Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Covid vaccine

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Linda, that's scary! I hope that by referring to the reaction as a 2 week long pseudo flair you are indicating a full recovery. Mind if I ask how long after your last Rituxan infusion you got the CoVid vaccination? I completed my vaccinations 9 months after my last Rituxan infusion, and just 2 weeks before my next infusion. I suspect I achieved maximum CoVid antibody protection and then promptly wiped it out with Rituxan but obviously we don't really know.

    Larry

    Comment


    • #32
      I was between rituxan infusions so 3 months after infusion and next infusion coming mid and end of June.

      Comment


      • #33
        Linda, sorry to hear about reaction to 2nd shot. I hope you are feeling better. Did you say in another post that you had pnemonia right before pandemic, which might have been covid? I wonder if you contracted covid last year and had natural occurring antibodies and that's why you had such an intense reaction to vaccine?? I really don't know. Thankfully, you're protected now. Ps I had the medic alert for a time and it was reassuring to know if I fell, I could get help.

        Comment


        • #34
          What a great post! I don't know if any Aussies will see this post, but I'm trying to reach out widely.

          Covid-19 Research Survey for Australians with MS

          Melbourne, Australia underwent a strict and prolonged lockdown in 2020. This research survey wants to know how Covid-19 affected Australians, both in and out of lockdown, with respect to physical activity levels and venues (indoor/outdoor, for example).

          The survey also asks about MS-specific information and intentions with respect to vaccinations.
          Please help us examine these important topics by filling out this anonymous survey.

          This has been approved by the University of Melbourne ethics committee and will take approx 20 min to complete.

          https://redcap.link/MS_Covid

          Thank you for volunteering your time to participate
          ! Your input is greatly valued.

          Comment


          • #35
            The prevalence of COVID-19 infection in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS): a systematic review and meta-analysisNeurological Sciences (2021)

            Abstract

            Background
            The prevalence of COVID-19 is different in studies conducted in different countries. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to estimate the pooled prevalence of COVID-19 in patients with MS.

            Methods
            Two independent researchers independently searched PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and google scholar along with gray literature up to April 2021. The search strategy included the MeSH and text words as (((coronavirus OR Wuhan coronavirus OR novel coronavirus OR coronavirus disease OR COVID-19 OR 2019 novel coronavirus infection OR 2019-nCOV OR severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 OR SARS-CoV-2) AND (Multiple Sclerosis OR Sclerosis, Multiple) OR Sclerosis, Disseminated) OR Disseminated Sclerosis) OR MS (Multiple Sclerosis)) OR Multiple Sclerosis, Acute Fulminating).

            Results
            We found 1466 articles by literature search, and after deleting duplicates, 1029 remained. Twelve articles remained for meta-analysis. Totally, 101,462 patients were evaluated and the total number of possible/confirmed cases was 1394. Mean age ranged from 35 to 54 years. Totally, 49 patients died. The pooled prevalence of suspected COVID-19 in MS patients was 4% (95% CI: 3–4%) (I2 = 98.5%, P < 0.001). The pooled prevalence of hospitalization in infected cases was 10% (95% CI: 7–12%) (I2 = 95.6%, P < 0.001). The pooled prevalence of death in hospitalized cases was 4% (95% CI: 1–6%) (I2 = 82.4%, P < 0.001).

            Conclusion
            Hospitalization rate is higher among MS patients based on COVID-19 infection while the pooled infection rate is estimated as 4%.
            Dave Bexfield
            ActiveMSers

            Comment


            • #36
              Booster shoot for immune compromised??? France says yes, CDC says not so fast, And some Americans get on own... Johns Hopkins study -> https://apnews.com/article/science-c...3f3f1bc17185a1


              France recommendation June 1, 2021
              3 rd vaccine dose for immune compromised. immune compromised includes:
              • People under strong immunosuppressive treatment (anti-CD20 or anti-metabolites).
              The third dose is recommended four weeks after the second dose, or as soon as possible for people who have already exceeded this time.......They recommend that all severely immunocompromised people receive a quantitative anti-S type serology 30 days after administration of the second dose and the third dose. People also need to be rapidly informed that two doses of any vaccine is only likely to provide very limited protection.” https://i-base.info/htb/40634






              Last edited by Suebee; 06-14-2021, 09:06 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Neurol Sci
                . 2021 Jun 15;1-4.
                doi: 10.1007/s10072-021-05397-7. Online ahead of print.

