3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
3 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of vaccination on hospitalization and mortality from COVID-19 in patients with primary and secondary immunodeficiency: The United Kingdom experience

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Individuals with primary and secondary immunodeficiency (PID/SID) were shown to be at risk of poor outcomes during the early stages of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines demonstrate reduced immunogenicity in these patients.

          Objectives

          To understand whether the risk of severe COVID-19 in individuals with PID or SID has changed following the deployment of vaccination and therapeutics in the context of the emergence of novel viral variants of concern.

          Methods

          The outcomes of two cohorts of patients with PID and SID were compared: the first, infected between March and July 2020, prior to vaccination and treatments, the second after these intervention became available between January 2021 and April 2022.

          Results

          22.7% of immunodeficient patients have been infected at least once with SARS-CoV-2 since the start of the pandemic, compared to over 70% of the general population. Immunodeficient patients were typically infected later in the pandemic when the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant was dominant. This delay was associated with receipt of more vaccine doses and higher pre-infection seroprevalence. Compared to March-July 2020, hospitalization rates (53.3% vs 17.9%, p<0.0001) and mortality (Infection fatality rate 20.0% vs 3.4%, p=0.0003) have significantly reduced for patients with PID but remain elevated compared to the general population. The presence of a serological response to vaccination was associated with a reduced duration of viral detection by PCR in the nasopharynx. Early outpatient treatment with antivirals or monoclonal antibodies reduced hospitalization during the Omicron wave.

          Conclusions

          Most individuals with immunodeficiency in the United Kingdom remain SARS-CoV-2 infection naïve. Vaccination, widespread availability of outpatient treatments and, possibly, the emergence of the B.1.1.529 variant have led to significant improvements in morbidity and mortality followings SARS-CoV-2 infection since the start of the pandemic. However, individuals with PID and SID remain at significantly increased risk of poor outcomes compared to the general population; mitigation, vaccination and treatment strategies must be optimized to minimize the ongoing burden of the pandemic in these vulnerable cohorts.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19 — Preliminary Report

          Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and thereby reduce progression to respiratory failure and death. Methods In this controlled, open-label trial comparing a range of possible treatments in patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19, we randomly assigned patients to receive oral or intravenous dexamethasone (at a dose of 6 mg once daily) for up to 10 days or to receive usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Here, we report the preliminary results of this comparison. Results A total of 2104 patients were assigned to receive dexamethasone and 4321 to receive usual care. Overall, 482 patients (22.9%) in the dexamethasone group and 1110 patients (25.7%) in the usual care group died within 28 days after randomization (age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.93; P<0.001). The proportional and absolute between-group differences in mortality varied considerably according to the level of respiratory support that the patients were receiving at the time of randomization. In the dexamethasone group, the incidence of death was lower than that in the usual care group among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (29.3% vs. 41.4%; rate ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.81) and among those receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation (23.3% vs. 26.2%; rate ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94) but not among those who were receiving no respiratory support at randomization (17.8% vs. 14.0%; rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.55). Conclusions In patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the use of dexamethasone resulted in lower 28-day mortality among those who were receiving either invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen alone at randomization but not among those receiving no respiratory support. (Funded by the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research and others; RECOVERY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04381936; ISRCTN number, 50189673.)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            OpenSAFELY: factors associated with COVID-19 death in 17 million patients

            COVID-19 has rapidly impacted on mortality worldwide. 1 There is unprecedented urgency to understand who is most at risk of severe outcomes, requiring new approaches for timely analysis of large datasets. Working on behalf of NHS England we created OpenSAFELY: a secure health analytics platform covering 40% of all patients in England, holding patient data within the existing data centre of a major primary care electronic health records vendor. Primary care records of 17,278,392 adults were pseudonymously linked to 10,926 COVID-19 related deaths. COVID-19 related death was associated with: being male (hazard ratio 1.59, 95%CI 1.53-1.65); older age and deprivation (both with a strong gradient); diabetes; severe asthma; and various other medical conditions. Compared to people with white ethnicity, black and South Asian people were at higher risk even after adjustment for other factors (HR 1.48, 1.29-1.69 and 1.45, 1.32-1.58 respectively). We have quantified a range of clinical risk factors for COVID-19 related death in the largest cohort study conducted by any country to date. OpenSAFELY is rapidly adding further patients’ records; we will update and extend results regularly.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Neutralizing antibody levels are highly predictive of immune protection from symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection

