Search

Objective: To evaluate inactivated CoronaVac prime vaccination, antibody decay, booster dose, and safety in ANCA-Associated Vasculitis (AAV) patients., Methods: Fifty-three AAV patients and 106 Controls (CG) received CoronaVac on days: D0 (first dose), D28(second dose), and D210 (booster dose, 32 AAV: 32 CG). The primary outcome was immunogenicity after the second vaccine dose (day 69) assessed by Seroconversion Rates (SC) of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG and Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb). Secondary outcomes were safety, immunogenicity (D28/D240), 6-months antibody decay (D210) and the booster dose response (D240)., Results: At D69 SC (65.1% vs. 96.8%, p = 0.0001), GMT (21.3 UA/mL vs. 67.7 UA/mL, p < 0.001) and NAb- positivity (53.7% vs. 80.6%, p = 0.001) were moderate but lower in naïve-AAV patients than CG. Patients without SC used more often IS (93.3% vs. 53.3%, p = 0.015), mycophenolate mofetil (20% vs. 0%, p = 0.037) and prednisone (60.0% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.057) than seroconverted. NAb negativity in AAV patients was associated with prednisone treatment (57.9% vs. 18.2%, p = 0.015) and IS (84.2% vs. 55.0%, p = 0.046). Logistic regression analysis models showed that only prednisone was associated with lower seroconversion (OR = 0.2, 0,95% CI 0.05‒0.86, p = 0.030) and with lower NAb positivity (OR = 0.2, 0,95% CI 0.05‒0.88, p = 0.034). After six months (D69‒D210) a decrease in IgG positivity occurred in 32 AAV patients (15.7%, p = 0.074) and 32 CG (18.7%, p = 0.041). For the NAb positivity, the 6-month decrease was not significant (p = 0.114) whereas a major reduction occurred for CG (p < 0.001). A booster dose (D240) resulted in an increment in IgG-positivity (21.9%, p = 0.023) and NAb-positivity (34.4%, p = 0.006) in AAV patients. No moderate/severe adverse events attributable to the vaccine were observed., Conclusion: This study provides novel data on the excellent safety and moderate immunogenicity of CoronaVac in AAV patients. A six-month mild antibody waning was observed with a good response to the booster dose, although levels remained lower than CG (CoronavRheum-NCT04754698)., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 HCFMUSP. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the reported persistent or new symptoms 1 year after a single dose of 200,000 IU of vitamin D 3 and hospitalization in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19., Methods: This is a post-hoc , exploratory analysis from a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial from two hospitals in São Paulo, Brazil, registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04449718. Discharged patients were followed for up to 1 year and evaluated by telephone interviews at 6 and 12 months. The primary and secondary outcomes were previously published. These post-hoc exploratory secondary outcomes are the persistent or new symptoms and quality of life (QoL) at the post-viral stage of COVID-19. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) for repeated measures with Bonferroni's adjustment were used for testing outcomes., Results: Between 2 June and 27 August 2020, we randomized 240 patients of which 144 were included in this study [the vitamin D 3 ( n = 71) or placebo ( n = 73) group]. The mean (SD) age was 54.3 (13.1) years, and body mass index (BMI) was 32.4 (6.5) kg/m 2 . Fever demonstrated a significant main effect of time ( P < 0.001) with a reduction from baseline to 6 (52-0) and 12 months (52-0). No significant differences between groups were observed for fever, cough, fatigue, fever, myalgia, joint pain, runny nose, nasal congestion, sore throat, hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, rheumatic disease, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary, chronic kidney disease, QoL, and new or persistent symptoms up to 1-year of follow-up., Conclusion: The findings do not support the use of 200,000 IU of vitamin D 3 compared to placebo for the management of persistence or new symptoms, and QoL reported by moderate to severe patients after hospitalization for COVID-19., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Fernandes, Sales, Santos, Caparbo, Murai and Pereira.)