Humoral and T Cell Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and T cell response after a two-dose regimen of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: In this observational study, patients with RA who are ≥18 years of age and vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 according to the Argentine National Health Ministry's vaccination strategy were included. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (ELISA-COVIDAR test), neutralizing activity (cytotoxicity in VERO cells), and specific T cell response (IFN-γ ELISpot Assay) were assessed after the first and second dose. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients with RA were included. Mostly, homologous regimens were used, including Gam-COVID-Vac (27.5%), ChAdOx1 (24.2%), and BBIBP-CorV (22.5%). The most frequent combination was Gam-COVID-Vac/mRNA-1273 (21.7%). After the second dose, 81.7% presented with anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, 70.0% presented with neutralizing activity, and 65.3% presented with specific T cell response. The use of BBIBP-CorV and treatment with abatacept (ABA) and rituximab (RTX) were associated with undetectable antibodies and no neutralizing activity after two doses. BBIBP-CorV was also associated with the absence of T cell response. The total incidence of adverse events was 357.1 events per 1,000 doses, significantly lower with BBIBP-CorV (166.7 events per 1,000 doses, P < 0.02). CONCLUSION: In this RA cohort vaccinated with homologous and heterologous regimens against COVID-19, 2 out of 10 patients did not develop anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG, 70% presented with neutralizing activity, and 65% presented with specific T cell response. The use of BBIBP-CorV was associated with deficient humoral and cellular response, whereas treatment with ABA and RTX resulted in an impaired anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG formation and neutralizing activity.

Increased risk of false-positive HIV ELISA results after COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: From the first-generation options available in 1985, tests to detect HIV-1 specific antibodies have increased its sensitivity and specificity. HIV-1 and SARS-CoV-2 surface glycoproteins present a certain degree of homology and shared epitope motifs, which results of relevance as both pandemics coexist. Here, we aimed to evaluate the rate of false-positive HIV serology results among individuals with COVID-19 diagnosis and in vaccinated individuals. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of the samples stored at the Infectious Disease Biobank in Argentina from donors with previous COVID-19 diagnosis or anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. METHODS: Plasma samples were analyzed using Genscreen Ultra HIV Ag-Ab. In those with a positive result, the following assays were also performed: ELISA lateral flow Determine Early Detect; RecomLine HIV-1 & HIV-2 IgG and Abbott m2000 RealTime PCR for HIV-1 viral load quantification. In all samples, the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies was evaluated by ELISA using the COVIDAR kit. Statistical analysis was done using Pearson's and Fisher's exact chi-squared test; Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests. RESULTS: Globally, the false-positive HIV ELISA rate was 1.3% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.66-2.22; χ2  = 4.68, P  = 0.03, when compared with the expected 0.4% false-positive rate]. It increased to 1.4% (95% CI 0.70-2.24, χ2  = 5.16, P  = 0.02) when only samples from individuals with previous COVID-19 diagnosis, and to 1.8% (95% CI 0.91-3.06, χ2  = 7.99, P  = 0.005) when only individuals with detectable IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were considered. CONCLUSION: This higher occurrence of HIV false-positive results among individuals with detectable antibodies against Spike SARS-CoV-2 protein should be dispersed among virology testing settings, health providers, and authorities.

Serological response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with multiple sclerosis in Argentina.

INTRODUCTION: The objective was to assess the immunogenicity and effectiveness of vaccines against SARSCoV-2 in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients included in the Argentinean MS registry. METHODS: A prospective cohort study between May and December 2021. The primary outcome was immunogenicity and effectiveness of vaccines during a three-month follow-up. Immunogenicity was evaluated based on detection of total antibodies (Ab) against spike protein and neutralizing Ab in serum 4 weeks after the second vaccine dose. A positive COVID-19 case was defined according to Argentinean Ministry of Health. RESULTS: 94 patients were included, mean age: 41.7 ± 12.1 years. Eighty (85.1%) had relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS); 30 (31.9%) were under fingolimod treatment. The Sputnik V vaccine was the first dose in 33 (35.1%), and AstraZeneca in 61 (64.9%). In 60 (63.8%), the vaccine elicited a specific humoral response. Immunological response according to the vaccination schemes showed no qualitative differences (p = 0.45). Stratified analysis according to the MS treatment showed that a significantly smaller number of subjects developed antibodies against spike antigen among those that were on ocrelizumab compared to other groups (p = 0.001), while a reduced number of patients under ocrelizumab where evaluated (n = 7). This was also observed for neutralizing antibodies in the ocrelizumab group (p < 0.001). During the three-month follow-up, two individuals were diagnosed with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: We found that MS patients that received Sputnik V or AstraZeneca vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 developed a serological response with no differences between the vaccines used.