                Preliminary evidence of blunted humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine in multiple sclerosis patients treated with ocrelizumab

                Antonio Gallo 1, Rocco Capuano 2, Giovanna Donnarumma 3, Alvino Bisecco 2, Elena Grimaldi 3, Miriana Conte 2, Alessandro d'Ambrosio 2, Nicola Coppola 4, Massimiliano Galdiero 3, Gioacchino Tedeschi 2
                Abstract


                Objectives: Several concerns regard the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS), since the majority of them is treated with immunomodulating/immunosuppressive disease modifying therapies. Here we report the first data on the humoral response to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in a case series of 4 pwMS treated with ocrelizumab (OCR) as compared to a group of healthy subjects (HS).

                Methods: We collected serum samples at 0, 14, 21 days after the first dose and 7 days after the second dose of BNT162b2-mRNA-Covid-19 vaccine from 55 health-care workers and 4 relapsing pwMS on OCR, with no history of Covid-19 infection. Sera were tested using the LIAISONŽSARS-CoV-2 TrimericS-IgG assay (DiaSorin-S.p.A.) for the detection of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The anti-spike IgGtiters were expressed in Binding Antibody Units (BAU), an international standard unit.

                Results: At baseline all subjects were negative for anti-spike IgG. Seven days after the second dose of vaccine all HS mounted a significant humoral response (geometric mean 2010.4 BAU/mL C.I. 95% 1512.7-2672) while the 4 pwMS showed a lower response (range <4.81-175 BAU/mL).

                Discussion: Humoral response to BNT162b2-mRNA-vaccine in pwMS treated with OCR was clearly blunted. Further data are urgently needed to confirm and expand these preliminary results and to develop strategies to optimize the response to SARSCoV-2 vaccines in pwMS on OCR.

                FREE ARTICLE: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34128150/
                Dave Bexfield
                ActiveMSers

                Comment


                • #38
                  Ocrevous causes blunted response. Point of information The article identifies type of spike antibody used:
                  LIAISONŽSARS-CoV-2 TrimericS-IgG assay (DiaSorin-S.p.A.). Manufacture says biotin treatment can interfere with test “ specimens from patients receiving therapeutic doses of Biotin (Vitamin H, B7 or B8) may interfere in immunoassays based on biotinylated reagents – interference was not observed testing Biotin serum concentration up to 3500 ng/mL with LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG assay” @ pg 8 https://assets.publishing.service.go...SARS_CoV_2.pdf

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Hello, I'm trying to get a bit more clarity on how Ocrevus impacted my immune system.

                    I had never taken any anti-CD20 medication when I got the Moderna vaccine. 4 weeks after the second shot, I started Ocrevus for the first time. So did Ocrevus dampen the vaccine's effectiveness? I hadn't been on a DMT for a year and had only ever been on Copaxone. My wishful thinking is that it means my immune response to the vaccine would be more like a person without MS, but that's just a guess.

                    I wasn't too worried until Delta, because my friends/family are all vaccinated.

                    I'll probably try to chat with my dr soon, because I have some travel decisions coming up in late summer and I don't know what to do. Cancel? Mask? What about my plans to attend some big outdoor events?

