Literature DB >> 35706827

SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccine hesitancy and the safety in inflammatory bowel disease patients: a single-center study.

Yubin Cao1, Jiaming Feng2, Shihao Duan1, Yi Yang1, Yan Zhang3.   

Abstract

Background: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine is thought to be the most effective preventive method of controlling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic. Some patients with immune-related diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients, however, may hesitate to be vaccinated for various reasons. Although several guidelines recommend vaccinating all IBD patients with inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, there is still a lack of real-world data on the safety of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and COVID-19 vaccination rate in IBD patients. In this study, we investigated the reasons for hesitancy in COVID-19 vaccination, the COVID-19 vaccination rate, and the safety of SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination in patients with IBD.
Methods: This was a retrospective study. A total of 418 participants with IBD were enrolled to calculate the vaccination rates. A total of 232 patients with IBD who did not receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were recruited to investigate the reasons for hesitation. A follow-up survey of 151 IBD patients and 188 healthy participants who had received the SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination was conducted to analyze adverse reactions.
Results: The COVID-19 vaccination rate was 49.3% and almost half of the participants were 'Concerned about the safety of the vaccine (such as adverse reactions) due to IBD'. After SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, adverse reactions were mild or moderate. The adverse reactions in the IBD and non-IBD populations were roughly the same, and IBD medications did not increase the risk of adverse reactions.
Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination rates in IBD patients are still low and a significant proportion of patients are hesitant about the vaccine because of safety concerns. SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination in patients with IBD appears to be safe.
© The Author(s), 2022.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; IBD; SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination

Year:  2022        PMID: 35706827      PMCID: PMC9189530          DOI: 10.1177/17562848221101722

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Therap Adv Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1756-283X            Impact factor:   4.802


Introduction

As of 19 November 2021, the number of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases recorded globally has exceeded 255 million and the number of deaths has exceeded 5.1 million. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine is thought to be the most effective preventive method for controlling the COVID-19 epidemic. Some patients with immune-related diseases, such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), however, may hesitate to be vaccinated for various reasons, including concerns about the interaction between vaccines and IBD medications.[2,3] Several important types of vaccines include inactivated virus, live attenuated, viral-vector, nucleic acid, and protein-based vaccines.[4,5] Compared with other vaccines, inactivated vaccines are more widely recommended for IBD patients because of their higher safety profile[3,6,7] (a comparison of several types of vaccines is shown in Supplemental Table 1). To date, three inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (BBIBP-CorV, CoronaVac, and COVILO ) have been approved in China and other countries and regions worldwide. Although several guidelines recommend vaccinating all patients with IBD using preferentially inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, there is a paucity of direct data on their safety in this patient group.[2,11-14] In this study, we investigated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination hesitancy, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status, and adverse event (AE) types and frequency after SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccine administration.

Methods

Study design and populations

This study utilized a retrospective design that followed the STROBE guidelines for reporting observational studies. Patients with IBD or IBD unclassified (IBDU) at the West China Hospital of Sichuan University, the largest IBD center in Southwest China, were included. In addition, healthy controls (HCs) were enrolled from the Health Physical Examination Center. The inclusion criteria for IBD patients were as follows: (1) age ⩾ 18 years, (2) confirmed IBD/IBDU, (3) no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and (4) ability to complete the study questionnaire. The diagnosis of IBD was based on the 3rd European evidence-based consensus.[16,17] Eligible HCs were non-IBD patients aged ⩾18 years who were not diagnosed with IBD or any other immune-related disorders and had no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants who did not complete the questionnaire were excluded from the study. A flowchart of the study design is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1.

Study profile.

Study profile. This study was approved by the academic committee of the West China Hospital of Sichuan University and informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Data collection

We conducted a real-name survey using an online questionnaire and telephone follow-up from 7 January 2021 to 29 July 2021. Three components of data were collected: (1) the COVID-19 vaccination status of the IBD population, (2) the reasons why the IBD population hesitated to receive the COVID-19 vaccination, and (3) the type and frequency of AEs after SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccine administration.

Component 1: the COVID-19 vaccination status of the IBD population

The vaccination status of each participant was monitored until 29 July 2021, which was the last day of follow-up. Participants who received at least one dose of SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccines were counted as vaccinated.

