MO914: Development of Antibody Response to SARS-COV-2 Vaccines in Haemodialysis Patients

Abstract BACKGROUND AND AIMS Previous data has shown a reduced immune response shortly after SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations in haemodialysis patients. We therefore investigated the long-term antibody response in patients from different outpatient dialysis centres at 4 weeks and 6 months after a complete vaccination against COVID-19. The results were compared with the humoral responses of non-dialysis subjects. METHODS We designed a retrospective multicentric cohort study, enrolling 106 haemodialysis patients and 50 non-dialysis patients after the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing was performed as part of routine clinical practice 4 weeks as well as 6 months after the immunization with chemiluminescence immunoassays designed to detect antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S, Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany). Testing was performed in the Institute of Laboratory Medicine of the University Hospital Munich. According to the manufacturer's specifications, anti-SARS-CoV-2 S titres &amp;gt;0.8 U/mL are considered reactive (sensitivity 98.8% and specificity 99.9%). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S titres &amp;lt; 100 U/mL were defined as a low antibody response. RESULTS A total of 106 haemodialysis patients with a median age of 73 years received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (n = 105 mRNA, n = 1 AstraZeneca). Of these, 50 non-dialysis patients with a median age of 56 years received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (n = 45 mRNA, n = 5 mRNA/AstraZeneca). During the observational period, 8 haemodialysis patients and 2 non-dialysis patients additionally contracted a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Between the two testings, an overall decrease in anti-SARS-CoV-2 S antibody titres was observed (haemodialysis patients from a median of 252 to 95 U/mL, non-dialysis patients from a median of 1621 to 441 U/mL). At 6 months after the complete vaccination, 99 (93%) haemodialysis patients still presented with a detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody response (&amp;gt;0.8 U/mL), comparable to 100% of the non-dialysis subjects. However, 60 (57%) haemodialysis patients showed low antibody response (&amp;lt;100 U/mL), whereas only 5 (10%) non-dialysis patients presented with low antibody response. Patients with an additional infection showed an increased titre of antibodies during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Our data suggest regular antibody testing as well as a need for booster vaccination in the vulnerable population of haemodialysis patients. </jats:sec

Empagliflozin in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Background The effects of empagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease who are at risk for disease progression are not well understood. The EMPA-KIDNEY trial was designed to assess the effects of treatment with empagliflozin in a broad range of such patients. Methods We enrolled patients with chronic kidney disease who had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of at least 20 but less than 45 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area, or who had an eGFR of at least 45 but less than 90 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (with albumin measured in milligrams and creatinine measured in grams) of at least 200. Patients were randomly assigned to receive empagliflozin (10 mg once daily) or matching placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of progression of kidney disease (defined as end-stage kidney disease, a sustained decrease in eGFR to &lt; 10 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), a sustained decrease in eGFR of &amp; GE;40% from baseline, or death from renal causes) or death from cardiovascular causes. Results A total of 6609 patients underwent randomization. During a median of 2.0 years of follow-up, progression of kidney disease or death from cardiovascular causes occurred in 432 of 3304 patients (13.1%) in the empagliflozin group and in 558 of 3305 patients (16.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.82; P &lt; 0.001). Results were consistent among patients with or without diabetes and across subgroups defined according to eGFR ranges. The rate of hospitalization from any cause was lower in the empagliflozin group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.95; P=0.003), but there were no significant between-group differences with respect to the composite outcome of hospitalization for heart failure or death from cardiovascular causes (which occurred in 4.0% in the empagliflozin group and 4.6% in the placebo group) or death from any cause (in 4.5% and 5.1%, respectively). The rates of serious adverse events were similar in the two groups. Conclusions Among a wide range of patients with chronic kidney disease who were at risk for disease progression, empagliflozin therapy led to a lower risk of progression of kidney disease or death from cardiovascular causes than placebo