RESUMEN
Post-COVID-19 interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a new entity that frequently causes pulmonary fibrosis and can become chronic. We performed a single-center parallel-group open-label pilot randomized clinical trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of cyclosporine A (CsA) in the development of ILD in the medium term among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive CsA plus standard of care or standard of care alone. The primary composite outcome was the percentage of patients without ILD 3 months after diagnosis of pneumonia and not requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) (response without requiring IMV). The key secondary composite outcomes were the percentage of patients who achieve a response requiring IMV or irrespective of the need for IMV, and adverse events. A total of 33 patients received at least one dose of CsA plus standard of care (n = 17) or standard of care alone (n = 16). No differences were found between the groups in the percentage of patients who achieved a response without requiring IMV or a response requiring IMV. A higher percentage of patients achieved a response irrespective of the need for IMV in the CsA plus standard of care group although the RR was almost significant 2.833 (95% CI, 0.908-8.840; p = 0.057). No differences were found between the groups for adverse events. In hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, we were unable to demonstrate that CsA achieved a significant effect in preventing the development of ILD. (EU Clinical Trials Register; EudraCT Number: 2020-002123-11; registration date: 08/05/2020).
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Enfermedades Pulmonares Intersticiales , Humanos , Ciclosporina/efectos adversos , SARS-CoV-2 , Proyectos Piloto , Enfermedades Pulmonares Intersticiales/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
INTRODUCCIÓN: La seroprevalencia del SARS-CoV-2 en las enfermedades inflamatorias inmunomediadas (IMID) sigue siendo fuente de controversia. OBJETIVO: Comparar la seroprevalencia de anticuerpos (Ac) anti SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes con IMID en tratamientos con fármacos antirreumáticos modificadores de la enfermedad biológicos (FAMEb) o sintéticos dirigidos (FAMEsd) frente a un grupo de personas sin IMID. MÉTODOS: Estudio de pacientes con IMID y tratamientos con FAMEb y FAMEsd y de individuos sin IMID. Mediante la técnica de inmunoensayo por quimioluminiscencia indirecta, se determinaron las serologías IgG frente al SARS-CoV-2 entre octubre/2020 y mayo/2021. RESULTADOS: Se estudiaron 1.100 sujetos, 550 pacientes con IMID y 550 personas sin IMID. Se observó una seroprevalencia de 16% (88/550) en los pacientes frente a 19,3% (106/550) en el grupo de personas sin IMID, sin significación estadística (OR 0,790 [IC 95% 0,558-1,118]). Comparando los tratamientos con FAMEb o FAMEsd, se observó una tendencia a una menor seroprevalencia con rituximab, en relación con los individuos sin IMID (OR 0,296 [IC 95% 0,0871,007]). Asimismo, se encontró menor seroprevalencia en los pacientes que además de su FAMEb recibían tratamiento con metotrexato, en comparación con el grupo de personas sin IMID (OR 0,432 [IC 95% 0,223-0,835]). CONCLUSIONES: Las IMID en tratamiento con FAMEb o FAMEsd no influyen en la seroprevalencia frente al SARS-CoV-2 de los pacientes. El tratamiento concomitante con metotrexato disminuye de forma significativa la seroprevalencia en estos pacientes.
BACKGROUND: The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in immunemediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) remains controversial. AIM: To compare the seroprevalence of antibodies (Ab) to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with IMID receiving treatment with biological diseasemodifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) or targeted synthetic (tsDMARD) versus a group of people without IMID. METHODS: Study of patients with IMID and treatments with bDMARD and tsDMARD and individuals without IMID. IgG serology against SARS-CoV-2 was measured using the two-step sandwich immunoassay technique by indirect chemiluminescence between October 2020 and May 2021. RESULTS: A total of 1100 subjects were studied, 550 patients with IMID and 550 persons without IMID. A seroprevalence of 16% (88/550) was observed in patients versus 19.3% (106/550) in the group of people without IMID, without statistical significance (OR 0.790 [95% CI 0.558-1.118]). Comparing the treatments with bD- MARD or tsDMARD, there was a tendency to lower seroprevalence with rituximab, in relation to individuals without IMID (OR 0.296 [95% CI 0.087-1.007]). In addition, lower seroprevalence was found in patients who received methotrexate treatment in addition to their bDMARD, compared to the group of individuals without IMID (OR 0.432 [95% CI 0.223-0.835]). CONCLUSIONS: IMIDs in treatment with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs do not influence the seroprevalence against SARS-CoV-2 in patients. Concomitant treatment with methotrexate significantly decreased seroprevalence in these patients.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , COVID-19/epidemiología , Enfermedades del Sistema Inmune/inmunología , Enfermedades del Sistema Inmune/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedades del Sistema Inmune/epidemiología , Terapia Biológica , Inmunoglobulina G/inmunología , Estudios Seroepidemiológicos , Prevalencia , Estudios Transversales , Antirreumáticos/uso terapéutico , Biosimilares Farmacéuticos , COVID-19/inmunologíaRESUMEN
Background. The risk of herpes zoster reactivation is increased in immunocompromised patients, especially in those with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) on Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) treatment. The recombinant subunit herpes zoster vaccine (RZV) is a non-live vaccine, recently approved for this subgroup of patients, which shows high rates of vaccine effectiveness, with few adverse effects reported in clinical trials. Purpose. The aim of this real-world study was to determine the immunogenicity and safety of RZV in IMID patients on JAKi treatment. Methods. The increase in the concentration of anti-gE antibody for varicella zoster virus post-vaccination, compared to the pre-vaccination concentration, was analyzed to test the humoral immune response. Adverse effects after the first and second vaccine doses were registered. Results. In total, 49 patients were analyzed, and a fourfold increase in antibody concentration was achieved in almost 40% of subjects, with only one serious local adverse effect. Discussion. The resulting immunogenicity was lower than that observed in clinical trials, probably due to the presence of immune disease and immunosuppressive treatment, and to the fact that this was a real-world study. No differences in response according to age, previous virus zoster reactivation, or concomitant treatments were found. Conclusions. RZV was well tolerated and reached the immune response objective in 40% of patients. These results reinforce the importance of including RZV vaccination for immunosuppressed patients. Real-world studies regarding vaccine effectiveness are still needed in order to gain a full understanding of the response to RZV in this group of patients.