Introducción: El objetivo fue evaluar la inmunogenicidad y efectividad de las vacunas contra el SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes con esclerosis múltiple (EM) incluidos en el registro argentino de EM (RelevarEM, NCT03375177). Métodos: Estudio de cohorte prospectivo entre mayo y diciembre 2021. Se evaluó la inmunogenicidad (detección de anticuerpos totales (Ab) contra proteína espiga y anticuerpos neutralizantes en suero) y eficacia (nueva infección por COVID-19) durante seguimiento de tres meses. El momento de detección de anticuerpos fue 4 semanas después de segunda dosis de vacuna. Un caso positivo de COVID-19 se definió de acuerdo con la definición del Ministerio de Salud. Resultados: Se incluyeron 94 pacientes, edad media de 41.7 ± 12.1 años. Ochenta (85.1%) tenían EM remitente-recurrente; 30 (31.9%) en tratamiento con fingolimod. La vacuna Sputnik V fue usada en 33 (35.1%), mientras que AstraZeneca se administró en 61 (64.9%). En 60 pacientes (63.8 %), la vacuna provocó respuesta humoral específica. La respuesta inmunológica según esquemas de vacunación (Sputnik V, Astra Zeneca o esquemas heterólogos) no mostró diferencias cualitativas (p = 0.45). El análisis estratificado según tratamiento recibido para la EM mostró que número significativamente menor de sujetos desarrolló anticuerpos contra el antígeno espiga en los pacientes que recibieron ocrelizumab (p = 0.001), aunque con un número reducido de pacientes evaluados bajo este tratamiento (n = 7). Esto también se observó para anticuerpos neutralizantes en el grupo bajo ocrelizumab (p < 0.001). Durante el seguimiento de tres meses, dos personas fueron diagnosticadas con COVID-19. Conclusión: Encontramos que los pacientes con EM que recibieron vacunas Sputnik V o AstraZeneca para el SARS-CoV-2 desarrollaron respuesta serológica sin diferencias entre las vacunas utilizadas.

Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 Third Vaccine in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Had No Seroconversion After Primary 2-Dose Regimen With Inactivated or Vector-Based Vaccines.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the immune response after a third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with undetectable antibody titers after the primary regimen of 2 doses. METHODS: Patients with RA with no seroconversion after 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and who received a third dose of either an mRNA or vector-based vaccine were included. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, neutralizing activity, and T cell responses were assessed after the third dose. RESULTS: A total of 21 nonresponder patients were included. At the time of vaccination, 29% were receiving glucocorticoids and 85% biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (including 6 taking abatacept [ABA] and 4 taking rituximab [RTX]). The majority (95%) received the BNT162b2 vaccine and only one of them received the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine. After the third dose, 91% of the patients presented detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and 76% showed neutralizing activity. Compared to other treatments, ABA and RTX were associated with the absence of neutralizing activity in 4 out of 5 (80%) patients and lower titers of neutralizing antibodies (median 3, IQR 0-20 vs 8, IQR 4-128; P = 0.20). Specific T cell response was detected in 41% of all patients after the second dose, increasing to 71% after the third dose. The use of ABA was associated with a lower frequency of T cell response (33% vs 87%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: In this RA cohort, 91% of patients who failed to seroconvert after 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine presented detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG after a third dose. The use of ABA was associated with a lower frequency of specific T cell response.

Serological response to SARS-COV-2 vaccines in patients with multiple sclerosis in Argentina / Respuesta serológica a vacunas contra SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes con esclerosis múltiple en Argentina

Abstract Introduction : The objective was to assess the im munogenicity and effectiveness of vaccines against SARSCoV-2 in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients included in the Argentinean MS registry. Methods : A prospective cohort study between May and December 2021. The primary outcome was im munogenicity and effectiveness of vaccines during a three-month follow-up. Immunogenicity was evalua ted based on detection of total antibodies (Ab) against spike protein and neutralizing Ab in serum 4 weeks after the second vaccine dose. A positive COVID-19 case was defined according to Argentinean Ministry of Health. Results : 94 patients were included, mean age: 41.7 ± 12.1 years. Eighty (85.1%) had relapsing remitting mul tiple sclerosis (RRMS); 30 (31.9%) were under fingolimod treatment. The Sputnik V vaccine was the first dose in 33 (35.1%), and AstraZeneca in 61 (64.9%). In 60 (63.8%), the vaccine elicited a specific humoral response. Immu nological response according to the vaccination schemes showed no qualitative differences (p = 0.45). Stratified analysis according to the MS treatment showed that a significantly smaller number of subjects developed anti bodies against spike antigen among those that were on ocrelizumab compared to other groups (p ≤ 0.001), while a reduced number of patients under ocrelizumab where evaluated (n = 7). This was also observed for neutralizing antibodies in the ocrelizumab group (p < 0.001). During the three-month follow-up, two individuals were diag nosed with COVID-19. Conclusion: We found that MS patients that recei ved Sputnik V or AstraZeneca vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 developed a serological response with no differences between the vaccines used.

