RESUMO
Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines vary for reasons that remain poorly understood. A range of sociodemographic, behavioural, clinical, pharmacologic and nutritional factors could explain these differences. To investigate this hypothesis, we tested for presence of combined IgG, IgA and IgM (IgGAM) anti-Spike antibodies before and after 2 doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (ChAdOx1, AstraZeneca) or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) in UK adults participating in a population-based longitudinal study who received their first dose of vaccine between December 2020 and July 2021. Information on sixty-six potential sociodemographic, behavioural, clinical, pharmacologic and nutritional determinants of serological response to vaccination was captured using serial online questionnaires. We used logistic regression to estimate multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for associations between independent variables and risk of seronegativity following two vaccine doses. Additionally, percentage differences in antibody titres between groups were estimated in the sub-set of participants who were seropositive post-vaccination using linear regression. Anti-spike antibodies were undetectable in 378/9101 (4.2%) participants at a median of 8.6 weeks post second vaccine dose. Increased risk of post-vaccination seronegativity associated with administration of ChAdOx1 vs. BNT162b2 (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 6.6, 95% CI 4.2−10.4), shorter interval between vaccine doses (aOR 1.6, 1.2−2.1, 6−10 vs. >10 weeks), poor vs. excellent general health (aOR 3.1, 1.4−7.0), immunodeficiency (aOR 6.5, 2.5−16.6) and immunosuppressant use (aOR 3.7, 2.4−5.7). Odds of seronegativity were lower for participants who were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive pre-vaccination (aOR 0.2, 0.0−0.6) and for those taking vitamin D supplements (aOR 0.7, 0.5−0.9). Serologic responses to vaccination did not associate with time of day of vaccine administration, lifestyle factors including tobacco smoking, alcohol intake and sleep, or use of anti-pyretics for management of reactive symptoms after vaccination. In a sub-set of 8727 individuals who were seropositive post-vaccination, lower antibody titres associated with administration of ChAdOx1 vs. BNT162b2 (43.4% lower, 41.8−44.8), longer duration between second vaccine dose and sampling (12.7% lower, 8.2−16.9, for 9−16 weeks vs. 2−4 weeks), shorter interval between vaccine doses (10.4% lower, 3.7−16.7, for <6 weeks vs. >10 weeks), receiving a second vaccine dose in October−December vs. April−June (47.7% lower, 11.4−69.1), older age (3.3% lower per 10-year increase in age, 2.1−4.6), and hypertension (4.1% lower, 1.1−6.9). Higher antibody titres associated with South Asian ethnicity (16.2% higher, 3.0−31.1, vs. White ethnicity) or Mixed/Multiple/Other ethnicity (11.8% higher, 2.9−21.6, vs. White ethnicity), higher body mass index (BMI; 2.9% higher, 0.2−5.7, for BMI 25−30 vs. <25 kg/m2) and pre-vaccination seropositivity for SARS-CoV-2 (105.1% higher, 94.1−116.6, for those seropositive and experienced COVID-19 symptoms vs. those who were seronegative pre-vaccination). In conclusion, we identify multiple determinants of antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, many of which are modifiable.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of population level implementation of a test-and-treat approach to correction of suboptimal vitamin D status (25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) <75 nmol/L) on risk of all cause acute respiratory tract infection and covid 19. DESIGN: Phase 3 open label randomised controlled trial. SETTING: United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: 6200 people aged ≥16 years who were not taking vitamin D supplements at baseline. INTERVENTIONS: Offer of a postal finger prick test of blood 25(OH)D concentration with provision of a six month supply of lower dose vitamin D (800 IU/day, n=1550) or higher dose vitamin D (3200 IU/day, n=1550) to those with blood 25(OH)D concentration <75 nmol/L, compared with no offer of testing or supplementation (n=3100). Follow-up was for six months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with at least one swab test or doctor confirmed acute respiratory tract infection of any cause. A secondary outcome was the proportion of participants with swab test confirmed covid-19. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and associated 95% confidence intervals. The primary analysis was conducted by intention to treat. RESULTS: Of 3100 participants offered a vitamin D test, 2958 (95.4%) accepted and 2674 (86.3%) had 25(OH)D concentrations <75 nmol/L and received vitamin D supplements (n=1328 lower dose, n=1346 higher dose). Compared with 136/2949 (4.6%) participants in the no offer group, at least one acute respiratory tract infection of any cause occurred in 87/1515 (5.7%) in the lower dose group (odds ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.66) and 76/1515 (5.0%) in the higher dose group (1.09, 0.82 to 1.46). Compared with 78/2949 (2.6%) participants in the no offer group, 55/1515 (3.6%) developed covid-19 in the lower dose group (1.39, 0.98 to 1.97) and 45/1515 (3.0%) in the higher dose group (1.13, 0.78 to 1.63). CONCLUSIONS: Among people aged 16 years and older with a high baseline prevalence of suboptimal vitamin D status, implementation of a population level test-and-treat approach to vitamin D supplementation was not associated with a reduction in risk of all cause acute respiratory tract infection or covid-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04579640.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Infecções Respiratórias , Deficiência de Vitamina D , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Colecalciferol , Suplementos Nutricionais , Método Duplo-Cego , Humanos , Infecções Respiratórias/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções Respiratórias/epidemiologia , Infecções Respiratórias/prevenção & controle , Vitamina D/uso terapêutico , Deficiência de Vitamina D/diagnóstico , Deficiência de Vitamina D/tratamento farmacológico , Vitaminas/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
