People living with HIV (PLWH) remain at high risk of mortality and morbidity from vaccine-preventable diseases, even though antiretroviral therapy (ART) has restored life expectancy and general well-being. When, which, and how many doses of vaccine should be administered over the lifetime of PLWH are questions that have become clinically relevant. Immune responses to most vaccines are known to be impaired in PLWH. Effective control of viremia with ART and restored CD4+ T-cell count are correlated with an improvement in responsiveness to routine vaccines. However, the presence of immune alterations, comorbidities and co-infections may alter it. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of the literature on immune responses to different vaccines in the setting of HIV infection, emphasizing the potential effect of HIV-related factors and presence of comorbidities in modulating such responses. A better understanding of these issues will help guide vaccination and prevention strategies for PLWH.

In 2022, three antiviral drugs—molnupiravir, remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir—were introduced for treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in high-risk patients. The aim of this study is the evaluation of their effectiveness and tolerability in a real-life setting. A single-center observational study was set up, with the involvement of 1118 patients, with complete follow-up data, treated between the 5th of January and the 3rd of October 2022 at Santa Maria Goretti’s hospital in Latina, Central Italy. A univariable and a multivariable analysis were performed on clinical and demographic data and composite outcome, the persistence of symptoms at 30 days and time to negativization, respectively. The three antivirals showed a similar effectiveness in containing the progression of the infection to severe COVID-19 and a good tolerability in the absence of serious adverse effects. Persistence of symptoms after 30 days was more common in females than males and less common in patients treated with molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/r. The availability of different antiviral molecules is a strong tool and, if correctly prescribed, they can have a significant role in changing the natural history of infection for frail persons, in which vaccination could be not sufficient for the prevention of severe COVID-19.

We investigated specific humoral and T-cell responses in people living with HIV (PLWH) before (T0), after two (T1) and after six months (T2) from the third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Healthy donors (HD) were enrolled. The specific humoral response was present in most PLWH already after the second dose, but the third dose increased both the rate of response and its magnitude. Collectively, no significant differences were found in the percentage of responding T-cells between PLWH and HD. At T0, stratifying PLWH according to CD4 cell count, a lower percentage of responding T-cells in 200 cells/µL one was observed. At T1, this parameter was comparable between the two subgroups, and the same result was found at T2. However, the pattern of co-expression of IFNγ, IL2 and TNFα in PLWH was characterized by a higher expression of TNFα, independently of CD4 cell count, indicating a persistent immunological signature despite successful ART. mRNA vaccination elicited a specific response in most PLWH, although the cellular one seems qualitatively inferior compared to HD. Therefore, an understanding of the T-cell quality dynamic is needed to determine the best vaccination strategy and, in general, the capability of immune response in ART-treated PLWH.

Background: CD163, a haptoglobin-hemoglobin scavenger receptor mostly expressed by monocytes and macrophages, is involved in the regulation of inflammatory processes. Following proteolytic cleavage after pro-inflammatory stimulation, CD163 is shed from the cell surface and its soluble form in plasma, sCD163, is a biomarker of monocyte/macrophage lineage activation. The assessment of sCD163 plasmatic levels in an early stage of the disease could have clinical utility in predicting the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia. The use of tocilizumab (monoclonal antibody anti-IL-6 receptor) in COVID-19 patients reduces lethality rate at 30 days. The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of tocilizumab on sCD163 plasmatic levels in a cohort of COVID-19 patients. Methods: In COVID-19 patients, on hospital admission (T0), after 7 days from hospitalization (T7) and after 45 days from discharge (T45) sCD163 plasmatic levels were evaluated, along with other laboratory parameters. COVID-19 patients were stratified into tocilizumab (TCZ) and non-tocilizumab (non-TCZ) groups. TCZ group was further divided into responder (R) and non-responder (NR) groups. Patients who died or required mechanical ventilation were defined as NR. As control group, healthy donors (HD) were enrolled. Results: Seventy COVID-19 patients and 47 HD were enrolled. At T0, sCD163 plasmatic levels were higher in COVID-19 patients compared to HD (p<0.0001) and the longitudinal evaluation showed a reduction in sCD163 plasmatic levels at T7 compared to T0 (p=0.0211). At T0, both TCZ and non-TCZ groups showed higher sCD163 plasmatic levels compared to HD (p<0.0001 and p=0.0147, respectively). At T7, the longitudinal evaluation showed a significant reduction in sCD163 plasmatic levels (p=0.0030) only in the TCZ group, reaching levels comparable to those of HD. Conversely, not statistically significance in non-TCZ group was observed and, at T7, a statistically significance was found comparing non-TCZ group to HD (p=0.0019). At T0, R and NR groups showed not statistically significance in sCD163 plasmatic levels and both groups showed higher levels compared to HD (p=0.0001 and p=0.0340, respectively). The longitudinal evaluation showed significant reductions in both groups (R: p=0.0356; NR: p=0.0273) independently of the outcome. After 45 days of follow-up sCD163 plasmatic levels remain stable. Conclusion: sCD163 plasmatic levels are increased in COVID-19 pneumonia and is efficiently down-regulated by tocilizumab treatment regardless of the clinical outcome.