Component 2: the reasons why the IBD population hesitated to receive the COVID-19 vaccination

When enrolled, participants who did not receive the COVID-19 vaccine were asked if they (1) would receive the vaccine as soon as possible without hesitation and (2) had vaccine hesitancy. Those who selected option (2) were asked why they hesitated to receive the vaccine.

Component 3: the type and frequency of AEs after SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccine administration in IBD participants

Participants who received at least one dose of SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccine (BBIBP-CorV, CoronaVac, or COVILO ) were defined as vaccinated. All vaccinated patients included in this component received follow-up phone calls/questionnaires at 7 and 28 days after vaccination. The participants who received the SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccines were surveyed regarding the type and frequency of the AEs that occurred within 7 and 28 days after the first or second doses of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (the grading scale is provided in Supplemental Tables 2 and 3, refer to the documents of the China Food and Drug Administration for the classification of AEs ). The incidence of adverse reactions was compared between patients with IBD and HCs.

Statistical analysis

Continuous variables were presented as median values with interquartile ranges (IQRs), while categorical variables were presented as percentages. Student’s t test, Mann–Whitney U test, and chi-square test were performed to compare the participant characteristics between the two populations. Chi-square, Fisher’s exact test, or Pearson’s chi-square test were used to compare the differences in local AEs, systemic AEs, and overall AEs between the two groups. Univariate analysis was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) of predictors (such as ‘IBD’, ‘Crohn’s disease’, ‘ulcerative disease’, sex, vaccine type, and type of IBD medication) associated with AEs following SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination. The statistical software used was R version 3.5.3. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

COVID-19 vaccination status in IBD population

There were 212 participants with IBD who did not receive the COVID-19 vaccine and 206 IBD participants who received at least one dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (205 received inactivated vaccines and one used recombinant vaccines). The SARS-CoV-2 vaccination rate was 49.3% in the IBD population. The characteristics of all 418 enrolled IBD participants are shown in Supplemental Table 4 and there was no significant difference between all 418 enrolled IBD participants and 344 IBD patients who completed further questionnaires (Supplemental Table 4). In this component, the characteristics of vaccinated and unvaccinated IBD patients were also compared. As shown in Table 1, the unvaccinated IBD patients were significantly younger than the vaccinated IBD patients. The median age was 34 (IQR = 27–46) years for vaccinated IBD patients and 31.5 (IQR = 25–40) years for unvaccinated IBD patients. Compared with vaccinated IBD patients, a significantly higher proportion of unvaccinated IBD patients used biologics (57.6% versus 53.8%, p < 0.0001), whereas fewer used 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) as an IBD medication (16.6% versus 17.0%, p = 0.0369). In addition, vaccination coverage in IBD patients was independent of sex and disease type.
Table 1.

Participant characteristics of vaccinated IBD patients (N1) and unvaccinated IBD patients (N2).

Vaccinated IBD patients (N1 = 206)Unvaccinated IBD patients (N2 = 212)χ2p value
Diagnosis
 Crohn’s disease68.0% (140/206)72.2% (153/212)0.88280.3474
 Ulcerative disease26.2% (54/206)23.6% (50/212)0.38630.5343
 Indeterminate colitis5.8% (12/206)4.2% (9/212)0.54660.4597
Sex
 Male56.3% (116/206)63.2% (134/212)2.06740.1505
 Female43.7% (90/206)36.8% (78/212)2.06740.1505
Age
Mean ( SD)36.7 (12.11)33.9 (11.46)NA0.0139
 Median (IQR)34 (27–46)31.5 (25–40)NA0.0116
Current IBD medications
 None10.3% (20/206)11.3% (23/212)0.14720.7012
 5-aminosalicylic acid17.0% (43/206)16.6% (28/212)4.35470.0369
 Glucocorticoid1.4% (3/206)2.0% (3/212)0.00131
 Immunosuppressant19.4% (46/206)21.8% (35/212)2.26570.1323
 Biologics53.8% (88/206)57.6% (137/212)20.1695<0.0001
 Chinese traditional medicine2.2% (6/206)2.0% (3/212)1.11210.3322

IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; IQR, interquartile range; SD, standard deviation.

Participant characteristics of vaccinated IBD patients (N1) and unvaccinated IBD patients (N2). IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; IQR, interquartile range; SD, standard deviation.