Resumen Introducción : El objetivo fue evaluar la inmunogeni cidad y efectividad de las vacunas contra el SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes con esclerosis múltiple (EM) incluidos en el registro argentino de EM (RelevarEM, NCT 03375177). Métodos : Estudio de cohorte prospectivo entre mayo y diciembre 2021. Se evaluó la inmunogenicidad (detec ción de anticuerpos totales (Ab) contra proteína espiga y anticuerpos neutralizantes en suero) y eficacia (nueva infección por COVID-19) durante seguimiento de tres meses. El momento de detección de anticuerpos fue 4 semanas después de segunda dosis de vacuna. Un caso positivo de COVID-19 se definió de acuerdo con la defi nición del Ministerio de Salud. Resultados : Se incluyeron 94 pacientes, edad media de 41.7 ± 12.1 años. Ochenta (85.1%) tenían EM remiten te-recurrente; 30 (31.9%) en tratamiento con fingolimod. La vacuna Sputnik V fue usada en 33 (35.1%), mientras que AstraZeneca se administró en 61 (64.9%). En 60 pa cientes (63.8 %), la vacuna provocó respuesta humoral específica. La respuesta inmunológica según esquemas de vacunación (Sputnik V, Astra Zeneca o esquemas he terólogos) no mostró diferencias cualitativas (p = 0.45). El análisis estratificado según tratamiento recibido para la EM mostró que número significativamente menor de sujetos desarrolló anticuerpos contra el antígeno espiga en los pacientes que recibieron ocrelizumab (p ≤ 0.001), aunque con un número reducido de pacientes evaluados bajo este tratamiento (n = 7). Esto también se observó para anticuerpos neutralizantes en el grupo bajo ocrelizumab (p < 0.001). Durante el seguimiento de tres meses, dos personas fueron diagnosticadas con COVID-19. Conclusión : Encontramos que los pacientes con EM que recibieron vacunas Sputnik V o AstraZeneca para el SARS-CoV-2 desarrollaron respuesta serológica sin diferencias entre las vacunas utilizadas.

Respuesta immune humoral asociada a las vacunas contra SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes con artritis reumatoidea: datos del registro SAR-CoVAC / Humoral immune response associated to the vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with rheumatic arthritis: data from the SAR-CoVAC registry

Introducción: la artritis reumatoidea (AR) y los tratamientos indicados para su manejo pueden afectar la respuesta a la vacuna para SARS-CoV-2. Sin embargo, aún no se cuenta con datos locales. Objetivos: evaluar la respuesta humoral de la vacuna para SARS-CoV-2 y su seguridad en esta población. Materiales y métodos: estudio observacional. Se incluyeron pacientes ≥18 años, con AR ACR/EULAR 2010 que recibieron la vacunación para SARS-CoV-2. Detección de IgG anti-proteína S (kit COVIDAR). Resultados: se incluyeron 120 pacientes con AR. El 24,4% recibió tratamiento con glucocorticoides, 50,9% drogas biológicas y 13,3% inhibidores de JAK (janus kinases). El 6% había tenido infección por SARS-CoV-2 previamente. La vacuna más utilizada en la primera dosis fue Sputnik V (52,9%). El 25% recibió esquemas heterólogos. Luego de la primera dosis, el 59% presentó una prueba no reactiva o indeterminada, y un 18% luego de la segunda dosis. La aplicación de esquemas homólogos de vacuna Sinopharm (63,6% vs 13,3%, p<0,0001), y el uso de abatacept (27,3% vs 5,1%, p=0,005) y rituximab (18,2% vs 0%, p=0,001) al momento de la vacunación se asociaron a un resultado no reactivo o indeterminado. Conclusiones: similar a lo reportado en otras poblaciones internacionales, en esta cohorte, dos de cada 10 pacientes no desarrollaron anticuerpos. Una menor respuesta se asoció con la vacuna Sinopharm y al tratamiento con abatacept y rituximab.

Introduction: rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and its treatments can affect the response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. However, we still do not have local data. Objectives: to evaluate the humoral response of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and its safety in this population. Materials and methods: observational study. Patients ≥18 years of age, with RA ACR/EULAR 2010 who had received vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 were included. Detection of anti-protein S IgG (COVIDAR Kit). Results: a total of 120 patients with RA were included. A quarter was receiving glucocorticoids, 50.9% biological drugs and 13.3% JAK inhibitors (janus kinases). Only 6% had a history SARS-CoV-2 infection. The most used vaccine was Sputnik V (52.9%) and 25% received mixed regimenes. After the first dose, 59% had a non-reactive or indeterminate test, and after the second, 18% were still having this result. The application of homologous Sinopharm vaccine regimen (63.6% vs 13.3%, p<0.0001) and the use of abatacept (27.3% vs 5.1%, p=0.005) and rituximab (18.2% vs 0%, p=0.001) at vaccination was associated with a non-reactive or indeterminate result. Conclusions: similar to other international populations, in this cohort, two out of 10 patients did not develop antibodies. A lower response was associated with the Sinopharm vaccine and treatment with abatacept and rituximab.