Objectives: The current study aims to survey the willingness of parents to vaccinate their children, who are childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia survivors (CALLS), and identify factors associated with vaccine acceptance. Methods: Parents of CALLS on/off treatment, with the general condition of being amendable to vaccination, were recruited for interviews with attending oncologists about COVID-19 vaccination acceptance from July to November 2021 in China. After controlling for socioeconomic factors, the Association of Oncologists’ recommendations and parent–oncologist alliance with acceptance status were investigated. For validation, propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was used. Results: A total of 424 families were included in the study, with CALLS mean remission age of 5.99 ± 3.40 years. Among them, 91 (21.4%) agreed, 168 (39.6%) hesitated, and 165 (38.9%) parents disagreed with the vaccination. The most common reason that kept parents from vaccinating their children was lack of recommendations from professional personnel (84/165, 50.9%), and massive amounts of internet information (78/175, 44.6%) was the main nonhealthcare resource against vaccination. Logistic regression analysis showed that only the recommendation from the oncologist was associated with parents’ vaccine acceptance (OR = 3.17, 95% CI = 1.93–5.20), as demonstrated by PSM comparison (42 in recommendation group vs. 18 in nonrecommendation group among 114 pairs, p < 0.001). An exploratory analysis revealed that parents with a better patient–oncologist alliance had a significantly higher level of acceptance (65.6% in alliance group vs. 15.6% in nonalliance group among 32 pairs, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Due to a lack of professional recommendation resources and the potential for serious consequences, parents were generally reluctant to vaccinate their CALLS. The recommendation of oncologists, which was influenced by the parent–oncologist alliance, significantly increased acceptance. This study emphasizes the critical role of oncologists in vaccinating cancer survivors and can be used to promote COVID-19 vaccines among vulnerable populations.
IntroductionThe response is poorly understood to the third dose in patients with cancer who failed the standard dose of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (CoronaVac). We aim to assess the immune response to the third dose and identify whether vitamin D deficiency is associated with serial serologic failure in patients with cancer.MethodsSolid cancer patients (SCP-N) and healthy controls (HCs) who were seronegative after the standard-dose vaccines in our previous study were prospectively recruited, from October 2021 to February 2022, to receive the third dose vaccines and anti-SARS-CoV-2S antibodies were measured. SCP-N who failed the third dose (serial seronegative group, SSG) were matched by propensity scores with the historical standard-dose positive cancer patient group (robust response group, RRG). An exploratory analysis was carried out to validate the role of vitamin D on the serology response.ResultsThe multi-center study recruited 97 SCP-N with 279 positive controls as RRG and 82 negative controls as HC group. The seroconversion rate after third-dose vaccination was higher in SCP-N than in HC (70.6% vs. 29.4%, p < 0.01). The matched comparison showed that patients in SSG had a significantly lower level of vitamin D and consumption rate than RRG or RRG-B (RRG with third-dose positive) (all p < 0.01). None had serious (over grade II) adverse events after the third dose.ConclusionSolid cancer patients with second-dose vaccine failure may have a relatively poor humoral response to the third dose of COVID-19 vaccines as compared with the seronegative HC group. The consecutively poor humoral response could be associated with poor vitamin D levels and intake. Vitamin D status and cancer-related immune compromise may jointly affect the humoral response following booster vaccination.
ContextSevere acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (COVID-19) vaccines may incur changes in thyroid functions followed by mood changes, and patients with Hashimoto thyroiditis (HT) were suggested to bear a higher risk.ObjectivesWe primarily aim to find whether COVID-19 vaccination could induce potential subsequent thyroid function and mood changes. The secondary aim was to find inflammatory biomarkers associated with risk.MethodsThe retrospective, multi-center study recruited patients with HT receiving COVID-19–inactivated vaccines. C-reactive proteins (CRPs), thyroid-stimulating hormones (TSHs), and mood changes were studied before and after vaccination during a follow-up of a 6-month period. Independent association was investigated between incidence of mood state, thyroid functions, and inflammatory markers. Propensity score–matched comparisons between the vaccine and control groups were carried out to investigate the difference.ResultsFinal analysis included 2,765 patients with HT in the vaccine group and 1,288 patients in the control group. In the matched analysis, TSH increase and mood change incidence were both significantly higher in the vaccine group (11.9% versus 6.1% for TSH increase and 12.7% versus 8.4% for mood change incidence). An increase in CRP was associated with mood change (p< 0.01 by the Kaplan–Meier method) and severity (r = 0.75) after vaccination. Baseline CRP, TSH, and antibodies of thyroid peroxidase (anti-TPO) were found to predict incidence of mood changes.ConclusionCOVID-19 vaccination seemed to induce increased levels and incidence of TSH surge followed by mood changes in patients with HT. Higher levels of pre-vaccine serum TSH, CRP, and anti-TPO values were associated with higher incidence in the early post-vaccine phase.
IntroductionAlthough there is extended research on the response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines in adult cancer patients (ACP), the immunogenicity to the variants of concern (VOCs) in childhood cancer patients (CCP) and safety profiles are now little known.MethodsA prospective, multi-center cohort study was performed by recruiting children with a solid cancer diagnosis and childhood healthy control (CHC) to receive standard two-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. An independent ACP group was included to match CCP in treatment history. Humoral response to six variants was performed and adverse events were followed up 3 months after vaccination. Responses to variants were compared with ACP and CHC by means of propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis.ResultsThe analysis included 111 CCP (27.2%, median age of 8, quartile 5.5–15 years), 134 CHC (32.8%), and 163 ACP (40.0%), for a total 408 patients. Pathology included carcinoma, neural tumors, sarcoma, and germ cell tumors. Median chemotherapy time was 7 (quartile, 5–11) months. In PSM sample pairs, the humoral response of CCP against variants was significantly decreased, and serology titers (281.8 ± 315.5 U/ml) were reduced, as compared to ACP (p< 0.01 for the rate of neutralization rate against each variant) and CHC (p< 0.01 for the rate of neutralization against each variant) groups. Chemotherapy time and age (Pearson r ≥ 0.8 for all variants) were associated with the humoral response against VOCs of the CHC group. In the CCP group, less than grade II adverse events were observed, including 32 patients with local reactions, and 29 patients had systemic adverse events, including fever (n = 9), rash (n = 20), headache (n = 3), fatigue (n = 11), and myalgia (n = 15). All reactions were well-managed medically.ConclusionsThe humoral response against VOCs after the CoronaVac vaccination in CCP was moderately impaired although the vaccine was safe. Age and chemotherapy time seem to be the primary reason for poor response and low serology levels.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.