Background Patients on hemodialysis have an elevated risk for COVID-19 infection but were not included in efficacy trials of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Methods We conducted a retrospective, observational study to estimate the real-world effectiveness and immunogenicity of two mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in a large, representative population of adult hemodialysis patients in the United States. In separate, parallel analyses, patients who began a vaccination series with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 in January and February 2021 were matched with unvaccinated patients and followed after they completed the first of two doses. In a subset of patients, blood samples were collected approximately 28 days after the second dose and anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G was measured. Results A total of 12,169 patients received the BNT162b2 vaccine (matched with 44,377 unvaccinated controls); 23,037 patients received the mRNA-1273 vaccine (matched with 63,243 unvaccinated controls). Compared with controls, vaccinated patients' risk of being diagnosed with COVID-19 post-vaccination became progressively lower after the first dose (day 1) to days ≥43. Following a COVID-19 diagnosis, vaccinated patients were significantly less likely than unvaccinated patients to be hospitalized (for BNT162b2, 28.0% versus 43.4%; for mRNA-1273, 37.2% versus 45.6%) and significantly less likely to die (for BNT162b2, 4.0% versus 12.1%; for mRNA-1273, 5.6% versus 14.5%). Antibodies were detected in 98.1% (309/315) and 96.0% (308/321) of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 patients, respectively. Conclusions In patients on hemodialysis, vaccination with BNT162b2 or mRNA-12 was associated with a lower risk of COVID-19 diagnosis and significantly lower risk of hospitalization or death among those diagnosed with COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in nearly all patients after vaccination. These findings support the use of these vaccines in this population.

No outside funding supported this study. The authors have nothing to disclose. Study concept and design were principally contributed by Bagwell and Newman, along with the other authors. Lee took the lead in data collection, along with Carver, Bagwell, Kelley, and Newman. Data interpretation was performed by Carver, Kelley, Lee, and Bagwell, with assistance from Newman. The manuscript was written by Bagwell, Carver, Kelley, and Lee and revised primarily by Bagwell, along with the other authors.

Disclaimer In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. Purpose This report describes a health-system pharmacy’s response to a natural disaster while staff members simultaneously prepared for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. By detailing our experience, we hope to help other institutions that are current facing or could encounter similar crises. Summary In early March 2020, a tornado destroyed the health system’s warehouse for storage of most clinical supplies, including personal protective equipment and fluids. The pharmacy purchasing team collaborated with suppliers and manufacturers to recover losses and establish alternative storage areas. Days later, the pharmacy department was forced to address the impending COVID-19 pandemic. Key elements of the COVID-19 response included reducing the potential for patient and staff virus exposure; overcoming challenges in sourcing of staff, personal protective equipment, and medications; and changing care delivery practices to maintain high-quality patient care while maximizing social distancing. The pharmacy department also created distance learning opportunities for 70 pharmacy students on rotations. After an initial plan, ongoing needs include adjustment in patient care activities if significant staff losses occur, when and how to resume clinical activities, and how to best utilize the resources accumulated. Elements of practice changes implemented to reduce COVID-19 threats to patients and pharmacy personnel have proven beneficial and will be further evaluated for potential continuation. Conclusion The pharmacy department’s efforts to respond to a natural disaster and unprecedented pandemic have proven successful to this point and have illuminated several lessons, including the necessity of cohesive department communication, staff flexibility, prioritization of teamwork, and external collaboration.

Vascular compliance is dependent on endogenous and exogenous sources of nitric oxide (NO). In a discussion of therapeutics and NO derived via nitric oxide synthase (NOS) enzymes, it is necessary to examine the pathways of each drug to provide the clinical perfusionist with a greater understanding of the role of NOS/NO in vascular function. Endothelial-derived NO is a contributor in the vasoregulation of vascular smooth muscle. Therapeutics seek to mimic the vasodilatory effects of the endogenous NO. The therapeutics included in this review are nitroglycerin, nitroprusside, amyl nitrite, and inhalation of NO. L-Arginine supplementation provides additional substrate for the endogenous pathway that can augment NO production. NO is a small bioactive molecule involved in various biochemical pathways. Dysregulation of NO production can impair normal physiologic control of vascular compliance. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to provide the perfusionist with an understanding of the biochemical and pharmacological aspects of NOS/NO associated with vascular function.

