Assessing the post hoc effectiveness of tixagevimab-cilgavimab for prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infections in solid organ transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Tixagevimab-cilgavimab (Tix-Cil) was authorized for prophylaxis against COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients from December 2021 through January 2023. Real-world effectiveness for solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients has been unclear. METHODS: We enrolled 911 SOT recipients into a longitudinal COVID-19 serology study, of whom 381 (42%) received ≥1 dose of Tix-Cil. We collected and analyzed data on incident SARS-CoV-2 infections and antibody kinetics for all patients from January 2022 to March 2023, including periods dominated by Omicron BA and BQ subvariants. RESULTS: Over 253 ± 131 days of follow-up, there were 324 new-onset SARS-CoV-2 infections: 117 (31%) in Tix-Cil treated and 207 (39%) in Tix-Cil untreated patients (p = .012). In analyses adjusting for demographic, clinical, and COVID-19 exposure factors, any Tix-Cil treatment was associated with lower infection risk (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.27-0.96, p = .039) throughout the surveillance period including when more resistant BQ.1 and BQ.1.1 subvariants had emerged (12/1/2022 onwards). Among treated patients, receiving a Tix-Cil dose was associated with substantial and sustained increase in anti-spike IgG antibody and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 binding inhibition levels (Abbott Architect assay) that together also demonstrated association with lower infection risk (p = .042). During the full surveillance period, the frequency of infections requiring hospitalization was low overall (N = 26, 2.9% of the total cohort) and not significantly different between Tix-Cil recipients (N = 12, 3.2% of treated patients) and non-Tix-Cil recipients (N = 14, 2.6% of untreated patients) with unadjusted p = .31 for between-group difference. CONCLUSION: In a large cohort of SOT recipients, we found that Tix-Cil reduced infection risk even amidst emergent Omicron subvariants. Additionally, the extent of measurable humoral response to Tix-Cil may indicate relative effectiveness. Pre-exposure monoclonal antibody therapy may represent a strategy that will continue to offer clinical benefit for immunocompromised persons who are known to derive limited protection from vaccinations.

Serological response to vaccination in post-acute sequelae of COVID.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with post-acute sequelae of COVID (PASC) may have a persistence in immune activation that differentiates them from individuals who have recovered from COVID without clinical sequelae. To investigate how humoral immune activation may vary in this regard, we compared patterns of vaccine-provoked serological response in patients with PASC compared to individuals recovered from prior COVID without PASC. METHODS: We prospectively studied 245 adults clinically diagnosed with PASC and 86 adults successfully recovered from prior COVID. All participants had measures of humoral immunity to SARS-CoV-2 assayed before or after receiving their first-ever administration of COVID vaccination (either single-dose or two-dose regimen), including anti-spike (IgG-S and IgM-S) and anti-nucleocapsid (IgG-N) antibodies as well as IgG-S angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) binding levels. We used unadjusted and multivariable-adjusted regression analyses to examine the association of PASC compared to COVID-recovered status with post-vaccination measures of humoral immunity. RESULTS: Individuals with PASC mounted consistently higher post-vaccination IgG-S antibody levels when compared to COVID-recovered (median log IgG-S 3.98 versus 3.74, P < 0.001), with similar results seen for ACE2 binding levels (median 99.1 versus 98.2, P = 0.044). The post-vaccination IgM-S response in PASC was attenuated but persistently unchanged over time (P = 0.33), compared to in COVID recovery wherein the IgM-S response expectedly decreased over time (P = 0.002). Findings remained consistent when accounting for demographic and clinical variables including indices of index infection severity and comorbidity burden. CONCLUSION: We found evidence of aberrant immune response distinguishing PASC from recovered COVID. This aberrancy is marked by excess IgG-S activation and ACE2 binding along with findings consistent with a delayed or dysfunctional immunoglobulin class switching, all of which is unmasked by vaccine provocation. These results suggest that measures of aberrant immune response may offer promise as tools for diagnosing and distinguishing PASC from non-PASC phenotypes, in addition to serving as potential targets for intervention.