                    What is everyone else doing?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Andrea, I think you should be fine as you stated. But there is always a risk of breakthrough Covid, MS or no. Be smart like you have been. Your neuro will have a better idea and I suggest keeping track of the news. Everything is fuzzy again just when things were looking better!
                      Dave Bexfield
                      ActiveMSers

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Definitely worth a read! -DCOVID-19 vaccines and multiple sclerosis disease-modifying therapiesPublished:July 18, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msard.2021.103155

                        Much more evidence has emerged since our first editorial in April 2020 on the use of multiple sclerosis (MS) disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) during the pandemic (Giovannoni et al., 2020) and a further publication in MSARDs by Baker and colleagues on the biology underpinning the interaction between DMTs and SARs-CoV-2 (Baker et al., 2020). It is now clear that apart from anti-CD20 therapies (rituximab and ocrelizumab) MS DMTs do not appear to increase the risk of COVID-19 or severe COVID-19 (Sormani et al., 2021; Simpson-Yap et al., 2021; Salter et al., 2021). Importantly, people with MS (pwMS) treated with interferon-beta are less likely to get severe COVID-19 (Sormani et al., 2021), presumably due to its antiviral effects (Monk et al., 2021). The risks of COVID-19 associated with anti-CD20 therapy are relatively small with an approximate doubling of liability compared to people on other DMTs (Sormani et al., 2021; Simpson-Yap et al., 2021.). The most important drivers of severe COVID-19 and death are age, disability and the presence of comorbidities (
                        Sormani et al., 2021; Louapre et al., 2020). Male sex and other social determinants of health such as deprivation and ethnicity also play an important role in outcomes from COVID-19 (Bhaskaran et al., 2021). When counselling individual patients about the doubling of the risk of getting severe COVID-19 when on an anti-CD20 therapy it should be stressed that a doubling of a low risk, particularly a low absolute risk, remains still a low absolute risk. People with MS could use one of the online risk calculators, for example the online QCovidŽ risk calculator developed by the University of Oxford (https://qcovid.org/) to assess their personal risk.

                        FULL ARTICLE:
                        https://www.msard-journal.com/articl.../fulltext?s=03
                        Dave Bexfield
                        ActiveMSers

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm. 2021 Jul 14;8(5):e1035.

                          Ocrelizumab Extended Interval Dosing in Multiple Sclerosis in Times of COVID-19

                          Leoni Rolfes 1 , Marc Pawlitzki 1 , Steffen Pfeuffer 1 , Christopher Nelke 1 , Anke Lux 1 , Refik Pul 1 , Christoph Kleinschnitz 1 , Konstanze Kleinschnitz 1 , Rebeca Rogall 1 , Katrin Pape 1 , Stefan Bittner 1 , Frauke Zipp 1 , Clemens Warnke 1 , Yasemin Goereci 1 , Michael Schroeter 1 , Jens Ingwersen 1 , Orhan Aktas 1 , Luisa Klotz 1 , Tobias Ruck 1 , Heinz Wiendl 1 , Sven G Meuth 2

                          PMID: 34261812 DOI: 10.1212/NXI.0000000000001035

                          Abstract

                          Objective: To evaluate the clinical consequences of extended interval dosing (EID) of ocrelizumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

                          Methods: In our retrospective, multicenter cohort study, we compared patients with RRMS on EID (defined as ≥4-week delay of dose interval) with a control group on standard interval dosing (SID) at the same period (January to December 2020).

                          Results: Three hundred eighteen patients with RRMS were longitudinally evaluated in 5 German centers. One hundred sixteen patients received ocrelizumab on EID (median delay [interquartile range 8.68 [5.09-13.07] weeks). Three months after the last ocrelizumab infusion, 182 (90.1%) patients following SID and 105 (90.5%) EID patients remained relapse free (p = 0.903). Three-month confirmed progression of disability was observed in 18 SID patients (8.9%) and 11 EID patients (9.5%, p = 0.433). MRI progression was documented in 9 SID patients (4.5%) and 8 EID patients (6.9%) at 3-month follow-up (p = 0.232). Multivariate logistic regression showed no association between treatment regimen and no evidence of disease activity status at follow-up (OR: 1.266 [95% CI: 0.695-2.305]; p = 0.441). Clinical stability was accompanied by persistent peripheral CD19+ B-cell depletion in both groups (SID vs EID: 82.6% vs 83.3%, p = 0.463). Disease activity in our cohort was not associated with CD19+ B-cell repopulation.

                          Conclusion: Our data support EID of ocrelizumab as potential risk mitigation strategy in times of the COVID-19 pandemic.
                          Dave Bexfield
                          ActiveMSers

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X