Vitamin D deficiency has been reported to associate with the impaired development of antigen-specific responses following vaccination. We aimed to determine whether vitamin D supplements might boost the immunogenicity and efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination by conducting three sub-studies nested within the CORONAVIT randomised controlled trial, which investigated the effects of offering vitamin D supplements at a dose of 800 IU/day or 3200 IU/day vs. no offer on risk of acute respiratory infections in UK adults with circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations <75 nmol/L. Sub-study 1 (n = 2808) investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on the risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection following two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Sub-study 2 (n = 1853) investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on titres of combined IgG, IgA and IgM (IgGAM) anti-Spike antibodies in eluates of dried blood spots collected after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Sub-study 3 (n = 100) investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on neutralising antibody and cellular responses in venous blood samples collected after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. In total, 1945/2808 (69.3%) sub-study 1 participants received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford−AstraZeneca); the remainder received two doses of BNT162b2 (Pfizer). Mean follow-up 25(OH)D concentrations were significantly elevated in the 800 IU/day vs. no-offer group (82.5 vs. 53.6 nmol/L; mean difference 28.8 nmol/L, 95% CI 22.8−34.8) and in the 3200 IU/day vs. no offer group (105.4 vs. 53.6 nmol/L; mean difference 51.7 nmol/L, 45.1−58.4). Vitamin D supplementation did not influence the risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection in vaccinated participants (800 IU/day vs. no offer: adjusted hazard ratio 1.28, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.84; 3200 IU/day vs. no offer: 1.17, 0.81 to 1.70). Neither did it influence IgGAM anti-Spike titres, neutralising antibody titres or IFN-γ concentrations in the supernatants of S peptide-stimulated whole blood. In conclusion, vitamin D replacement at a dose of 800 or 3200 IU/day effectively elevated 25(OH)D concentrations, but it did not influence the protective efficacy or immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination when given to adults who had a sub-optimal vitamin D status at baseline.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Anticorpos Neutralizantes , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Suplementos Nutricionais , Humanos , Imunoglobulina A , Imunoglobulina G , Imunoglobulina M , SARS-CoV-2 , Eficácia de Vacinas , Vitamina D , VitaminasRESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that vitamin D (VD) deficiency may increase individuals' risk of COVID-19 infection and susceptibility. We aimed to determine the relationship between VD deficiency and sufficiency and COVID-19 seropositivity within healthcare workers. METHODS: The study included an observational cohort of healthcare workers who isolated due to COVID-19 symptoms from 12 May to 22 May 2020, from the University Hospitals Birmingham National Health Service Foundation Trust. Data collected included SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion status, serum 25(OH)D3 levels, age, body mass index (BMI), sex, ethnicity, job role and comorbidities. Participants were grouped into four VD categories: (1) Severe VD deficiency (VD<30 nmol/L); (2) VD deficiency (30 nmol/L ≤VD<50 nmol/L); (3) VD insufficiency (50 nmol/L ≤VD<75 nmol/L); (4) VD sufficiency (VD≥75 nmol/L). RESULTS: When VD levels were compared against COVID-19 seropositivity rate, a U-shaped curve was identified. This trend repeated when participants were split into subgroups of age, sex, ethnicity, BMI and comorbidity status. Significant difference was identified in the COVID-19 seropositivity rate between VD groups in the total population and between groups of men and women; black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) group; BMI<30 (kg/m2); 0 and +1 comorbidities; the majority of which were differences when the severely VD deficient category were compared with the other groups. A larger proportion of those within the BAME group (vs white ethnicity) were severely VD deficient (p<0.00001). A larger proportion of the 0 comorbidity subgroup were VD deficient in comparison to the 1+ comorbidity subgroup (p=0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Our study has shown a U-shaped relationship for COVID-19 seropositivity in UK healthcare workers. Further investigation is required to determine whether high VD levels can have a detrimental effect on susceptibility to COVID-19 infection. Future randomised clinical trials of VD supplementation could potentially identify 'optimal' VD levels, allowing for targeted therapeutic treatment for those at risk.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Deficiência de Vitamina D , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Feminino , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Masculino , SARS-CoV-2 , Medicina Estatal , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Vitamina D , Deficiência de Vitamina D/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Mild oropharyngeal symptoms to peanut/hazelnut occur in ~30% of patients with pollen-food syndrome (PFS). Component tests are considered a useful adjunct to the diagnosis and may help differentiate PFS from those at a risk of anaphylaxis due to storage protein/lipid transfer protein (LTP) sensitisation. AIMS: To assess concordance between component tests and clinical history in suspected PFS to peanut/hazelnut in a specialist clinic. METHODS: Adult patients were classified into PFS (group 1, n=69) and PFS with mild systemic symptoms (group 2, n=45) based on clinical history. Specific IgE (sIgE) of ≥0.35 kUA/L was considered positive as per manufacturers' recommendation. Kappa (κ) inter-rater agreement was calculated for concordance between clinical classification and test profiles. RESULTS: Group 1 hazelnut: 85% monosensitised to Cor a1, 12% to storage protein/s or LTP and 3% negative to all components. Group 1 peanut: 41% monosensitised to Ara h8, 44% to storage protein/s or ±LTP and 15% negative to all components. Group 2 hazelnut: 67% monosensitised to Cor a1, 16% sensitised to storage protein/s and 17% negative to all components. Group 2 peanut: 19% monosensitised to Ara h8, 62% sensitised to storage protein/s and/or LTP and 19% negative to all components.SIgE to Ara h8 and Cor a1 were greater in group 1 versus group 2: (median (IQR) kUA/L; hazelnut: 12.1 (7.8-25.2) vs 2.4 (0.36-6.3), p<0.001; peanut: 2.4 (0.10-21.1) vs 0.3 (0-3), p<0.01)). CONCLUSION: Concordance between component tests and clinical history for adults with PFS was good for hazelnut (κ=0.63) but poor for peanut (κ=-0.12). Food challenges are warranted in discordant cases for an accurate diagnosis.