Efficacy of three COVID-19 vaccine doses in lung transplant recipients: a multicentre cohort study
Abstract
Question addressed by the study Do three coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine doses induce a serological response in lung transplant recipients? Methods We retrospectively included 1071 adults (551 (52%) males) at nine transplant centres in France. Each had received three COVID-19 vaccine doses in 2021, after lung transplantation. An anti-spike protein IgG response, defined as a titre >264 BAU·mL−1 after the third dose (median (interquartile range (IQR)) 3.0 (1.7–4.1) months), was the primary outcome and adverse events were the secondary outcomes. Median (IQR) age at the first vaccine dose was 54 (40–63) years and median (IQR) time from transplantation to the first dose was 64 (30–110) months. Results Median (IQR) follow-up after the first dose was 8.3 (6.7–9.3) months. A vaccine response developed in 173 (16%) patients. Factors independently associated with a response were younger age at vaccination, longer time from transplantation to vaccination and absence of corticosteroid or mycophenolate therapy. After vaccination, 51 (5%) patients (47 non-responders (47/898 (5%)) and four (4/173 (2%)) responders) experienced COVID-19, at a median (IQR) of 6.6 (5.1–7.3) months after the third dose. No responders had severe COVID-19 compared with 15 non-responders, including six who died of the disease. Conclusions Few lung transplant recipients achieved a serological response to three COVID-19 vaccine doses, indicating a need for other protective measures. Older age and use of…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,071 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials
- Accuracy Comparison between Robot-Assisted Dental Implant Placement and Static/Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
- Determinants of passive antibody efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bonding Efficacy of Universal Resin Adhesives to Zirconia Substrates: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- In vitro antimicrobial activity of extracts and essential oils of Cinnamomum, Salvia, and Mentha spp. against foodborne pathogens: A meta-analysis study
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.