Solid cancer patients, compared to their healthy counterparts, are at a greater risk of contracting and suffering from severe complications and poorer prognosis after COVID-19 infections. They also have different immune responses after doses of COVID-19 vaccination, but limited evidence is available to reveal the effectiveness and help to guide immunization programs for this subpopulation; MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases, and clinicaltrials.gov were used to search literature. The pooled seroconversion rate was calculated using a random-effects model and reported with a 95% confidence interval (CI); The review includes 66 studies containing serological responses after COVID-19 vaccination in 13,050 solid cancer patients and 8550 healthy controls. The pooled seropositive rates after the first dose in patients with solid cancer and healthy controls are 55.2% (95% CI 45.9%-64.5% N = 18) and 90.2% (95% CI 80.9%-96.6% N = 13), respectively. The seropositive rates after the second dose in patients with solid cancer and healthy controls are 87.6% (95% CI 84.1%-90.7% N = 50) and 98.9% (95% CI 97.6%-99.7% N = 35), respectively. The seropositive rates after the third dose in patients with solid cancer and healthy controls are 91.4% (95% CI 85.4%-95.9% N = 21) and 99.8% (95% CI 98.1%-100.0% N = 4), respectively. Subgroup analysis finds that study sample size, timing of antibody testing, and vaccine type have influence on the results; Seroconversion rates after COVID-19 vaccination are significantly lower in patients with solid malignancies, especially after the first dose, then shrinking gradually after the following two vaccinations, indicating that subsequent doses or a booster dose should be considered for the effectiveness of this subpopulation.

This study examined the serum antibody response of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in solid and hematologic cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Levels of various inflammatory cytokines/chemokines after full vaccination were analyzed.

Forty-eight patients with solid cancer and 37 with hematologic malignancy who got fully vaccinated either with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 messenger RNA (mRNA) or vector vaccines or their combination were included. After consecutively collecting blood, immunogenicity was assessed by surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT), and cytokine/chemokines were evaluated by Meso Scale Discovery assay.

Seropositivity and protective immune response were lower in patients with hematologic cancer compared to those with solid cancers, regardless of vaccine type. Significantly lower sVNT inhibition was observed in patients with hematologic cancer (mean [SD] 45.30 [40.27] %) than in those with solid cancer (mean [SD] 61.78 [34.79] %) (p = 0.047). Heterologous vector/mRNA vaccination was independently and most markedly associated with a higher sVNT inhibition score (p < 0.05), followed by homologous mRNA vaccination. The mean serum levels of tumor necrosis factor α, macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-1α, and MIP-1β were significantly higher in patients with hematologic cancers compared to those with solid cancers after the full vaccination. In 36 patients who received an additional booster shot, 29 demonstrated increased antibody titer in terms of mean sVNT (%) (40.80 and 75.21, respectively, before and after the additional dose, p < 0.001).

Hematologic cancer patients receiving chemotherapy tended to respond poorly to both COVID-19 mRNA and vector vaccines and had a significantly lower antibody titer compared to those with solid cancers.

This study was conducted to investigate potential differences in vaccine efficacy between patients undergoing palliative chemotherapy and receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Additionally, the study proved the influence of vaccination timing on vaccine efficacy during active chemotherapy. Anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG binding antibody assays and surrogate neutralizing antibody assays were performed after BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination in 45 solid cancer patients (23 adjuvant and 22 palliative chemotherapy) and in 24 healthy controls before vaccination (baseline), at every two to four weeks after the first (post-dose 1) and the second vaccination (post-dose 2). The levels of anti-RBD IgG and neutralizing antibodies increased significantly from baseline through post-dose 1 to post-dose 2 in all three groups. At the post-dose 1, the anti-RBD IgG and neutralizing antibody levels were significantly lower in cancer patients than in healthy controls. However, by post-dose 2, the seropositivity of anti-RBD IgG and neutralizing antibodies uniformly reached 100% across all groups, with no significant disparity in antibody levels among the three groups. Moreover, the antibody titers were not significantly different between patients with a vaccine and chemotherapy interval of more than 14 days or those with less than 14 days. This study demonstrated that after second doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, humoral immune responses in patients receiving chemotherapy were comparable to those of healthy controls, regardless of whether the purpose of the anti-cancer treatment was palliative or adjuvant. Furthermore, the timing of vaccination did not affect the level of humoral immunity after the second vaccination.

Many effective vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been developed, but a weaker response in individuals undergoing anticancer treatment has been reported. This study evaluates the immunogenic status and safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), receiving tegafur-uracil (UFT) as postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy.

The subjects of this prospective study were 40 patients who underwent surgery for NSCLC and received SARS-CoV-2 vaccines postoperatively. We compared the antibody titers of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and the adverse events between patients who received adjuvant UFT and patients who did not.

