Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMJ Open ; 12(5): e052130, 2022 05 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35613821

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Austria, and particularly its westernmost federal state Vorarlberg, developed an extremely high incidence rate during the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare workers (HCWs) worldwide are known to have an increased risk of contracting the disease within the working environment and, therefore, the seroprevalence in this population is of particular interest. We thus aimed to analyse SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody dynamics in Vorarlberg HCWs. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of HCWs including testing at three different time points for the prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies specific for nucleocapsid protein (NP) and receptor-binding domain (RBD). SETTING: All five state hospitals of Vorarlberg. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 395 HCWs, enrolled in June 2020 (time point 1 (t1)), 2 months after the end of the first wave, retested between October and November at the beginning of the second wave (time point 2 (t2)) and again at the downturn of the second wave in January 2021 (time point 3 (t3)). MAIN OUTCOMES: We assessed weak and strong seropositivity and associated factors, including demographic and clinical characteristics, symptoms consistent with COVID-19 infection, infections verified by reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) and vaccinations. RESULTS: At t1, 3% of HCWs showed strong IgG-specific responses to either NP or RBD. At t2, the rate had increased to 4%, and at t3 to 14%. A strong response was found to be stable for up to 10 months. Overall, only 55% of seropositive specimen had antibodies against both antigens RBD and NP; 29% had only RBD-specific and 16% only NP-specific antibodies. Compared with the number of infections found by RT-PCR, the number of HCWs being seropositive was 38% higher. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Serological testing based on only one antigen implicates the risk of missing infections; thus, the set of antigens should be broadened in the future. The seroprevalence among participating HCWs was comparable to the general population in Austria. Nevertheless, in view of undetected infections, monitoring and surveillance should be reconsidered.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Anticorpos Antivirais , Formação de Anticorpos , Áustria/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Imunoglobulina G , Proteínas do Nucleocapsídeo , Pandemias , Estudos Prospectivos , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos
2.
Br J Haematol ; 196(3): 577-584, 2022 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34872162

RESUMO

Patients with haemato-oncological malignancies are one of the high-risk groups for a severe course in case of COVID-19 infections. Furthermore, vaccination results in significantly lower response rates in haematological malignancies and lower antibody levels in patients with solid cancer. We investigated efficacy and safety of a heterologous booster vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S DNA vector vaccine in haemato-oncological patients without antibody response after double-dose BNT162b2 messenger (m-)RNA COVID-19 vaccine. A total of 32 haemato-oncological non-responders to double-dose BNT162b2 received a heterologous booster vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S. Blood samples were assessed directly before the vaccination (T0) and four weeks after (T1). Safety assessment was performed using a standardised questionnaire. The overall response rate was 31%, with a mean (SD) antibody titre of 693·79 (1 096·99) binding activity units (BAU)/ml. Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or lymphoma showed a significantly lower response rate (P = 0·048). Adverse events were reported in 29·6% of patients, of which 7·1% were graded as severe, including grade III and IV events following the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (CTCAE). The heterologous booster vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S led to a serological response in nine out of 29 patients without response after double-dose BNT162b2. Furthermore, the vaccination was safe in our cohort, leading to mainly mild local and systemic reactions. Overall, this vaccination regimen should be further evaluated to increase the response rate in the highly vulnerable population of haemato-oncological patients.


Assuntos
Ad26COVS1/administração & dosagem , Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Formação de Anticorpos/efeitos dos fármacos , Vacina BNT162/administração & dosagem , COVID-19 , Neoplasias Hematológicas/sangue , Imunização Secundária , SARS-CoV-2/metabolismo , Idoso , COVID-19/sangue , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Feminino , Neoplasias Hematológicas/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade
3.
Br J Haematol ; 195(4): 523-531, 2021 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34346068

RESUMO

Haemato-oncological patients are at risk in case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Currently, vaccination is the best-evaluated preventive strategy. In the present study, we aimed to assess serological response, predictive markers, and safety of BNT162b2 in haemato-oncological patients. A total of 259 haemato-oncological patients were vaccinated with two 30 µg doses of BNT162b2 administered 21 days apart. Serological response was assessed by ELECSYS® Anti-SARS-CoV-2-S immunoassay before vaccination, and at 3 and 7 weeks after the first dose (T1, T2). Safety assessment was performed. At T2 spike protein receptor binding domain (S/RBD) antibodies were detected in 71·4% of haematological and in 94·5% of oncological patients (P < 0·001). Haematological patients receiving systemic treatment had a 14·2-fold increased risk of non-responding (95% confidence interval 3·2-63·3, P = 0·001). Subgroups of patients with lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukaemia were at highest risk of serological non-response. Low immunoglobulin G (IgG) level, lymphocyte- and natural killer (NK)-cell counts were significantly associated with poor serological response (P < 0·05). Vaccination was well tolerated with only 2·7% of patients reporting severe side-effects. Patients with side-effects developed a higher S/RBD-antibody titre compared to patients without side-effects (P = 0·038). Haematological patients under treatment were at highest risk of serological non-response. Low lymphocytes, NK cells and IgG levels were found to be associated with serological non-response. Serological response in oncological patients was encouraging. The use of BNT162b2 is safe in haemato-oncological patients.


Assuntos
Formação de Anticorpos/efeitos dos fármacos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Neoplasias Hematológicas/imunologia , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Idoso , Anticorpos Antivirais/imunologia , Formação de Anticorpos/imunologia , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/sangue , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/imunologia , Feminino , Humanos , Imunoensaio/métodos , Imunoglobulina G/sangue , Células Matadoras Naturais/citologia , Leucemia Linfocítica Crônica de Células B/imunologia , Linfócitos/citologia , Linfoma/imunologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Segurança
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA