RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cancer patients are highly prone to infectious diseases. While undergoing antineoplastic treatment, the risk of severe symptoms upon infection increases, necessitating efficient protective measures, such as vaccination. For patients receiving radiotherapy, there is no specific information about humoral immunity. During the COVID-19 pandemic, serial antibody measurements were therefore offered to cancer patients, following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination while obtaining radiotherapy. METHODS: Out of 74 enrolled patients, 46 met the inclusion criteria. Two cohorts were allocated, depending on an association with chemotherapy or pure radiotherapy. An additional healthy control cohort of 16 healthcare workers was enrolled. All participants followed a two-fold BNT162b2 vaccine schedule. SARS-CoV-2 binding antibodies were measured serially in a 7-day cycle for 35 days and over the long-term, using the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay. RESULTS: Cancer patients under pure radiotherapy have a comparable humoral vaccination response and long-term persistency of antibodies to healthy controls. Patients receiving additional chemotherapy show a significantly delayed immune response and decreased antibody titers. The vaccine was well tolerated in all cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Pure radiotherapy in cancer patients does not interfere with the vaccine-induced humoral immune response or other immunogenetic aspects, whereas previous or simultaneous chemotherapy does. Findings are of particular relevance for future epidemic or pandemic scenarios.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The risk of developing late radiotoxicity after radiotherapy in patients with high chromosomal radiosensitivity after radiotherapy could potentially be higher compared to the risk in patients with average radiosensitivity. In case of extremely high radiosensitivity, dose reduction may be appropriate. Some rheumatic diseases (RhD), including connective tissue diseases (CTDs) appear to be associated with higher radiosensitivity. The question arises as to whether patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) also generally have a higher radiosensitivity and whether certain parameters could indicate clues to high radiosensitivity in RA patients which would then need to be further assessed before radiotherapy. METHODS: Radiosensitivity was determined in 136 oncological patients with RhD, 44 of whom were RA patients, and additionally in 34 non-oncological RA patients by three-colour fluorescence in situ hybridization (FiSH), in which lymphocyte chromosomes isolated from peripheral blood are analysed for their chromosomal aberrations of an unirradiated and an with 2 Gy irradiated blood sample. The chromosomal radiosensitivity was determined by the average number of breaks per metaphase. In addition, correlations between certain RA- or RhD-relevant disease parameters or clinical features such as the disease activity score 28 and radiosensitivity were assessed. RESULTS: Some oncological patients with RhD, especially those with connective tissue diseases have significantly higher radiosensitivity compared with oncology patients without RhD. In contrast, the mean radiosensitivity of the oncological patients with RA and other RhD and the non-oncological RA did not differ. 14 of the 44 examined oncological RA-patients (31.8%) had a high radiosensitivity which is defined as ≥ 0.5 breaks per metaphase. No correlation of laboratory parameters with radiosensitivity could be established. CONCLUSIONS: It would be recommended to perform radiosensitivity testing in patients with connective tissue diseases in general. We did not find a higher radiosensitivity in RA patients. In the group of RA patients with an oncological disease, a higher percentage of patients showed higher radiosensitivity, although the average radiosensitivity was not high.