The mean anti-S1 IgG titers were not significantly different between the UFT and without-UFT groups (mean optimal density, 0.194 vs. 0.205; P = 0.76). Multivariate analysis identified the period after the second vaccination as an independent predictor of anti-S1 IgG titer (P = 0.049), but not the UFT status (with or without-UFT treatment; P = 0.47). The prevalence of adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups, and no severe adverse events occurred.

The efficacy and safety of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines for NSCLC patients who received postoperative adjuvant UFT chemotherapy were comparable to those for NSCLC patients who did not receive postoperative adjuvant UFT chemotherapy.

This study was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) in Japan (UMIN000047380).

The use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody products like tixagevimab/cilgavimab represents an important strategy to protect immunocompromised patients with haematological malignancies from COVID-19. Although patients who receive these agents should still be vaccinated, the use of tixagevimab/cilgavimab can mask the production of anti-spike antibody after vaccination, making it hard to assess vaccine response. We have newly established a quantification method to assess the response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination at the mRNA level using B-cell receptor (BCR) repertoire assay and the Coronavirus Antibody Database (CoV-AbDab). Repeated blood samples before and after vaccination were analysed for the BCR repertoire, and BCR sequences were searched in the database. We analysed the number and percentage frequency of matched sequences. We found that the number of matched sequences increased 2 weeks after the first vaccination and quickly decreased. Meanwhile, the number of matched sequences more rapidly increased after the second vaccination. These results show that the postvaccine immune response can be assessed at the mRNA level by analysing the fluctuation in matching sequences. Finally, BCR repertoire analysis with CoV-AbDab clearly demonstrated the response to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination even after tixagevimab/cilgavimab administration in haematological malignancy patients who underwent allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Cancer patients have an increased risk of a severe COVID-19 infection with higher mortality rate. This study aimed to analyze the levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG and NAB among cancer patients who were vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines, either with BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222/ChAdOx1nCoV-19, or Coronavac/BBIBP-CorV vaccines.

A cross-sectional study was conducted among subjects with either solid or hematological cancers who had received two doses of either mRNA or non-mRNA vaccines within 6 months. The levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG and NAb were analyzed using the Mindray Immunoassay Analyzer CL-900i. Statistical analysis was conducted using mean comparison and regression analysis.

The mRNA-1273 vaccine had the highest median levels of S-RBD IgG and NAb, followed by BNT162b, ChAdOx1nCoV-19, and BBIBP-CorV/Coronavac. The levels of S-RBD IgG and NAb in subjects vaccinated with mRNA vaccines were significantly higher than those of non-mRNA vaccines when grouped based on their characteristics, including age, type of cancer, chemotherapy regimen, and comorbidity (p<0.05). Furthermore, the S-RBD IgG and NAb levels between the subjects vaccinated with non-mRNA vaccines and the subjects vaccinated with mRNA vaccines were significantly different (p<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the same types of vaccines. This study demonstrated a very strong correlation between the level of S-RBD IgG and the level of NAb (R = 0.962; p<0.001). The level of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG was consistently higher compared to the level of NAb.

Generally, mRNA vaccines produced significantly higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG and NAb levels than non-mRNA vaccines in cancer subjects.

Patients with cancer, especially hematological cancer, are at increased risk for breakthrough COVID-19 infection. So far, a predictive biomarker that can assess compromised vaccine-induced anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunity in cancer patients has not been proposed.

We employed machine learning approaches to identify a biomarker signature based on blood cytokines, chemokines, and immune- and non-immune-related growth factors linked to vaccine immunogenicity in 199 cancer patients receiving the BNT162b2 vaccine.

C-reactive protein (general marker of inflammation), interleukin (IL)-15 (a pro-inflammatory cytokine), IL-18 (interferon-gamma inducing factor), and placental growth factor (an angiogenic cytokine) correctly classified patients with a diminished vaccine response assessed at day 49 with >80% accuracy. Amongst these, CRP showed the highest predictive value for poor response to vaccine administration. Importantly, this unique signature of vaccine response was present at different studied timepoints both before and after vaccination and was not majorly affected by different anti-cancer treatments.

We propose a blood-based signature of cytokines and growth factors that can be employed in identifying cancer patients at persistent high risk of COVID-19 despite vaccination with BNT162b2. Our data also suggest that such a signature may reflect the inherent immunological constitution of some cancer patients who are refractive to immunotherapy.

Patients with solid cancer have an increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and associated mortality than the general population. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the currently available evidence about the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with solid cancer. We included prospective studies comparing the immunogenicity and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines between patients with solid cancer and healthy individuals. Relative risks of seroconversion after the first and second dose of a COVID-19 vaccine were separately pooled with the use of random effects meta-analysis. Thirty studies with 11,245 subjects met the inclusion criteria. After first vaccine dose, the pooled RR of seroconversion in patients with solid cancer vs healthy individuals was 0.54 (95% CI 0.38-0.78, I2 = 94%). After a second dose, the pooled RR of seroconversion in patients with solid cancer vs healthy controls was 0.87 (0.86-0.88, I2 = 87%). Our review suggests that, compared with healthy individuals, COVID-19 vaccines show favorable immunogenicity and efficacy in patients with solid cancer. A second dose is associated with significantly improved seroconversion, although it is slightly lower in patients with solid cancer compared with healthy individuals.

