Evaluation of immunogenicity and reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women.

OBJECTIVE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in pregnancy is associated with increased risk of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Vaccines are highly effective at preventing severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but there are limited data on COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy. This study aimed to investigate the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women when administered according to the 12-week-interval dosing schedule recommended in the UK. METHODS: This was a cohort study of pregnant women receiving COVID-19 vaccination between April and September 2021. The outcomes were immunogenicity and reactogenicity after COVID-19 vaccination. Pregnant women were recruited by phone, e-mail and/or text and were vaccinated according to vaccine availability at their local vaccination center. For immunogenicity assessment, blood samples were taken at specific timepoints after each dose to evaluate nucleocapsid protein (N) and spike protein (S) antibody titers. The comparator group comprised non-pregnant female healthcare workers in the same age group who were vaccinated as part of the national immunization program in a contemporaneous longitudinal cohort study. Longitudinal changes in serum antibody titers and association with pregnancy status were assessed using a two-step regression approach. Reactogenicity assessment in pregnant women was undertaken using an online questionnaire. The comparator group comprised non-pregnant women aged 18-49 years who had received two vaccine doses in primary care. The association of pregnancy status with reactogenicity was assessed using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 67 pregnant women, of whom 66 had received a mRNA vaccine, and 79 non-pregnant women, of whom 50 had received a mRNA vaccine, were included in the immunogenicity study. Most (61.2%) pregnant women received their first vaccine dose in the third trimester, while 3.0% received it in the first trimester and 35.8% in the second trimester. SARS-CoV-2 S-antibody geometric mean concentrations after mRNA vaccination were not significantly different at 2-6 weeks after the first dose but were significantly lower at 2-6 weeks after the second dose in infection-naïve pregnant compared with non-pregnant women. In pregnant women, prior infection was associated with higher antibody levels at 2-6 weeks after the second vaccine dose. Reactogenicity analysis included 108 pregnant women and 116 non-pregnant women. After the first dose, tiredness and chills were reported less commonly in pregnant compared with non-pregnant women (P = 0.043 and P = 0.029, respectively). After the second dose, feeling generally unwell was reported less commonly (P = 0.046) in pregnant compared with non-pregnant women. CONCLUSIONS: Using an extended 12-week interval between vaccine doses, antibody responses after two doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine were found to be lower in pregnant compared with non-pregnant women. Strong antibody responses were achieved after one dose in previously infected women, regardless of pregnancy status. Pregnant women reported fewer adverse events after both the first and second dose of vaccine. These findings should now be addressed in larger controlled studies. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

What is the evidence for interactions between filaggrin null mutations and environmental exposures in the aetiology of atopic dermatitis? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies indicate that gene-environment interactions play a role in atopic dermatitis (AD). OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence for gene-environment interactions in AD aetiology, focusing on filaggrin (FLG) loss-of-function mutations. METHODS: A systematic search from inception to September 2018 in Embase, MEDLINE and BIOSIS was performed. Search terms included all synonyms for AD and filaggrin/FLG; any genetic or epidemiological study design using any statistical methods were included. Quality assessment using criteria modified from guidance (ROBINS-I and Human Genome Epidemiology Network) for nonrandomized and genetic studies was completed, including consideration of power. Heterogeneity of study design and analyses precluded the use of meta-analysis. RESULTS: Of 1817 papers identified, 12 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria required and performed formal interaction testing. There was some evidence for FLG-environment interactions in six of the studies (P-value for interaction ≤ 0·05), including early-life cat ownership, older siblings, water hardness, phthalate exposure, higher urinary phthalate metabolite levels (which all increased AD risk additional to FLG null genotype) and prolonged breastfeeding (which decreased AD risk in the context of FLG null genotype). Major limitations of published studies were the low numbers of individuals (ranging from five to 94) with AD and FLG loss-of-function mutations and exposure to specific environmental factors, and variation in exposure definitions. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on FLG-environment interactions in AD aetiology is limited. However, many of the studies lacked large enough sample sizes to assess these interactions fully. Further research is needed with larger sample sizes and clearly defined exposure assessment. Linked Comment: Park and Seo. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:411.