You are here

Responses

Article menu
XML
Epidemiology
Humoral and T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients receiving immunosuppression
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 7 October 2021
    Correspondence to ”Humoral and T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients receiving immunosuppression”
    • Yun-Hsien Hsieh, Medical student Department of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan
    • Other Contributors:
      • Pui-Ying Leong, Allergy, Immunology and Rheumatology doctor

    Dear editor:
    We read with great interest in the article by Maria Prendecki, which reported repeated SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations could induce humoral and T-cell responses in those patients who are immunosuppressed. The authors collected data from a total 161 patients with immune-mediated glomerulonephritis and vasculitis from 17 January 2021 and 9 March 2021, and conducted a cohort study. However, some conclusions and findings in this study need to be further clarified.

    Firstly, in the sample collection and baseline data of the RESULTS section, we can see that a total of 114 patients have previously received rituximab treatment, 69 of which received Rituximab treatment in the past six months. However, in the statistical table 1, we see that there were only 99 patients who had previously treated with rituximab, and only 56 patients received rituximab treatment within six months. Is the difference in sample data between the two likely to affect the statistical results?
    Secondly, the article focused on patients in the IS group only for matching age and vaccine type. Does the article ignore the past medical history or past medication history for matching?
    Last but not least, there is a big difference in the interval between the first dose of vaccine and the second dose of the patient in the healthy group and the IS group, and the second dose of the healthy group can only choose the BNT vaccine. Will the above two likely to have interference factors in this...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on: 24 September 2021
    Correspondence on “Humoral and T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients receiving immunosuppression” by “Prendecki et al”
    • Wei-Teng Lin, Student School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan
    • Other Contributors:
      • Ting Yu-Ting Chen, Student
      • Karen Yu-Hsien Weng, Student
      • James Cheng-Chung Wei, Rheumatologist

    We have a great interest in the article published by Prendecki et al studying on immune response to SARS-CoV2 vaccination (with either BNT162b2 mRNA or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines) in patients receiving immunosuppression (IS) for autoimmune rheumatic and glomerular diseases.[1] They reported poor humeral and cellular responses to first-dose vaccine in IS group comparing to a cohort of healthy volunteer (HV), while the immune responses could be augmented by second dose. [1] We appreciate this important and timely study. However, we believe that some issues should be discussed in this study.
    First of all, the baseline comparability between IS and HV as well as between subgroups should be balanced, not only for age, but also for interval between 2 doses and types of vaccine. According to the recommendation for use of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine published by World Health Organization (WHO), they suggested an interval of 8 to 12 weeks between the two doses due to the observation that two-dose efficacy and antibody level increase with a longer inter-dose interval. [2] However, IS group patients got second-dose vaccination at a median of 30 days (IQR 28-42 days), which didn’t categorize subgroup by different types of vaccine and was much earlier than the WHO recommendation timing. Although the significantly lower seroconversion rate was noticed in patients receiving ChAdOx1 than those receiving BNT2b162, we still concerned that short interval vaccination schedule would have i...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.