Few guidelines exist for COVID-19 vaccination amongst cancer patients, fostering uncertainty regarding the immunogenicity, safety, and effects of cancer therapies on vaccination, which this review aims to address. A literature review was conducted to include the latest articles covering the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with solid and hematologic cancers receiving various treatments. Lower seropositivity following vaccination was associated with malignancy (compared to the general population), and hematologic malignancy (compared to solid cancers). Patients receiving active cancer therapy (unspecified), chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and immunosuppressants generally demonstrated lower seropositivity compared to healthy controls; though checkpoint inhibition, endocrine therapy, and cyclin dependent kinase inhibition did not appear to affect seropositivity. Vaccination appeared safe and well-tolerated in patients with current or past cancer and those undergoing treatment. Adverse events were comparable to the general population, but inflammatory lymphadenopathy following vaccination was commonly reported and may be mistaken for malignant etiology. Additionally, radiation recall phenomenon was sporadically reported in patients who had received radiotherapy. Overall, while seropositivity rates were decreased, cancer patients showed capacity to generate safe and effective immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination, thus vaccination should be encouraged and hesitancy should be addressed in this population.

The rapid spread of the SARS-Cov-2 virus, the increase in the number of patients with severe COVID-19, and the high mortality rate created the basis for the production of safe and effective vaccines. Studies have confirmed the increased risk of severe Covid-19 disease and mortality in cancer patients. It is logical that cancer patients should be the first to receive the primary vaccination and the booster vaccine for Covid-19. Since studies related to cancer patients and the effectiveness of existing Covid-19 vaccines have not been widely conducted, there are significant uncertainties about the effectiveness of the vaccine and the level of humoral and cellular immune responses in these patients. As a result, the possible risks and side effects of existing vaccines are not clear for patients with different cancers who are undergoing special treatments. In this study, we will discuss the effectiveness and safety of existing vaccines on cancer patients. In addition, we highlight factors that could affect the effectiveness of vaccines in these patients and finally discuss opportunities and challenges related to vaccination in cancer patients.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been impacting healthcare in various ways worldwide and cancer patients are greatly affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The reorganization of the health facilities in order to supply the high demand resulting from the aforementioned infection as well as the social isolation measures led to impairments for the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with gastrointestinal cancers, which has had an impact on the prognosis of the oncologic patients. In that context, health authorities and organizations have elaborated new guidelines with specific recommendations for the management of individuals with gastrointestinal neoplasms during the pandemic. Of note, oncologic populations seem to be more susceptible to unfavorable outcomes when exposed to SARS-CoV-2 infection and some interactions involving virus, tumor, host immune system and anticancer therapies are probably related to the poorer prognosis observed in those COVID-19 patients. Moreover, vaccination stands out as the main prevention method against severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and some particularities have been observed regarding the seroconversion of vaccinated oncologic patients including those with gastrointestinal malignancies. In this minireview, we gather updated information regarding the influence of the pandemic in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal neoplasms, new recommendations for the management of gastrointestinal cancer patients, the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in those individuals and the scenario of the vaccination against the virus in that population.

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines efficacy and safety have been tested in phase 3 studies in which cancer patients were not included or were underrepresented. Methods: The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety profile of the mRNA-1273 vaccine across cancer patients and its relationship to patients' demographics. We selected from our records all 18-years or older solid cancer patients under active treatment vaccinated with the complete three-dose schedule mRNA-1273 vaccine whose adverse drug reactions (ADRs)  after each dose were recorded. Medical records were reviewed retrospectively to collect data between April 19, 2021, and December 31, 2021. Patients with documented previous infection by SARS-Cov-2 were excluded. Results: A total of 93 patients met the inclusion criteria. Local ADRs were reported more frequently after the first and second dose than after the third (41.9%, 43% and 31.1% of the patients respectively), while systemic ADRs followed the opposite pattern (16.1%, 34.4% and 52.6% of the patients respectively). We found a statistically significant association between sex and systemic adverse reactions after the third dose, p < 0.001 and between systemic adverse reactions after the second dose and systemic adverse reactions after the third dose, p = 0.001 A significant linear trend, p = 0.012, with a higher Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score associated with a lower proportion of patients suffering from systemic side effects was found. Women had 5.79 times higher odds to exhibit systemic ADRs after the third dose (p=0.01) compared to males. Increasing age was associated with a decreased likelihood of exhibiting ADRs (p=0.016). Conclusion: The mRNA-1273 vaccine shows a tolerable safety profile. The likelihood of ADRs appears to be associated with gender and age. Its association with ECOG scores is less evident. Further studies are needed to elucidate this data in cancer patients.