Search

Background: Torquetenovirus (TTV) viremia is increasingly recognized as a marker of immune competence. In the context of COVID-19, TTV viral load (VL) has been shown to predict anti-Spike antibody levels in severely immunocompromised patients. This study aimed to evaluate whether pre-vaccine TTV VL could predict humoral and cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in people living with HIV (PLWH) and healthy individuals (HP). Methods: TTV VL was measured via real-time PCR in serum samples collected before the second and third doses of mRNA vaccines in 93 PLWH and 48 HP (second dose) and 255 PLWH and 48 HP (third dose). Immune responses were assessed through anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG, neutralizing antibodies, and IFN-γ release. Statistical analyses included correlation studies between TTV VL and vaccine-induced immune responses. Results: TTV VL did not significantly correlate with anti-RBD IgG or neutralizing antibody levels in either cohort; highlighting its limited predictive value for humoral responses in relatively immunocompetent populations. However, a strong inverse correlation was observed between TTV VL and IFN-γ release after the third, but not the second, vaccine dose. These findings suggest that higher TTV VL, indicative of reduced immune competence, may impair T-cell-mediated immunity to vaccines. Conclusions: In virologically suppressed PLWH and HP, TTV VL is not a reliable predictor of humoral immune responses to COVID-19 vaccines. However, its inverse relationship with cellular responses warrants further investigation in more immunosuppressed populations. These results reinforce the continuum model of TTV VL as a biomarker, with predictive utility increasing alongside the degree of immunosuppression [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The recent resurgence of mpox in central Africa has been declared a new public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) requiring coordinated international responses. Vaccination is a priority to expand protection and enhance control strategies, but the vaccine's need exceeds the currently available doses. Intradermal (ID) administration of one-fifth of the standard modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA-BN) dose was temporarily authorized during the 2022 PHEIC. Studies conducted before 2022 provided evidence about the humoral response against the vaccinia virus (VACV) after vaccination but not against the mpox virus (MPXV). Moreover, no data are available on the T-cell response elicited by MVA-BN administered subcutaneously or intradermally. Methods: We compare the two vaccine administration routes according to reactogenicity (n = 943) and immunogenicity (n = 225) of vaccine recipients attending INMI Spallanzani hospital during the 2022 vaccination campaign in Rome, Italy. Results: We found that the ID route elicited higher titers of MPXV-specific IgG (mean difference of 0.26 log2, p = 0.05) and nAbs (0.24 log2, p = 0.08) than the subcutaneous (SC) route one month after the complete vaccination cycle. At the same time, no evidence for a difference in cellular response was found. Conclusions: MVA-BN was globally well tolerated despite higher reactogenicity for the ID than the SC route, especially for the reactions at the local injection site. The ID dose-sparing strategy was proven safe and immunogenic and would make vaccination available to more people. Our data support the current WHO recommendation of using the ID route in low–medium-income countries (LMIC), although response data in people infected with the new 1b clade are urgently needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. We aimed to report the real-world use and outcomes over time in immunocompromised individuals receiving tixagevimab/cilgavimab (T/C) pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Methods. This observational study included participants who received T/C PrEP, categorized into three groups: (i) No COVID-19 (NoC), i.e., participants who never had COVID-19; (ii) Hybrids (H), i.e., participants who had COVID-19 before PrEP; and (iii) Break-through Infections (BTIs), i.e., participants who had COVID-19 after PrEP. The study measured several immune markers at the administration of T/C (T0) at 3 (T1), 6 (T2), and 9 (T3) months afterward. These markers included: anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG antibodies; BA.5-neutralizing antibodies (nAbs); mucosal IgG; and T cell immunity. The incidence rate ratios for BTIs were analyzed using a Poisson regression model. Results. A total of 231 participants with a median age of 63 years (IQR 54.0–73.0). were included. Among these, 84% had hematological diseases and received a median of three vaccine doses. N = 72 participants belonged to the NoC group, N = 103 to the H group, and n = 56 to the BTI group (24%), with most BTIs being mild/moderate. The incidence rate (IR) of BTIs was 4.2 per 100 patient-months (95% CI 3.2–5.4), with no associated risk factors identified. There was a significant increase in anti-RBD IgG levels 3 months after the T/C administration in all groups, followed by a decline at 6 months, whereas at the same time points, geometric mean titers (GMTs) of anti-BA.5 nAbs were low for all groups and were around or below the detection threshold. No significant changes were observed in IFN-γ levels. The mucosal immune response was observed only 3 months after the PrEP administration. Conclusion. We provided a real-world experience model on the clinical