Background: Although reinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is rare among individuals with few coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) risk factors, the ability of naturally acquired immunity to prevent reinfection among patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is not known. Methods: This prospective study was conducted among adults with ESKD treated with in-center hemodialysis (ICHD) in the United States. Exposure was ascribed based on the presence or absence of immunoglobulin G (IgG) against SARS-CoV-2 at baseline, and separately, a history of documented COVID-19 prior to study entry. Outcomes were assessed following a disease-free washout period, and were: any SARS-CoV-2 infection (ie, detected by protocolized PCR tests or during routine clinical surveillance), and clinically manifest COIVD-19 (consisting of only the latter). Results: Of 2337 consented participants who met study inclusion criteria, 9.5% were anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG positive at baseline; 3.6% had a history of COVID-19. Over 6679 patient-months of follow-up, 263 participants had evidence of any SARS-CoV-2 infection, including 141 who had clinically manifest COIVD-19. Presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG (versus its absence) at baseline was associated with lower risk of any SARS-CoV-2 infection (incidence rate ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.32, 0.95) and clinically manifest COVID-19 0.21 (95% confidence interval 0.07, 0.67). Conclusion: Among ESKD patients, naturally acquired anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG positivity is associated with a 45% lower risk of subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection, and a 79% lower risk of clinically manifest COVID-19. Since natural immunity is incomplete, ESKD patients should be prioritized for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, independent of their COVID-19 disease history.

No abstract

Background Studies have demonstrated that mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are highly effective among dialysis patients. Because individual vaccines may be differentially available or acceptable to patients, it is important to understand comparative effectiveness relative to other vaccines, such those based on adenovirus technologies. Methods In this retrospective study, we compared the clinical effectiveness of adenovirus vector-based Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson) to mRNA-based BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) in a contemporary cohort of dialysis patients. Patients who received a first BNT162b2 dose were matched 1:1 to Ad26.COV2.S recipients based on date of first vaccine receipt, US state of residence, site of dialysis care (in-center versus home), prior history of COVID-19, and propensity score. The primary outcome was the comparative rate of COVID-19 diagnoses starting in the seventh week postvaccination. In a subset of consented Ad26.COV2.S patients, blood samples were collected ≥28 days after vaccination and anti-SARS-Cov-2 immunoglobulin G antibodies were measured Results A total of 2572 matched pairs of patients qualified for analysis. Cumulative incidence rates of COVID-19 did not differ for BNT162b2 versus Ad26.COV2.S. No differences were observed in peri-COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths among patients receiving BNT162b2 versus Ad26.COV2.S who were diagnosed with COVID-19 during follow-up. Results were similar when excluding patients with prior history of COVID-19, in subgroup analyses restricted to patients who completed the two-dose BNT162b2 regimen, and in patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in 59.4% of 244 patients who received Ad26.COV2.S. Conclusions In a large real-world cohort of dialysis patients, no difference was detected in clinical effectiveness of BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S over the first 6 months postvaccination, despite an inconsistent antibody response to the latter.

Adherence and persistence to specialty medications are necessary to achieve successful outcomes of costly therapies. The increasing use of specialty medications has exposed several unique barriers to certain specialty treatments’ continuation. Integrated specialty pharmacy teams facilitate transitions in sites of care, between different provider types, among prescribed specialty medications, and during financial coverage changes. We review obstacles encountered within these types of transitions and the role of the specialty pharmacist in overcoming these obstacles. Case examples for each type of specialty transition provide insight into the unique complexities faced by patients, and shed light on pharmacists’ vital role in patient care. This insightful and real-world experience is needed to facilitate best practices in specialty care, particularly in the growing number of health-system specialty pharmacies.