Reasons of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination hesitancy in IBD patients

There were 263 IBD patients who did not receive the SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccine, 232 completed the survey, and 31 were excluded (10 had contraindications to vaccination, 18 had a vaccination plan in the near future without hesitation, one had received other types of the COVID-19 vaccine, and two did not complete the questionnaire). The former included 168 (77.6%) patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) and 49 (22.4%) with ulcerative colitis (UC). The median patient age was 32 (IQR = 25–42) years. The patients’ characteristics are presented in Table 2.
Table 2.

Participant characteristics of IBD participants who have COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy.

IBD (N = 232)
Diagnosis
 Crohn’s disease77.6% (180/232)
 Ulcerative disease22.4% (52/232)
Sex
 Male61.2% (142/232)
 Female38.8% (90/232)
Age
 Mean (SD)34.23 (11.33)
 Median (IQR)32 (25–42)
Current IBD medications
 None11.6% (27/232)
 5-aminosalicylic acid12.9% (30/232)
 Glucocorticoid2.2% (5/232)
 Immunosuppressant18.1% (42/232)
 Biologics59.1% (137/232)
 Chinese traditional medicine1.7% (4/232)
Reasons for COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy
 Concerned about the safety of vaccine (such as AE) due or not due to IBD47.4% (110/232)
 Concerned the vaccine will aggravate IBD36.2% (84/232)
 Concerned about the effectiveness of vaccine due or not due to IBD4.3%(10/232)
 Concerned about the interaction between vaccine and IBD medication34.1% (79/232)
 Do not think vaccination is necessary4.7% (11/232)
 The attending physician did not advice IBD patients to receive the vaccines7.8% (18/232)
 Just ‘watch-and-wait’0.9% (2/232)

AE, adverse event; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; IQR, interquartile ranges.

Participant characteristics of IBD participants who have COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy. AE, adverse event; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; IQR, interquartile ranges. The most common reason for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination hesitancy was ‘Concerned about the safety of vaccines (such as AE) due to IBD’ (47.4%). A total of 36.2% of participants selected ‘Concerned vaccine will aggravate IBD’, approximately one-third (34.1%) of the participants selected ‘Concerned about the interaction between the vaccine and IBD medication’, and 4.3% of participants selected ‘Concerned about the effectiveness of vaccine because or not because of IBD’ (Table 2). In addition, 7.8% of patients selected ‘The attending physician did not advise IBD patients to receive the vaccines’. Fifty IBD participants hesitated at the beginning but received SARS-CoV-2 vaccines by the end of the follow-up period. The main reason for the change in mind was the recommendation by attending doctors.

Safety analysis of SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination among the IBD population and non-IBD population

A total of 151 patients with IBD and 188 HCs who had received SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination were enrolled in this component of the study. Of the former, 62 received BBIBP-CorV (41.1%), 88 received CoronaVac (58.3%), and one received COVILO (0.7%). Of the latter, 68 received BBIBP-CorV (45.7%), 99 received CoronaVac (52.7%), and three received COVILO (1.6%). The median age was 34 (IQR = 27–45) years for patients with IBD and 32 (IQR = 24–46) years for HCs. There was no statistically significant difference in sex, age, or vaccine type between IBD patients and HCs (Table 3).
Table 3.

Participant characteristics of those who had SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination.

IBD (N = 151)HC (N = 188)χ2p value
Diagnosis
 Crohn’s disease64.9% (98/151)NANANA
 Ulcerative disease29.8% (45/151)NANANA
 Indeterminate colitis5.3% (8/151)NANANA
Sex
 Male53.0% (80/151)50.5% (95/188)0.2010.6539
 Female47.0% (71/151)49.5% (93/188)0.2010.6539
Age
 Mean (SD)36.25 (11.21)35.62 (11.54)0.6107
 Median (IQR)34 (27–45)32 (24–46)0.3782
Vaccine type
 BBIBP-CorV41.1% (62/151)45.7% (86/188)0.74730.3873
 CoronaVac58.3% (88/151)52.7% (99/188)1.06880.3012
 COVILO0.7% (1/151)1.6% (3/188)0.62580.6318
Current IBD medications
 None7.9% (12/151)NANANA
 5-aminosalicylic acid21.9% (33/151)NANANA
 Glucocorticoid1.3% (2/151)NANANA
 Immunosuppressant25.8% (39/151)NANANA
 Biologics41.1% (62/151)NANANA
 Chinese traditional medicine4.6% (7/151)NANANA

HC, healthy control; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; IQR, interquartile range; SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2; SD, standard deviation.

