Explore the vast range of titles available.

Lay Summary T-cell and antibody responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination in inflammatory bowel disease patients are poorly correlated. T-cell responses are preserved by most biologic therapies, but augmented by anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) treatment. While anti-TNF therapy blunts the antibody response, cellular immunity after vaccination is robust.

T-cells specifically bind antigens to induce adaptive immune responses using highly specific molecular recognition, and a diverse T-cell repertoire with expansion of antigen-specific clones can indicate robust immune responses after infection or vaccination. For patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), a spectrum of chronic intestinal inflammatory diseases usually requiring immunomodulatory treatment, the T-cell response has not been well characterized. Understanding the patient factors that result in strong vaccination responses is critical to guiding vaccination schedules and identifying mechanisms of T-cell responses in IBD and other immune-mediated conditions. Here we used T-cell receptor sequencing to show that T-cell responses in an IBD cohort were influenced by demographic and immune factors, relative to a control cohort of health care workers (HCWs). Subjects were sampled at the time of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, and longitudinally afterwards; TCR Vβ gene repertoires were sequenced and analyzed for COVID-19-specific clones. We observed significant differences in the overall strength of the T-cell response by age and vaccine type. We further stratified the T-cell response into Class-I- and Class-II-specific responses, showing that Ad26.COV2.S vector vaccine induced Class-I-biased T-cell responses, whereas mRNA vaccine types led to different responses, with mRNA-1273 vaccine inducing a more Class-I-deficient T-cell response compared to BNT162b2. Finally, we showed that these T-cell patterns were consistent with antibody levels from the same patients. Our results account for the surprising success of vaccination in nominally immuno-compromised IBD patients, while suggesting that a subset of IBD patients prone to deficiencies in T-cell response may warrant enhanced booster protocols.

In a retrospective case series study, medical records were evaluated for all male patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) diagnosed over a one-year period with foot fractures (n = 30) confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging at a Los Angeles outpatient private practice rheumatology clinic. Proportionally more patients had received tenofovir prefracture (17 [57%]) than those who had not (13 [43%]). At fracture diagnosis, these two groups were similar in median age (49 versus 48 years), HIV-1 RNA (both 1.7 log(10) copies/mL), CD4 count (300 versus 364/mm(3)), time between HIV diagnosis and foot fracture (both 17 years), family history of degenerative bone disease (24% versus 23%), prevalence of malabsorption syndrome, renal failure, calcium deficiency, or vitamin D deficiency, and concurrent use of bisphosphonates, calcitonin, and diuretics. However, more tenofovir-treated patients had osteoporosis (35% versus 8%), stress-type fractures (53% versus 31%), concurrent fractures (12% versus 0%), wasting syndrome (29% versus 15%), truncal obesity (18% versus 8%), smoked cigarettes (more than one pack/day for more than one year; 35% versus 8%), dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) T scores < -2.4 (denoting osteoporosis) at the femur (24% versus 9%) and spine (47% versus 36%), and had received protease inhibitors (71% versus 46%), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (24% versus 0%), prednisone (24% versus 0%), testosterone (47% versus 23%), and teriparatide (29% versus 8%). Median time from tenofovir initiation until fracture was 2.57 (range 1.17-5.69) years. In conclusion, more foot fractures were observed in tenofovir-treated patients than in non-tenofovir-treated patients with HIV infection. Comorbidities and/or coadministered drugs may have been contributory.

Background The safety of a third dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease is unknown. Methods We compared symptoms following a third SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose with symptoms after the second dose in IBD. Results The study group included 594 patients (70% female, 58% BNT162b2). Overall, 41% reported symptoms after a third dose. Symptom frequency and severity were lower after the third dose relative to the second dose for every organ system, except for gastrointestinal symptoms which were marginally worse. Conclusion The frequency and severity of symptoms after a third mRNA vaccine dose are generally similar or milder than after a second dose for most organ systems. Lay Summary The postvaccination symptom profile in patients with IBD is unknown after a third mRNA COVID vaccine dose. In a cohort of 594 subjects with IBD, we demonstrated that 41% experienced any symptoms after a third dose, the vast majority of which were mild and lasted less than 2 days. Symptoms after third dose were less frequently reported than after the second dose.

Abstract Background Vaccine hesitancy is prevalent among people with IBD, in part due to insufficient evidence regarding comparative safety of vaccines in this population. Methods We conducted a nationwide comparative study of postvaccination symptoms among those with IBD and health care workers (HCWs) without IBD. Symptom frequency, severity, and duration were measured. Continuous and categorical data were analyzed using Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher’s exact test. Regression analysis was used to adjust for confounding variables. Results We had 2910 and 2746 subjects who completed a survey after dose 1 (D1) and dose 2 (D2) respectively (D1: HCW = 933, IBD = 1977; D2: HCW = 884, IBD = 1862). Mean age was 43 years, 67% were female, and 23% were nonwhite; 73% received BNT162b2 (Pfizer) including almost all HCWs and 60% of IBD patients. Most postvaccine symptoms were mild and lasted ≤2 days after both doses in both groups. Health care workers experienced more postvaccination symptoms overall than IBD patients after each dose (D1: 57% vs 35%, P < .001; D2: 73% vs 50%, P < .001). Gastrointestinal symptoms were noted in IBD more frequently after D1 (5.5% vs 3%, P = .003) but not after D2 (10% vs 13%, P = .07). Inflammatory bowel disease subjects who received mRNA-1273 (Moderna) reported more overall symptoms compared with BNT162b2 (57% vs 46%, P < .001) including gastrointestinal symptoms (12% vs 8%, P = .002) after D2. Conclusions People with IBD had fewer postvaccination symptoms following the first 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines than HCWs. Among those with symptoms, most symptoms were mild and of short duration. Lay Summary Those with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) reported fewer postvaccination symptoms relative to non-IBD health care workers. Local and systemic symptoms were generally mild and lasted less than 2 days in both populations. The data are reassuring with considerable vaccine hesitancy.