In this retrospective comparative study, we evaluated the effectiveness of remdesivir (RDSV) in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Individuals hospitalized between March 2020 and August 2022 at S.M. Goretti Hospital, Latina, with a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 and, concomitantly, pneumonia, were included. The overall survival was the primary endpoint. The composite secondary endpoint included death or progression in severe ARDS at 40 days. The study population was stratified according to treatment into two groups: the RDSV group (patients treated with RDSV-based regimens) and the no-RDSV group (patients treated with any other, not RDSV-based, regimens). Factors associated with death and progression to severe ARDS or death were assessed by multivariable analysis. A total of 1153 patients (632 belonging to the RDSV group and 521 to the no-RDSV group) were studied. The groups were comparable in terms of sex, PaO2/FiO2 at admission, and duration of symptoms before hospitalization. Further, 54 patients (8.5%) in the RDSV group and 113 (21.7%) in the no-RDSV group (p < 0.001) died. RDSV was associated with a significantly reduced hazard ratio (HR) of death (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.49–0.97]; p = 0.03), compared to the no-RDSV group, as well as a significantly reduced OR of progression in severe ARDS or death (OR, 0.70 [95% CI 0.49–0.98]; p = 0.04). An overall significantly higher survival rate was observed in the RDSV group (p < 0.001, by log-rank test). These findings reinforce the survival benefit of RDSV and support its routine clinical use for the treatment of COVID-19 patients.

The aim of the study was to explore the humoral and T-cell response in lung transplant (LuT) patients. Two-time points were considered, before (T0) and after (Tpost) the third dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, comparing LuT with healthy donors (HD). LuT patients showed a lower serologic response against SARS-CoV-2 compared with HD at both time-points (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0011, respectively). A lower percentage of IFNγ+orIL2+orTNFα+CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells LuT patients was observed in LuT patients compared with HD at T0 (CD4+: p = 0.0001; CD8+: p = 0.0005) and Tpost (CD4+: p = 0.0028; CD8+: p = 0.0114), as well as in the percentage of IFNγ+IL2+TNFα+CD4+ T-cells (T0: p = 0.0247; Tpost: p = 0.0367). Finally, at Tpost, a lower percentage of IFNγ+IL2+TNFα+ CD8+ T-cells in LuT patients compared with HD was found (p = 0.0147). LuT patients were stratified according to the lowest cut-off value for the detection of a humoral response (4.81 BAU/mL) at T0, into responder (R) and non-responder (NR) groups. In the R group, no differences in the percentage of IFNγ+or IL2+orTNFα+ and IFNγ+IL2+TNFα+CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells compared with HD at both time-points were observed. Otherwise, in the NR group, lower percentages of IFNγ+IL2+TNFα+CD4+ T-cells compared with the R group (T0: p = 0.0159; Tpost: p = 0.0159), as well as compared with the HD, at both time-points, were observed (T0: p = 0.0064; Tpost: p = 0.0064). These data seem to confirm that some LuT patients can mount cellular responses even in the absence of a positive humoral response (>33.8 BAU/mL), although this cellular response is dysfunctional and partially detrimental.