Participant characteristics of those who had SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination. HC, healthy control; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; IQR, interquartile range; SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2; SD, standard deviation. All AEs, including injection-site and systemic AEs, were mild (grade 1) or moderate (grade 2) in severity. In IBD vaccine recipients, 90 of 151 (59.6%) had mild or moderate AEs within 7 days of inactivated vaccine administration compared with 112 (59.6%) of 188 vaccine recipients without IBD [odds ratio (OR) = 1.023; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.662–1.583]. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.9957) (Table 4).
Table 4.

Adverse reactions and AEs after SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccinations.

IBD (N = 151)HC (N = 188)χ2p value
All adverse reactions within 7 days
 Any59.6% (90/151)59.6% (112/188)<0.00010.9958
Injection-site adverse reactions within 7 days
 Pain53.6% (81/151)51.6% (97/188)0.14070.7076
  Grade 148.3% (73/151)46.3% (87/188)0.14370.7047
  Grade 25.3% (8/151)5.3% (10/188)<0.00010.9931
 Redness2.6% (4/151)3.2% (6/188)0.0861>0.9999
  Grade 12.6% (4/151)3.2% (6/188)0.0861>0.9999
  Grade 200
 Swelling6.0% (9/151)4.3% (8/188)0.51100.4747
  Grade 16.0% (9/151)4.3% (8/188)0.51100.4747
  Grade 200
Systemic adverse reactions within 7 days
 Vomiting1.3% (2/151)0.5% (1/188)0.59970.5876
  Grade 11.3% (2/151)0.5% (1/188)0.59970.5876
  Grade 200
 Diarrhea5.3% (8/151)1.6% (3/188)3.65600.0681
  Grade 14.6% (7/151)1.6% (3/188)2.70330.1167
  Grade 20.7% (1/151)01.24870.4454
 Fever0.7% (1/151)0.5% (1/188)0.0243>0.9999
  Grade 10.7% (1/151)0.5% (1/188)0.0243>0.9999
  Grade 200
 Headache4.0% (6/151)5.3% (10/188)0.33720.5615
  Grade 13.3% (5/151)5.3% (10/188)0.79830.3716
  Grade 20.7% (1/151)01.24870.4454
 Fatigue18.5% (28/151)19.7% (37/188)0.07000.7914
  Grade 116.6% (25/151)16.0% (30/188)0.02210.8818
  Grade 22.0% (3/151)3.7% (7/188)0.88220.5214
 Chills0.7% (1/151)01.24870.4454
  Grade 10.7% (1/151)01.24870.4454
  Grade 200
 New or worsened muscle pain9.3% (14/151)14.4% (27/188)2.04080.1531
  Grade 19.3% (14/151)10.1% (19/188)0.06640.7966
  Grade 204.3% (8/188)6.58080.0098
 New or worsened joint pain2.6% (4/151)2.1% (4/188)0.0988>0.9999
  Grade 12.6% (4/151)1.6% (3/188)0.45940.7044
  Grade 200.5% (1/188)0.8056>0.9999
Other suspected AEs within 28 days a 1.3% (2/151)02.50480.1977

AEs, adverse events; HC, healthy control; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2; UC, ulcerative colitis.

Missing variable values were caused by an insufficient number of observations in the participants.

Two UC patients had a recurrence of diarrhea within 7–28 days after vaccination. This will be described in detail in the ‘Results’ section.

