replacement therapy, and people with immune disorders, as well as pregnant and breastfeeding women, and children. We included studies if they had at least 100 participants (not considering healthy control groups); we excluded case studies and case series.We extracted data independently and in duplicate onto an online data extraction form. Data were represented as tables and as online maps to show the frequency of studies for each item. We mapped the data according to study design, country of participant origin, patient comorbidity subgroup, intervention, outcome domains (clinical, safety, immunogenicity), and outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Out of 25,452 identified records, 318 studies with a total of more than 5 million participants met our eligibility criteria and were included in the review. Participants were recruited mainly from high-income countries between January 2020 and 31 October 2021 (282/318); the majority of studies included adult participants (297/318). Haematological malignancies were the most commonly examined comorbidity group (N = 54), followed by solid tumours (N = 47), dialysis (N = 48), kidney transplant (N = 43), and rheumatic diseases (N = 28, 17, and 15 for mixed diseases, multiple sclerosis, and inflammatory bowel disease, respectively). Thirty-one studies included pregnant or breastfeeding women. The most commonly administered vaccine was BNT162b2 (N = 283), followed by mRNA-1273 (N = 153), AZD1222 (N = 66), Ad26.COV2.S (N = 42), BBIBP-CorV (N = 15), CoronaVac (N = 14), and Sputnik V (N = 5; no studies were identified for Sputnik Light). Most studies reported outcomes after regular vaccination scheme. The majority of studies focused on immunogenicity outcomes, especially seroconversion based on binding antibody measurements and immunoglobulin G (IgG) titres (N = 179 and 175, respectively). Adverse events and serious adverse events were reported in 126 and 54 studies, whilst SARS-CoV-2 infection irrespective of severity was reported in 80 studies. Mortality due to SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in 36 studies. Please refer to our evidence gap maps for more detailed information.Up to 6 December 2021, the majority of studies examined data on mRNA vaccines administered as standard vaccination schemes (two doses approximately four to eight weeks apart) that report on immunogenicity parameters or adverse events. Clinical outcomes were less commonly reported, and if so, were often reported as a secondary outcome observed in seroconversion or immunoglobulin titre studies. As informed by this scoping review, two effectiveness reviews (on haematological malignancies and kidney transplant recipients) are currently being conducted.

BackgroundHemodialysis patients are exposed to a markedly increased risk when infected with SARS-CoV-2. To date it is unclear if hemodialysis patients benefit from a fourth vaccination.MethodsA total of 142 hemodialysis patients (median age 72.6 years, 33.8% female) received four COVID-19 vaccinations between December 2020 and March 2022. RDB binding antibody titers were determined in a competitive surrogate neutralization assay. Vero-E6 cells were infected with SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoC) Delta (B.1.617.2) or Omicron (B.1.1.529, sub lineage BA.1) in a biosafety level 3 laboratory to determine serum infection neutralization capacity before and after vaccination.ResultsAfter the fourth vaccination serum infection neutralization capacity significantly increased from a 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50, serum dilution factor 1:x) of 247.0 (46.3-1560.8) to 2560.0 (1174.0-2560.0) for the Delta VoC, and from 37.5 (20.0-198.8) to 668.5 (182.2-2560.0) for the Omicron VoC (each pConclusionsOur findings suggest that hemodialysis patients benefit from a fourth vaccination in particular in the light of the highly infectious SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. A routinely applied four-time vaccination seems to broaden immunity against variants and would be recommended in hemodialysis patients.

Hemodialysis patients are exposed to a markedly increased risk when infected with SARS-CoV-2. To date, it is unclear if hemodialysis patients benefit from four vaccinations. A total of 142 hemodialysis patients received four COVID-19 vaccinations until March 2022. RDB binding antibody titers were determined in a competitive surrogate neutralization assay. Vero-E6 cells were infected with SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoC), Delta (B.1.617.2), or Omicron (B.1.1.529, sub-lineage BA.1) to determine serum infection neutralization capacity. Four weeks after the fourth vaccination, serum infection neutralization capacity significantly increased from a 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50, serum dilution factor 1:x) of 247.0 (46.3–1560.8) to 2560.0 (1174.0–2560.0) for the Delta VoC, and from 37.5 (20.0–198.8) to 668.5 (182.2–2560.0) for the Omicron VoC (each p < 0.001) compared to four months after the third vaccination. A significant increase in the neutralization capacity was even observed for patients with high antibody titers after three vaccinations (p < 0.001). Ten patients with SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection after the first blood sampling had by trend lower prior neutralization capacity for Omicron (p = 0.051). Our findings suggest that hemodialysis patients benefit from a fourth vaccination in particular in the light of the highly infectious SARS-CoV-2 Omicron-variants. A routinely applied four-time vaccination seems to broaden immunity against variants and would be recommended in hemodialysis patients.

Background Hospital staff are at high risk of infection during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. We analysed the exposure characteristics, efficacy of protective measures, and transmission dynamics in this hospital-wide prospective seroprevalence study. Methods and Findings Overall, 4554 individuals were tested for anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgG antibodies using a chemiluminescent immunoassay. Individual risk factors, use of personal protective equipment (PPE), occupational exposure, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and symptoms were assessed using a questionnaire and correlated to anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody titres and PCR testing results. Odds ratios with corresponding exact 95% confidence intervals were used to evaluate associations between individual factors and seropositivity. Spatio-temporal trajectories of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients and staff mobility within the hospital were visualised to identify local hotspots of virus transmission. The overall seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2-IgG antibody was 2.4% [95% CI 1.9–2.9]. Patient-facing staff, including those working in COVID-19 areas, had a similar probability of being seropositive as non-patient-facing staff. Prior interaction with SARS-CoV-2-infected co-workers or private contacts and unprotected exposure to COVID-19 patients increased the probability of seropositivity. Loss of smell and taste had the highest positive predictive value for seropositivity. The rate of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections was 25.9%, and higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody titres were observed in symptomatic individuals. Spatio-temporal hotspots of SARS-CoV-2-positive staff and patients only showed partial overlap. Conclusions Patient-facing work in a healthcare facility during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic may be safe if adequate PPE and hygiene measures are applied. The high numbers of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections that escaped detection by symptomatic testing underline the value of cross-sectional seroprevalence studies. Unprotected contact is a major risk factor for infection and argues for the rigorous implementation of hygiene measures.