efficacy of T/C PrEP in preventing severe COVID-19 during the Omicron wave through a comprehensive virological and immunological study. While waiting for the arrival of new monoclonal antibodies that can effectively neutralize the most recent variants, T/C PrEP remains the only viable strategy in the available armamentarium today to prevent COVID-19 complications in an extremely fragile population with suboptimal immune responses to COVID-19 vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We estimated the dynamics of the neutralizing response against XBB sublineages and T cell response in persons with HIV (PWH) with previous AIDS and/or CD4 < 200/mm3 receiving the bivalent original strain/BA.4‐5 booster dose in fall 2022. Samples were collected before the shot (Day 0), 15 days, 3, and 6 months after. PWH were stratified by immunization status: hybrid immunity (HI; vaccination plus COVID‐19) versus nonhybrid immunity (nHI; vaccination only). Fifteen days after the booster, 16% and 30% of PWH were nonresponders in terms of anti‐XBB.1.16 or anti‐EG.5.1 nAbs, respectively. Three months after, a significant waning of anti‐XBB.1.16, EG.5.1 and ‐XBB.1 nAbs was observed both in HI and nHI but nAbs in HI were higher than in nHI. Six months after both HI and nHI individuals displayed low mean levels of anti‐XBB.1.16 and EG.5.1 nAbs. Regarding T cell response, IFN‐γ values were stable over time and similar in HI and nHI. Our data showed that in PWH, during the prevalent circulation of the XBB.1.16, EG.5.1, and other XBB sublineages, a mRNA bivalent vaccine might not confer broad protection against them. With a view to the 2023/2024 vaccination campaign, the use of the monovalent XBB.1.5 mRNA vaccine should be urgently warranted in PWH to provide adequate protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During HIV infection, effective combined antiretroviral therapy suppresses viral replication and restores the number of circulating CD4+ T cells. However, 15%-30% of treated patients show a discordant response to combined antiretroviral therapy. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) are expanded in HIV+ patients; to better understand the role of MDSC on CD4 T-cell recovery, we evaluated the frequency of MDSC in HIV+ patients under combined antiretroviral therapy and its association with immunologic response. Methods: We enrolled 60 HIV+ patients, including complete responders (R, n = 44), virologic nonresponders (VNR, n = 5), and immunologic nonresponders (INR, n = 11). The frequency of circulating MDSC and the percentage of activated and naïve CD4 T cells were evaluated by flow cytometry. Plasmatic cytokine levels were analyzed by automated ELISA. Results: As previously observed, polymorphonuclear MDSC (PMN-MDSC) frequency was higher in HIV+ patients compared with healthy donors. Furthermore, PMN-MDSC percentage was higher in INR than R patients, and a significant association between MDSC frequency and immunologic failure was confirmed by a receiver operator characteristic analysis. Accordingly, an inverse correlation was found between the percentages of PMN-MDSC and naïve CD4 T cells. A positive correlation was observed between PMN-MDSC frequency and the percentage of human leucocyte antigen locus DR + CD4 T cells and the plasmatic level of IL-1β and IL-8. Conclusion: Our results show that a high frequency of PMN-MDSC persists in INR, possibly because of immune activation, contributing to CD4 T-cell recovery failure. These findings further highlight the detrimental role of MDSC during HIV infection, suggesting these cells as a possible new therapeutic target. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Immunocompromised patients have been shown to have an impaired immune response to COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: Here we compared the B-cell, T-cell and neutralizing antibody response to WT and Omicron BA.2 SARS-CoV-2 virus after the fourth dose of mRNA COVID19 vaccines in patients with hematological malignancies (HM, n=71), solid tumors (ST, n=39) and immune-rheumatological (IR, n=25) diseases. The humoral and Tcell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were analyzed by quantifying the antiRBD antibodies, their neutralization activity and the IFN-γ released after spike specific stimulation. Results: We show that the T-cell response is similarly boosted by the fourth dose across the different subgroups, while the antibody response is improved only in patients not receiving B-cell targeted therapies, independent on the pathology. However, 9% of patients with anti-RBD antibodies did not have neutralizing antibodies to either virus variants, while an additional 5.7% did not have neutralizing antibodies to Omicron BA.2, making these patients particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The increment of neutralizing antibodies was very similar towards Omicron BA.2 and WT virus after the third or fourth dose of vaccine, suggesting that there is no preferential skewing towards either virus variant with the booster dose. The only limited step is the amount of antibodies that are elicited after vaccination, thus increasing the probability of developing neutralizing antibodies to both variants of virus. Discussion: These data support the recommendation of additional booster doses in frail patients to enhance the development of a B-cell response directed against Omicron and/or to enhance the T-cell response in patients treated with antiCD20. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]