Background The efficacy and safety profiles of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with cancer is unknown. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) vaccine in patients with cancer. Methods For this prospective observational study, we recruited patients with cancer and healthy controls (mostly health-care workers) from three London hospitals between Dec 8, 2020, and Feb 18, 2021. Participants who were vaccinated between Dec 8 and Dec 29, 2020, received two 30 μg doses of BNT162b2 administered intramuscularly 21 days apart; patients vaccinated after this date received only one 30 μg dose with a planned follow-up boost at 12 weeks. Blood samples were taken before vaccination and at 3 weeks and 5 weeks after the first vaccination. Where possible, serial nasopharyngeal real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR) swab tests were done every 10 days or in cases of symptomatic COVID-19. The coprimary endpoints were seroconversion to SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein in patients with cancer following the first vaccination with the BNT162b2 vaccine and the effect of vaccine boosting after 21 days on seroconversion. All participants with available data were included in the safety and immunogenicity analyses. Ongoing follow-up is underway for further blood sampling after the delayed (12-week) vaccine boost. This study is registered with the NHS Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales (REC ID 20/HRA/2031). Findings 151 patients with cancer (95 patients with solid cancer and 56 patients with haematological cancer) and 54 healthy controls were enrolled. For this interim data analysis of the safety and immunogenicity of vaccinated patients with cancer, samples and data obtained up to March 19, 2021, were analysed. After exclusion of 17 patients who had been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 (detected by either antibody seroconversion or a positive rRT-PCR COVID-19 swab test) from the immunogenicity analysis, the proportion of positive anti-S IgG titres at approximately 21 days following a single vaccine inoculum across the three cohorts were 32 (94%; 95% CI 81–98) of 34 healthy controls; 21 (38%; 26–51) of 56 patients with solid cancer, and eight (18%; 10–32) of 44 patients with haematological cancer. 16 healthy controls, 25 patients with solid cancer, and six patients with haematological cancer received a second dose on day 21. Of the patients with available blood samples 2 weeks following a 21-day vaccine boost, and excluding 17 participants with evidence of previous natural SARS-CoV-2 exposure, 18 (95%; 95% CI 75–99) of 19 patients with solid cancer, 12 (100%; 76–100) of 12 healthy controls, and three (60%; 23–88) of five patients with haematological cancers were seropositive, compared with ten (30%; 17–47) of 33, 18 (86%; 65–95) of 21, and four (11%; 4–25) of 36, respectively, who did not receive a boost. The vaccine was well tolerated; no toxicities were reported in 75 (54%) of 140 patients with cancer following the ...

Background: The efficacy and safety profile of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have not been definitively established in immunocompromised patient populations. Patients with a known cancer diagnosis were hitherto excluded from trials of the vaccines currently in clinical use. Methods: This study presents data on the safety and immune efficacy of the BNT162b.2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine in 54 healthy controls and 151 mostly elderly patients with solid and haematological malignancies, respectively, and compares results for patients who were boosted with BNT162b.2 at 3 weeks versus those who were not. Immune efficacy was measured as antibody seroconversion, T cell responses, and neutralisation of SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan strain and of a variant of concern (VOC) (B1.1.7). We also collected safety data for the BNT162b2 vaccine up to 5 weeks following first dose. Findings: The vaccine was largely well tolerated. However, in contrast to its very high performance in healthy controls (>90% efficacious), immune efficacy of a single inoculum in solid cancer patients was strikingly low (below 40%) and very low in haematological cancer patients (below 15%). Of note, efficacy in solid cancer patients was greatly and rapidly increased by boosting at 21-days (95% within 2 weeks of boost). Too few haematological cancer patients were boosted for clear conclusions to be drawn. Conclusions: Delayed boosting potentially leaves most solid and haematological cancer patients wholly or partially unprotected, with implications for their own health; their environment and the evolution of VOC strains. Prompt boosting of solid cancer patients quickly overcomes the poor efficacy of the primary inoculum in solid cancer patients.

The contributions of the humoral immune response to melanoma are now widely recognized, with reports of positive prognostic value ascribed to tumor-infiltrating B cells (TIL-B) and increasing evidence of B cells as key predictors of patient response to treatment. There are disparate views as to the pro- and anti-tumor roles of B cells. B cells appear to play an integral role in forming tumor-associated tertiary lymphoid structures (TLSs) which can further modulate T cell activation. Expressed antibodies may distinctly influence tumor regulation in the tumor microenvironment, with some isotypes associated with strong anti-tumor immune response and others with progressive disease. Recently, B cells have been evaluated in the context of cancer immunotherapy. Checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs), targeting T cell effector functions, have revolutionized the management of melanoma for many patients; however, there remains a need to accurately predict treatment responders. Increasing evidence suggests that B cells may not be simple bystanders to CPI immunotherapy. Mature and differentiated B cell phenotypes are key positive correlates of CPI response. Recent evidence also points to an enrichment in activatory B cell phenotypes, and the contribution of B cells to TLS formation may facilitate induction of T cell phenotypes required for response to CPI. Contrastingly, specific B cell subsets often correlate with immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in CPI. With increased appreciation of the multifaceted role of B cell immunity, novel therapeutic strategies and biomarkers can be explored and translated into the clinic to optimize CPI immunotherapy in melanoma.

No abstract