Abstract 2285P
Background
Due to a compromised immune system, cancer patients are more prone to have a weaker response to COVID-19 vaccination, which can lead to a worst outcome. Thus it is crucial to evaluate the immunological response of cancer patients to booster doses of the vaccine to stratify the patients accordingly and provide a better care.
Methods
Vaccinated cancer patients from the Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto, under active cancer treatment with different types of solid tumours (SL) and liquid tumours (LT) were included to study the potential differences in the response to COVID-19 booster dose vaccine according to tumour type. Humoral immune response to the booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine was evaluated in patients’ serum samples analysing IgG levels against SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) protein. We also analysed the IgG levels against SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid (N) protein to address previous contact with the virus. The first cohort of patients collected samples before the booster dose and 3 and 6 months after (cohort 1, N=54, SL=44, LT=10) and the other cohort collected samples only 3 and 6 months after booster dose (cohort 2, N=71, SL=45, LT=26). A group of vaccinated healthy individuals (N=83) was also analysed, and they collected samples at 3 and 6 months post-boost.
Results
Regarding cohort 1, for solid tumours, we observed that IgG S levels increased 3 months after boost (p<0.001) and remained high at 6 months post-boost (p<0.001) when compared to pre-boost. One the other hand, the hematologic tumours demonstrated a weak response to vaccination since IgG S levels remained very low 3 and 6 months after the boost. When comparing 3 months post-boost in both cohorts and healthy individuals, we observed that the healthy individuals had the strongest IgG S response, followed by the solid and, lastly, the hematologic tumours. In fact, the difference between solid and haematological tumours was quite significant (p=0.017).
Conclusions
We verified that the type of tumour may influence COVID-19 vaccination efficacy since solid cancer patients had a better response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination when compared to haematological cancer patients. Moreover, as expected, healthy individuals have a stronger immune response when compared to cancer patients.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
Rui Medeiros, Júlio Oliveira.
Funding
AstraZeneca.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
2315P - Clinical and blood immune-inflammatory profiling to decode different patterns of acquired resistance in immunotherapy treated NSCLC patients
Presenter: Giulia Mazzaschi
Session: Poster session 08
2316P - Integrating comprehensive cancer genome profiling into clinical practice in an Italian referral center: Results of the first year of the fpg500 programme
Presenter: Camilla Nero
Session: Poster session 08
2317P - Mutational landscape and therapeutic implications in squamous cell carcinomas
Presenter: Laila Belcaid
Session: Poster session 08
2318P - Value of broad molecular profiling for cancer diagnosis
Presenter: Lars Volker Anton Werstein
Session: Poster session 08
2319P - CADSP: A web tool for comprehensive drug sensitivity analysis in pan-cancer
Presenter: Kexin Li
Session: Poster session 08
2320P - Detection of gene fusion-induced neoepitopes in dedifferentiated liposarcoma
Presenter: Peter Horak
Session: Poster session 08
2321TiP - TEMPLE: Thiopurine enhanced mutations for PD-1/ligand-1 efficacy: A phase Ib/II clinical trial
Presenter: Christine Federspiel Secher
Session: Poster session 08
2322TiP - SOUND: A phase II trial evaluating the efficacy of molecular profiling of circulating ± tumor tissue DNA for salvage-therapy matching in patients with advanced and refractory carcinoma
Presenter: Jakob Riedl
Session: Poster session 08