scholarly journals Immunogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines in Immunocompromised Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author(s):  
Mohammad-Mehdi Mehrabinejad ◽  
Fatemeh Moosaie ◽  
Hojat Dehghanbanadaki ◽  
Abdolkarim Hajighadery ◽  
Mahya Shabani ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Immunocompromised (IC) patients are at higher risk of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, morbidity, and mortality compared to general population. They should be prioritized for primary prevention through vaccination. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in IC patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. Method PubMed-MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for original articles reporting the immunogenicity of two doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in adult patients with IC condition between June 1, 2020 and September 1, 2021. Meta-analysis was performed using either random or fixed effect according to the heterogeneity of the studies. Subgroup analysis was performed to identify potential sources of heterogeneity. Results A total of 26 studies on 3207 IC patients and 1726 healthy individuals were included. The risk of seroconversion in IC patients was 48% lower than those in controls (RR= 0.52 [0.42, 0.65]). IC patients with autoimmune condition were 54% and patients with malignancy were 42% more likely to have positive seroconversion compared to those with transplant (P<0.01). Subgroup meta-analysis based on type of malignancy, revealed significantly higher proportion of positive seroconversion in solid organ compared to hematologic malignancies (RR= 0.88 [0.85, 0.92] vs. 0.61 [0.44, 0.86], P= 0.03). Subgroup meta-analysis based on type of transplantation (kidney vs. others), showed no statically significant between group difference of seroconversion (P= 0.55). Conclusions IC patients, especially transplant patients, developed lower immunogenicity with two-dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Among patients with IC, those with autoimmune condition and solid organ malignancies are mostly benefited from COVID-19 vaccination. Findings from this meta-analysis, could aid health care policy makers upon making decision regarding the importance of the booster dose or more strict personal protections in the IC patients.

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 327
Author(s):  
Nipat Chuleerarux ◽  
Achitpol Thongkam ◽  
Kasama Manothummetha ◽  
Saman Nematollahi ◽  
Veronica Dioverti-Prono ◽  
...  

Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) and invasive aspergillosis (IA) cause high morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. There are conflicting data with respect to the impact of CMV on IA development in SOT recipients. Methods: A literature search was conducted from existence through to 2 April 2021 using MEDLINE, Embase, and ISI Web of Science databases. This review contained observational studies including cross-sectional, prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, and case-control studies that reported SOT recipients with post-transplant CMV (exposure) and without post-transplant CMV (non-exposure) who developed or did not develop subsequent IA. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled effect estimate. Results: A total of 16 studies were included for systematic review and meta-analysis. There were 5437 SOT patients included in the study, with 449 SOT recipients developing post-transplant IA. Post-transplant CMV significantly increased the risk of subsequent IA with pORs of 3.31 (2.34, 4.69), I2 = 30%. Subgroup analyses showed that CMV increased the risk of IA development regardless of the study period (before and after 2003), types of organ transplantation (intra-thoracic and intra-abdominal transplantation), and timing after transplant (early vs. late IA development). Further analyses by CMV definitions showed CMV disease/syndrome increased the risk of IA development, but asymptomatic CMV viremia/infection did not increase the risk of IA. Conclusions: Post-transplant CMV, particularly CMV disease/syndrome, significantly increased the risks of IA, which highlights the importance of CMV prevention strategies in SOT recipients. Further studies are needed to understand the impact of programmatic fungal surveillance or antifungal prophylaxis to prevent this fungal-after-viral phenomenon.


Author(s):  
Heidi F. A. Moossdorff-Steinhauser ◽  
Bary C. M. Berghmans ◽  
Marc E. A. Spaanderman ◽  
Esther M. J. Bols

Abstract Introduction and hypothesis Urinary incontinence (UI) is a common and embarrassing complaint for pregnant women. Reported prevalence and incidence figures show a large range, due to varying case definitions, recruited population and study methodology. Precise prevalence and incidence figures on (bothersome) UI are of relevance for health care providers, policy makers and researchers. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the prevalence and incidence of UI in pregnancy in the general population for relevant subgroups and assessed experienced bother. Methods All observational studies published between January 1998 and October 2018 reporting on prevalence and/or incidence of UI during pregnancy were included. All women, regardless of weeks of gestation and type of UI presented in all settings, were of interest. A random-effects model was used. Subgroup analyses were conducted by parity, trimester and subtype of UI. Results The mean (weighted) prevalence based on 44 included studies, containing a total of 88.305 women, was 41.0% (range of 9–75%). Stress urinary incontinence (63%) is the most prevalent type of UI; 26% of the women reported daily loss, whereas 40% reported loss on a monthly basis. Bother was experienced as mild to moderate. Conclusions UI is very prevalent and rising with the weeks of gestation in pregnancy. SUI is the most common type and in most cases it was a small amount. Bother for UI is heterogeneously assessed and experienced as mild to moderate by pregnant women.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (25) ◽  
pp. 2881-2892
Author(s):  
Abi Vijenthira ◽  
Inna Y. Gong ◽  
Thomas A. Fox ◽  
Stephen Booth ◽  
Gordon Cook ◽  
...  

Abstract Outcomes for patients with hematologic malignancy infected with COVID-19 have not been aggregated. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the risk of death and other important outcomes for these patients. We searched PubMed and EMBASE up to 20 August 2020 to identify reports of patients with hematologic malignancy and COVID-19. The primary outcome was a pooled mortality estimate, considering all patients and only hospitalized patients. Secondary outcomes included risk of intensive care unit admission and ventilation in hospitalized patients. Subgroup analyses included mortality stratified by age, treatment status, and malignancy subtype. Pooled prevalence, risk ratios (RRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Thirty-four adult and 5 pediatric studies (3377 patients) from Asia, Europe, and North America were included (14 of 34 adult studies included only hospitalized patients). Risk of death among adult patients was 34% (95% CI, 28-39; N = 3240) in this sample of predominantly hospitalized patients. Patients aged ≥60 years had a significantly higher risk of death than patients &lt;60 years (RR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.45-2.27; N = 1169). The risk of death in pediatric patients was 4% (95% CI, 1-9; N = 102). RR of death comparing patients with recent systemic anticancer therapy to no treatment was 1.17 (95% CI, 0.83-1.64; N = 736). Adult patients with hematologic malignancy and COVID-19, especially hospitalized patients, have a high risk of dying. Patients ≥60 years have significantly higher mortality; pediatric patients appear to be relatively spared. Recent cancer treatment does not appear to significantly increase the risk of death.


2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 100588
Author(s):  
Mohammed A. Raja ◽  
Maria A. Mendoza ◽  
Aasith Villavicencio ◽  
Shweta Anjan ◽  
John M. Reynolds ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document