              Predictive models of immune protection from COVID-19 are urgently needed to identify correlates of protection to assist in the future deployment of vaccines. To address this, we analyzed the relationship between in vitro neutralization levels and the observed protection from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection using data from seven current vaccines and from convalescent cohorts. We estimated the neutralization level for 50% protection against detectable SARS-CoV-2 infection to be 20.2% of the mean convalescent level (95% confidence interval (CI) = 14.4-28.4%). The estimated neutralization level required for 50% protection from severe infection was significantly lower (3% of the mean convalescent level; 95% CI = 0.7-13%, P = 0.0004). Modeling of the decay of the neutralization titer over the first 250 d after immunization predicts that a significant loss in protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection will occur, although protection from severe disease should be largely retained. Neutralization titers against some SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern are reduced compared with the vaccine strain, and our model predicts the relationship between neutralization and efficacy against viral variants. Here, we show that neutralization level is highly predictive of immune protection, and provide an evidence-based model of SARS-CoV-2 immune protection that will assist in developing vaccine strategies to control the future trajectory of the pandemic.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Immunol
                Front Immunol
                Front. Immunol.
                Frontiers in Immunology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-3224
                23 September 2022
                2022
                23 September 2022
                : 13
                : 984376
                Affiliations
                [1] 1 Clinical Immunology Service, Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham , Birmingham, United Kingdom
                [2] 2 Department of Clinical Immunology, University Hospitals Birmingham National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust , Birmingham, United Kingdom
                [3] 3 Department of Immunology, Royal Free London National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust , London, United Kingdom
                [4] 4 Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals National Health Service (NHS) Trust , Leeds, United Kingdom
                [5] 5 Department of Infection and Tropical Medicine, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust and Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University , Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
                [6] 6 Department of Clinical Immunology, University Hospitals North Midlands , Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom
                [7] 7 Department of Clinical Immunology, University College London Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust , London, United Kingdom
                [8] 8 National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) Oxford Biomedical Centre, University of Oxford , Oxford, United Kingdom
                [9] 9 Department of Clinical Immunology, Oxford University Hospitals National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust , Oxford, United Kingdom
                [10] 10 Department of Immunology, Salford Royal National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust , Salford, United Kingdom
                [11] 11 Department of Clinical Immunology, Hull University Teaching Hospitals National Health Service (NHS) Trust , Hull, United Kingdom
                [12] 12 Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, University Hospitals Plymouth National Health Service (NHS) Trust , Plymouth, United Kingdom
                [13] 13 Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne , Newcastle, United Kingdom
                [14] 14 Medical Research Council Toxicology Unit, University of Cambridge , Cambridge, United Kingdom
                [15] 15 Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford , Oxford, United Kingdom
                [16] 16 Institute of Immunity and Transplantation, University College London , London, United Kingdom
                Author notes

                Edited by: Leif Hanitsch, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany

                Reviewed by: Anna Sediva, University Hospital in Motol, Czechia; Hilary J. Longhurst, Auckland District Health Board, New Zealand

                *Correspondence: Adrian M. Shields, a.m.shields@ 123456bham.ac.uk ; Siobhan O. Burns, siobhan.burns@ 123456ucl.ac.uk ; Alex G. Richter, a.g.richter@ 123456bham.ac.uk

                †These authors have contributed equally to this work and share senior authorship

                This article was submitted to Primary Immunodeficiencies, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

                Article
                10.3389/fimmu.2022.984376
                9539662
                36211396
                ef797ece-6315-4f62-a6eb-69d54d2838ba
                Copyright © 2022 Shields, Tadros, Al-Hakim, Nell, Lin, Chan, Goddard, Dempster, Dziadzio, Patel, Elkalifa, Huissoon, Duncan, Herwadkar, Khan, Bethune, Elcombe, Thaventhiran, Klenerman, Lowe, Savic, Burns and Richter

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 01 July 2022
                : 18 August 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 5, Equations: 0, References: 26, Pages: 13, Words: 6225
                Funding
                Funded by: UK Research and Innovation , doi 10.13039/100014013;
                Categories
                Immunology
                Original Research

                Immunology
                covid-19,cvid,inborn errors of immunity,primary immunodeficiency,secondary immunodeficiency,vaccination,sars-cov-2

                Comments

                Comment on this article