4.3 Article

Tixagevimab and Cilgavimab (Evusheld) boosts antibody levels to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with multiple sclerosis on b-cell depleters

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2022.103905

关键词

SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Multiple sclerosis; Ocrelizumab; Ofatumumab; Evusheld

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study confirms that the use of Evusheld can increase the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with multiple sclerosis who are undergoing B-cell depleting therapy, providing an alternative strategy for protection against COVID-19.
Background and objectives: B-cell-depleting therapies may affect the development of a protective immune response following vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. It is important to have a different strategy for creating immunity in this patient population. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether Evusheld (tixagevimab co-packaged with cilgavimab) affects the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 following an attenuated response to the vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in patients on b-cell depleters who have multiple sclerosis. Methods: This was a single-center cohort study performed at Methodist Hospitals in Merrillville, IN, USA. It included patients with multiple sclerosis treated with ocrelizumab and ofatumumab. Patients had already received the mRNA vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 and had demonstrated an attenuated response on baseline antibody testing. All participants received 150 mg of Evusheld. Follow-up antibody levels were measured at least two weeks following Evusheld injections. Results: All patients (100%) developed the highest level of antibodies possible at least two weeks following Evusheld injections. Discussion: In this study, patients with MS who had an attenuated antibody response to the COVID-19 vaccines due to exposure to b-cell depleters now had the highest antibody response possible after receiving Evusheld. This is important as it provides a different strategy for protection against COVID-19.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据