Evaluation of the efficacy of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine additional and booster doses in immunocompromised patients with multiple sclerosis: the COVACiMS study.
{"title":"Evaluation of the efficacy of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine additional and booster doses in immunocompromised patients with multiple sclerosis: the COVACiMS study.","authors":"Filipa Ladeira, Claudia Nobrega, João Cerqueira","doi":"10.1007/s00415-025-12991-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Studies evaluating COVID-19 primary vaccination with two vaccines reported a blunt response in Multiple Sclerosis (MS) patients under anti-CD20 and sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) modulators. An extended primary vaccination (EPV) was recommended in immunosuppressed MS patients. Data on the effectiveness of the EPV and subsequent booster dose are limited. A prospective cohort study (n = 270) was conducted to evaluate the humoral and cellular immunogenicity of the EPV scheme in immunocompromised MS patients (i.e., treated with anti-CD20, S1P modulators, natalizumab, teriflunomide, or dimethyl fumarate) vs. regular primary vaccination in non-treated patients - primary course (PC) cohort. The effect of a subsequent booster dose was also assessed - first booster (FB) cohort . The seroconversion rates were 55% and 56% in anti-CD20 and 75% and 67% in S1P modulators group in PC and FB cohort, respectively, and 100% in the remaining groups. A positive SARS-CoV-2 Spike T-spot was observed in 22% of patients under S1P modulators in PC cohort and 67% in FB cohort; the remaining groups had 75% or more. Similar rates of breakthrough infection were observed in both groups vs. controls. Compared to non-treated MS patients, immunosuppressed patients under anti-CD20 and S1P modulators drugs receiving EPV scheme or booster dose still present lower protection rates to SARS-CoV-2.</p>","PeriodicalId":16558,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurology","volume":"272 4","pages":"288"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11937187/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-025-12991-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Studies evaluating COVID-19 primary vaccination with two vaccines reported a blunt response in Multiple Sclerosis (MS) patients under anti-CD20 and sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) modulators. An extended primary vaccination (EPV) was recommended in immunosuppressed MS patients. Data on the effectiveness of the EPV and subsequent booster dose are limited. A prospective cohort study (n = 270) was conducted to evaluate the humoral and cellular immunogenicity of the EPV scheme in immunocompromised MS patients (i.e., treated with anti-CD20, S1P modulators, natalizumab, teriflunomide, or dimethyl fumarate) vs. regular primary vaccination in non-treated patients - primary course (PC) cohort. The effect of a subsequent booster dose was also assessed - first booster (FB) cohort . The seroconversion rates were 55% and 56% in anti-CD20 and 75% and 67% in S1P modulators group in PC and FB cohort, respectively, and 100% in the remaining groups. A positive SARS-CoV-2 Spike T-spot was observed in 22% of patients under S1P modulators in PC cohort and 67% in FB cohort; the remaining groups had 75% or more. Similar rates of breakthrough infection were observed in both groups vs. controls. Compared to non-treated MS patients, immunosuppressed patients under anti-CD20 and S1P modulators drugs receiving EPV scheme or booster dose still present lower protection rates to SARS-CoV-2.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Neurology is an international peer-reviewed journal which provides a source for publishing original communications and reviews on clinical neurology covering the whole field.
In addition, Letters to the Editors serve as a forum for clinical cases and the exchange of ideas which highlight important new findings. A section on Neurological progress serves to summarise the major findings in certain fields of neurology. Commentaries on new developments in clinical neuroscience, which may be commissioned or submitted, are published as editorials.
Every neurologist interested in the current diagnosis and treatment of neurological disorders needs access to the information contained in this valuable journal.