PASC in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients With Self-reported SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) is an increasingly recognized phenomenon and manifested by long-lasting cognitive, mental, and physical symptoms beyond the acute infection period. We aimed to estimate the frequency of PASC symptoms in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients and compared their frequency between those with SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization and those who did not require hospitalization. METHODS: A survey consisting of 7 standardized questionnaires was administered to 111 SOT recipients with history of SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosed >4 wk before survey administration. RESULTS: Median (interquartile range) time from SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was 167 d (138-221). Hospitalization for SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in 33 (30%) participants. Symptoms after the COVID episode were perceived as following: significant trauma (53%), cognitive decline (50%), fatigue (41%), depression (36%), breathing problems (35%), anxiety (23%), dysgeusia (22%), dysosmia (21%), and pain (19%). Hospitalized patients had poorer median scores in cognition (Quick Dementia Rating System survey score: 2.0 versus 0.5, P = 0.02), quality of life (Health-related Quality of Life survey: 2.0 versus 1.0, P = 0.015), physical health (Global physical health scale: 10.0 versus 11.0, P = 0.005), respiratory status (Breathlessness, Cough and Sputum Scale: 1.0 versus 0.0, P = 0.035), and pain (Pain score: 3 versus 0 out of 10, P = 0.003). Among patients with infection >6 mo prior, some symptoms were still present as following: abnormal breathing (42%), cough (40%), dysosmia (29%), and dysgeusia (34%). CONCLUSIONS: SOT recipients reported a high frequency of PASC symptoms. Multidisciplinary approach is needed to care for these patients beyond the acute phase.

SARS-CoV-2 messenger RNA vaccine antibody response and reactogenicity in heart and lung transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: While several studies have observed that solid organ transplant recipients experience diminished antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination, data specific to heart and lung transplant (HT/LT) recipients remains sparse. METHODS: US adult HT and LT recipients completed their vaccine series between January 7 and April 10, 2021. Reactogencity and SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody were assessed after a priming dose (D1) and booster dose (D2). Modified Poisson regression with robust variance estimator was used to evaluate associations between participant characteristics and antibody development. RESULTS: Of 134 heart recipients, there were 38% non-responders (D1-/D2-), 48% booster responders (D1-/D2+), and 14% priming dose responders (D1+/D2+). Of 103 lung recipients, 64% were non-responders, 27% were booster responders, and 9% were priming dose responders. Lung recipients were less likely to develop antibodies (p < .001). Priming dose antibody response was associated with younger recipient age (p = .04), transplant-to-vaccination time ≥6 years (p < .01), and lack of anti-metabolite maintenance immunosuppression (p < .001). Pain at injection site was the most commonly reported reaction (85% after D1, 76% after D2). Serious reactions were rare, the most common being fatigue (2% after D1 and 3% after D2). No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: HT and LT recipients experienced diminished antibody response following vaccination; reactogenicity was comparable to that of the general population. LT recipients may exhibit a more impaired antibody response than HT recipients. While current recommendations are to vaccinate eligible candidates and recipients, further studies characterizing the cell-mediated immune response and clinical efficacy of these vaccines in this population are needed.

Kidney Transplant Recipient Attitudes Toward a SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine.

A widely accepted severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine could protect vulnerable populations, but the willingness of solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) to accept a potential vaccine remains unknown. METHODS: We conducted a national survey of 1308 SOTRs and 1617 non-SOTRs between November 11 and December 2, 2020 through the network of the National Kidney Foundation. RESULTS: Respondents were largely White (73.2%), female (61.1%), and college graduates (56.2%). Among SOTRs, half (49.5%) were unsure or would be unwilling to receive a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine once available. Major concerns included potential side effects (85.2%), lack of rigor in the testing and development process (69.7%), and fear of incompatibility with organ transplants (75.4%). Even after the announcement of the high efficacy of the mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna Inc.) at the time of survey distribution, likeliness to receive a vaccine only slightly increased (53.5% before announcement versus 57.8% after the announcement). However, 86.8% of SOTRs would accept a vaccine if recommended by a transplant provider. CONCLUSIONS: SOTRs reported skepticism in receiving a potential SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, even after announcements of high vaccine efficacy. Reassuringly, transplant providers may be the defining influence in vaccine acceptance and will likely have a critical role to play in promoting vaccine adherence.

Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity After SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination in Kidney Transplant Recipients Taking Belatacept.

