There are no studies which have compared the risk of severe Covid‐19 and related mortality between transplant recipients and non‐transplant patients. We enrolled two groups of patients hospitalized for Covid‐19, i.e., kidney transplant recipients from the French Registry of Solid Organ Transplant (n=306) and a single‐center cohort of non‐transplant patients (n=795). An analysis was performed among subgroups matched for age and risk factors for severe Covid‐19 or mortality. Severe Covid‐19 was defined as admission (or transfer) to an intensive care unit, need for mechanical ventilation, or death.Transplant recipients were younger and had more comorbidities compared to non‐transplant patients. They presented with higher creatinine levels and developed more episodes of acute kidney injury. After matching, the 30‐day cumulative incidence of severe Covid‐19 did not differ between KTR and non‐transplant patients; however, 30‐day Covid‐19‐related mortality was significantly higher in KTR (17.9% versus 11.4%, respectively, p=0.038). Age >60 years, cardiovascular disease, dyspnea, fever, lymphopenia, and C‐reactive protein (CRP) were associated with severe Covid‐19 in univariate analysis, whereas transplant status and serum creatinine levels were not. Age >60 years, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, CRP >60 mg/L, lymphopenia, kidney transplant status (HR=1.55), and creatinine level >115 µmol/L (HR=2.32) were associated with Covid‐19‐related mortality in univariate analysis. In multivariable analysis, cardiovascular disease, dyspnea, and fever were associated with severe disease, whereas age >60 years, cardiovascular disease, dyspnea, fever, and creatinine level>115 µmol/L retained their independent associations with mortality. Kidney transplant recipients had a higher Covid‐19‐related mortality compared to non‐transplant hospitalized patients.

Transplant recipients, who receive therapeutic immunosuppression to prevent graft rejection, are characterized by high coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)–related mortality and defective response to vaccines. We observed that previous infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but not the standard two-dose regimen of vaccination, provided protection against symptomatic COVID-19 in kidney transplant recipients. We therefore compared the cellular and humoral immune responses of these two groups of patients. Neutralizing anti–receptor-binding domain (RBD) immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were identified as the primary correlate of protection for transplant recipients. Analysis of virus-specific B and T cell responses suggested that the generation of neutralizing anti-RBD IgG may have depended on cognate T-B cell interactions that took place in germinal center, potentially acting as a limiting checkpoint. High-dose mycophenolate mofetil, an immunosuppressive drug, was associated with fewer antigen-specific B and T follicular helper (T _FH ) cells after vaccination; this was not observed in patients recently infected with SARS-CoV-2. Last, we observed that, in two independent prospective cohorts, administration of a third dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine restored neutralizing titers of anti-RBD IgG in about 40% of individuals who had not previously responded to two doses of vaccine. Together, these findings suggest that a third dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine improves the RBD-specific responses of transplant patients treated with immunosuppressive drugs.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread widely, causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and significant mortality. However, data on viral loads and antibody kinetics in immunocompromised populations are lacking. We aimed to determine nasopharyngeal and plasma viral loads via reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and SARS-CoV-2 serology via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and study their association with severe forms of COVID-19 and death in kidney transplant recipients. In this study, we examined hospitalized kidney transplant recipients with nonsevere (n = 21) and severe (n = 19) COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal and plasma viral load and serological response were evaluated based on outcomes and disease severity. Ten recipients (25%) displayed persistent viral shedding 30 days after symptom onset. The SARS-CoV-2 viral load of the upper respiratory tract was not associated with severe COVID-19, whereas the plasma viral load was associated with COVID-19 severity (P = .010) and mortality (P = .010). All patients harbored antibodies during the second week after symptom onset that persisted for 2 months. We conclude that plasma viral load is associated with COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, whereas nasopharyngeal viral load is not. SARS-CoV-2 shedding is prolonged in kidney transplant recipients and the humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 does not show significant impairment in this series of transplant recipients.

The cilgavimab−tixagevimab combination retains a partial in vitro neutralizing activity against the current SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (omicron BA.1, BA.1.1, and BA.2). Here, we examined whether preexposure prophylaxis with cilgavimab−tixagevimab can effectively protect kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) against the omicron variant. Of the 416 KTRs who received intramuscular prophylactic injections of 150 mg tixagevimab and 150 mg cilgavimab, 39 (9.4%) developed COVID-19. With the exception of one case, all patients were symptomatic. Hospitalization and admission to an intensive care unit were required for 14 (35.9%) and three patients (7.7%), respectively. Two KTRs died of COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome. SARS-CoV-2 sequencing was carried out in 15 cases (BA.1, n = 5; BA.1.1, n = 9; BA.2, n = 1). Viral neutralizing activity of the serum against the BA.1 variant was negative in the 12 tested patients, suggesting that this prophylactic strategy does not provide sufficient protection against this variant of concern. In summary, preexposure prophylaxis with cilgavimab−tixagevimab at the dose of 150 mg of each antibody does not adequately protect KTRs against omicron. Further clarification of the optimal dosing can assist in our understanding of how best to harness its protective potential.