Objective The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of disease modifying therapies on immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome‐coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) vaccines in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Methods Four hundred seventy‐three people with MS provided one or more dried blood spot samples. Information about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) and vaccine history, medical, and drug history were extracted from questionnaires and medical records. Dried blood spots were eluted and tested for antibodies to SARS‐CoV‐2. Antibody titers were partitioned into tertiles with people on no disease modifying therapy as a reference. We calculated the odds ratio of seroconversion (univariate logistic regression) and compared quantitative vaccine response (Kruskal Wallis) following the SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine according to disease modifying therapy. We used regression modeling to explore the effect of vaccine timing, treatment duration, age, vaccine type, and lymphocyte count on vaccine response. Results Compared to no disease modifying therapy, the use of anti‐CD20 monoclonal antibodies (odds ratio = 0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.01–0.06, p < 0.001) and fingolimod (odds ratio = 0.04; 95% CI = 0.01–0.12) were associated with lower seroconversion following the SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine. All other drugs did not differ significantly from the untreated cohort. Both time since last anti‐CD20 treatment and total time on treatment were significantly associated with the response to the vaccination. The vaccine type significantly predicted seroconversion, but not in those on anti‐CD20 medications. Preliminary data on cellular T‐cell immunity showed 40% of seronegative subjects had measurable anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 T cell responses. Interpretation Some disease modifying therapies convey risk of attenuated serological response to SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination in people with MS. We provide recommendations for the practical management of this patient group. ANN NEUROL 2021

Objective: To investigate the effect of disease modifying therapies on serological response to SARS-CoV2 vaccines in people with multiple sclerosis Methods: 473 people with multiple sclerosis from 5 centres provided one or more dried blood spot samples and a questionnaire about COVID-19 and vaccine history. Information about disease and drug history was extracted from their medical records. Dried blood spots were eluted and tested for antibodies to SARS-CoV2 receptor binding domain. Seropositivity was expressed according to validated cut-off indices. Antibody titers were partitioned into tertiles using data from people on no disease modifying therapy as a reference. We calculated the odds ratio of seroconversion (Univariate logistic regression) and compared quantitative vaccine response (Kruskal Wallis) following SARS-CoV2 vaccine according to disease modifying therapy. We used regression modelling to explore the effect of factors including vaccine timing, treatment duration, age, vaccine type and lymphocyte count on vaccine response. Results: Compared to no disease modifying therapy, the use of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (odds ratio 0.03; 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.06, p<0.001) and fingolimod (odds ratio 0.41; 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.12) were associated with lower seroconversion following SARS-CoV2 vaccine. All other drug groups did not differ significantly from the untreated cohort. Both time since last anti-CD20 treatment and total time on treatment were significantly related with serological response to vaccination. Vaccine type significantly predicted seroconversion, but not in those on anti-CD20 medications. Interpretation: Some disease modifying therapies carry a risk of attenuated response to SARS-CoV2 vaccination in people with MS. We provide recommendations for the practical management of this patient group.

Background This study aimed to determine the impact of pulmonary complications on death after surgery both before and during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Methods This was a patient-level, comparative analysis of two, international prospective cohort studies: one before the pandemic (January–October 2019) and the second during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (local emergence of COVID-19 up to 19 April 2020). Both included patients undergoing elective resection of an intra-abdominal cancer with curative intent across five surgical oncology disciplines. Patient selection and rates of 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Mediation analysis using a natural-effects model was used to estimate the proportion of deaths during the pandemic attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results This study included 7402 patients from 50 countries; 3031 (40.9 per cent) underwent surgery before and 4371 (59.1 per cent) during the pandemic. Overall, 4.3 per cent (187 of 4371) developed postoperative SARS-CoV-2 in the pandemic cohort. The pulmonary complication rate was similar (7.1 per cent (216 of 3031) versus 6.3 per cent (274 of 4371); P = 0.158) but the mortality rate was significantly higher (0.7 per cent (20 of 3031) versus 2.0 per cent (87 of 4371); P &lt; 0.001) among patients who had surgery during the pandemic. The adjusted odds of death were higher during than before the pandemic (odds ratio (OR) 2.72, 95 per cent c.i. 1.58 to 4.67; P &lt; 0.001). In mediation analysis, 54.8 per cent of excess postoperative deaths during the pandemic were estimated to be attributable to SARS-CoV-2 (OR 1.73, 1.40 to 2.13; P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion Although providers may have selected patients with a lower risk profile for surgery during the pandemic, this did not mitigate the likelihood of death through SARS-CoV-2 infection. Care providers must act urgently to protect surgical patients from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The accumulation of the various products of alpha-synuclein aggregation has been associated with the etiology and pathogenesis of several neurodegenerative conditions, including both familial and sporadic forms of Parkinson’s disease (PD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). It is now well established that the aggregation and spread of alpha-synuclein aggregation pathology activate numerous pathogenic mechanisms that contribute to neurodegeneration and, ultimately, to disease progression. Therefore, the development of a safe and effective disease-modifying therapy that limits or prevents the accumulation of the toxic intermediate products of alpha-synuclein aggregation and the spread of alpha-synuclein aggregation pathology could provide significant positive clinical outcomes in PD/DLB cohorts. It has been suggested that this goal can be achieved by reducing the intracellular and/or extracellular levels of monomeric and already aggregated alpha-synuclein. The principal aim of this review is to critically evaluate the potential of therapeutic strategies that target the post-transcriptional steps of alpha-synuclein production and immunotherapy-based approaches to alpha-synuclein degradation in PD/DLB patients. Strategies aimed at the downregulation of alpha-synuclein production are at an early preclinical stage of drug development and, although they have shown promise in animal models of alpha-synuclein aggregation, many limitations need to be resolved before in-human clinical trials can be seriously considered. In contrast, many strategies aimed at the degradation of alpha-synuclein using immunotherapeutic approaches are at a more advanced stage of development, with some in-human Phase II clinical trials currently in progress. Translational barriers for both strategies include the limitations of alpha-synuclein aggregation models, poor understanding of the therapeutic window for the alpha-synuclein knockdown, and variability in alpha-synuclein pathology across patient cohorts. Overcoming such barriers should be the main focus of further studies. However, it is already clear that these strategies do have the potential to achieve a disease-modifying effect in PD and DLB.

No abstract