BACKGROUND: Belatacept may impair humoral immunity, impacting the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in transplant recipients. We investigated immunogenicity after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in kidney transplant recipients who are and are not taking belatacept. METHODS: Participants were recruited between December 9, 2020, and April 1, 2021. Blood samples were collected after dose 1 and dose 2 (D1, D2) and analyzed using either an anti-SARS-CoV-2 enzyme immunoassay against the S1 domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein or immunoassay against the receptor-binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weights was used to compare immunogenicity, and a weighted logistics regression was used to calculate fold change of positive response. RESULTS: Among the 609 participants studied, 24 (4%) were taking belatacept. After dose 1, 0/24 (0%) belatacept patients had detectable antibodies, compared with 77 of 568 (14%) among the equivalent nonbelatacept population (P = 0.06). After dose 2, 1/19 (5%) belatacept patients had detectable antibodies, compared with 190/381 (50%) among the equivalent nonbelatacept population (P < 0.001). Belatacept use was associated with 16.7-fold lower odds of having a positive post-D2 titer result (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Additional measures need to be explored to protect kidney transplant recipients taking belatacept. Best safety practices should be continued despite vaccination among this population.

Safety and Reactogenicity of 2 Doses of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: We studied the safety and reactogenicity SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in transplant recipients because immunosuppressed patients were excluded from vaccine trials. METHODS: US transplant recipients were recruited into this prospective cohort study through social media; those who completed the full vaccine series between December 9, 2020 and March 1, 2021 were included. We collected demographics, medical history, and safety information within 7 d after doses 1 and 2 (D1, D2). Associations between characteristics and reactions were evaluated using modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: We studied 741 transplant recipients who underwent BNT162b2 (54%) or mRNA-1273 (46%) vaccination. Median (interquartile range) age was 60 (44-69) y, 57% were female, and 10% were non-White. Although local site reactions decreased after D2 (85% D1 versus 78% D2, P < 0.001), systemic reactions increased (49% D1 versus 69% D2, P < 0.001). Younger participants were more likely to develop systemic symptoms after D1 (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] per 10 y = 0.850.900.94, P < 0.001) and D2 (aIRR per 10 y = 0.910.930.96, P < 0.001). Participants who experienced pain (aIRR = 1.111.662.47, P = 0.01) or redness (aIRR = 1.833.928.41, P < 0.01) were more likely to develop an antibody response to D1 of mRNA vaccines. No anaphylaxis, neurologic diagnoses, or SARS-CoV-2 diagnoses were reported. Infections were minimal (3% after D1, <0.01% after D2). One patient reported incident acute rejection post-D2. CONCLUSIONS: In solid organ transplant recipients undergoing mRNA vaccination, reactogenicity was similar to that reported in the original trials. Severe reactions were rare. These early safety data may help address vaccine hesitancy in transplant recipients.

Measurement of Retinal Microvascular Blood Velocity Using Erythrocyte Mediated Velocimetry.

Changes in retinal blood flow may be involved in the pathogenesis of glaucoma and other ocular diseases. Erythrocyte mediated velocimetry (EMV) is a novel technique where indocyanine green (ICG) dye is sequestered in erythrocyte ghosts and autologously re-injected to allow direct visualization of erythrocytes for in vivo measurement of speed. The purpose of this study is to determine the mean erythrocyte speed in the retinal microvasculature, as well as the intravisit and intervisit variability of EMV. Data from 23 EMV sessions from control, glaucoma suspect, and glaucoma patients were included in this study. In arteries with an average diameter of 43.11 µm ± 6.62 µm, the mean speed was 7.17 mm/s ± 2.35 mm/s. In veins with an average diameter of 45.87 µm ± 12.04 µm, the mean speed was 6.05 mm/s ± 1.96 mm/s. Intravisit variability, as measured by the mean coefficient of variation, was 3.57% (range 0.44-9.68%). Intervisit variability was 4.85% (range 0.15-8.43%). EMV may represent reliable method for determination of retinal blood speed, potentially allowing insights into the effects of pharmacologic agents or pathogenesis of ocular diseases.

A Pilot Study on the Effects of Physician Gaze on Patient Satisfaction in the Setting of Electronic Health Records.

PURPOSE: To determine the amount of time ophthalmologists using Electronic Health Records (EHRs) spend looking at the patient and its correlation on patient satisfaction. METHODS: This prospective cohort study examined 67 patients seeking care at two different ophthalmology clinics. Videos of entire office visits were recorded and each video was graded for amount of time spent by physicians gazing at the patient, computer, paper medical records, or other areas. Videos were also graded for the amount of time examining the patient, and the physician speaking during each visit. A patient satisfaction survey was administered at the end of each office encounter. Time of physician gaze to the patient was correlated to satisfaction outcome measures. RESULTS: Ophthalmologists spent 28.0% ± 21.2% of the visit looking at the computer. Overall, patient satisfaction levels were very high (4.8 ± 0.5, 5-point Likert scale). Ophthalmologists spent the same amount of time looking at patients who were extremely satisfied (28.8% ± 16.7%) as those who were not extremely satisfied (28.8% ± 15.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Ophthalmologists on EHRs spend over a third of each patient visit looking at the computer. However, patient satisfaction levels are very high. The amount of time that the ophthalmologist gazes at the patient or the computer does not appear to have an effect on patient satisfaction in this particular study. Further research still needs to be performed regarding the effects of EHRs on the patient experience. Physicians should continue to be sensitive to their patients' needs and approach the use of EHRs in patient encounters on an individual basis.