Adverse reactions and AEs after SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccinations. AEs, adverse events; HC, healthy control; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2; UC, ulcerative colitis. Missing variable values were caused by an insufficient number of observations in the participants. Two UC patients had a recurrence of diarrhea within 7–28 days after vaccination. This will be described in detail in the ‘Results’ section. The most common injection-site adverse reaction in both groups was ‘pain’, occurring in 81 (53.6%) of 151 IBD participants, compared with 97 (51.6%) of 188 recipients without IBD. There was no statistically significant difference in injection-site AEs (‘pain’, ‘redness’, and ‘swelling’) within 7 days of administration between the groups (p1 = 0.7076, p2 = 1, p3 = 0.4747). In both groups, the most common systemic AE after either vaccination was ‘fatigue’, reported in 28 (18.5%) of 151 IBD recipients, compared with 37 (19.7%) of 188 non-IBD recipients; there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.7914). Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference regarding other systemic AEs, including ‘vomiting’, ‘diarrhea’, ‘fever’, ‘headache’, and ‘new or worsened joint pain’, between the two groups. Regarding ‘new or worsened muscle pain’, the overall and grade 1 incidences were not significantly different between the two groups. The incidence of grade 2 AEs was significantly lower (p = 0.0098) in patients with IBD. Subgroup analysis revealed no differences in AEs after SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccine administration between patients with and without CD (68.9% versus 59.0%, OR = 1.538, 95% CI = 0.781–3.029). Different treatment regimens had no influence on the adverse reaction profile in IBD patients (5-ASA 16.7% versus 29.5%, OR = 0.478, 95%, CI = 0.219–1.043; glucocorticoid 1.1% versus 1.6%, OR = 0.674, 95% CI = 0.041-10.988; immunosuppressant 28.9% versus 21.3%, OR = 1.500, 95% CI = 0.699–3.219; biologics 42.2% versus 39.3%, OR = 1.127, 95% CI = 0.581–2.185). Finally, the AE profile of IBD patients was not related to sex, age, or vaccine type (Table 5).
Table 5.

Subgroup analysis of IBD patients with or without adverse reactions after SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination.

VariableWith adverse reactions (N = 90)Without adverse reactions (N = 61)OR (95% CI)χ2p value
Diagnosis
 Crohn’s disease68.9% (62/90)59.0% (36/61)1.538 (0.781–3.029)1.55560.2123
 Ulcerative disease25.6% (23/90)36.1% (22/61)0.609 (0.301–1.232)1.91970.1659
 Indeterminate colitis5.6% (5/90)0.5% (3/61)1.137 (0.262–4.945)0.0295>0.9999
Sex
 Male51.1% (46/90)55.7% (34/61)0.830 (0.432–1.595)0.31240.5762
 Female48.9% (44/90)44.3% (27/61)1.205 (0.627–2.314)0.31240.5762
Age
 Mean (SD)35.59 (11.21)37.23 (11.54)NANA0.4009
 Median (IQR)34 (27–41)37 (27–48)NANA0.5450
Vaccine type
 BBIBP-CorV40.0% (36/90)42.6% (26/61)0.897 (0.464–1.736)0.10340.7478
 CoronaVac58.9% (53/90)57.4% (35/61)1.064 (0.551–2.056)0.03420.8533
 COVILO0.4% (1/90)00.6823>0.9999
Current IBD medications
 5-aminosalicylic acid16.7% (15/90)29.5% (18/61)0.478 (0.219–1.043)3.51060.061
 Glucocorticoid1.1% (1/90)1.6% (1/61)0.674 (0.041–10.988)0.0776>0.9999
 Immunosuppressant28.9% (26/90)21.3% (13/61)1.500 (0.699–3.219)1.08970.2965
 Biologics42.2% (38/90)39.3% (24/61)1.127 (0.581–2.185)0.12440.7243
  Ustekinumab04.5% (1/22)1.8480.3548
  Vedolizumab5% (2/40)9.1% (2/22)0.526 (0.069–4.021)0.39360.6104
  Adalimumab35% (14/40)40.9% (9/22)0.778 (0.267–2.267)0.21240.6449
  Infliximab60% (24/40)45.5% (10/22)1.800 (0.629–5.148)1.21250.2708

CI, confidence interval; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; IQR, interquartile range; OR, odds ratio; SD, standard deviation.

Missing variable values for COVILO were caused by an insufficient number of observations in the participants.

Subgroup analysis of IBD patients with or without adverse reactions after SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination. CI, confidence interval; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; IQR, interquartile range; OR, odds ratio; SD, standard deviation. Missing variable values for COVILO were caused by an insufficient number of observations in the participants.

Two UC patients experienced relapse within 7–28 days after vaccination

Two patients relapsed within 7–28 days of vaccination. In the first patient (female, 33 years old), stool frequency increased slightly within 7 days (2–3 times/day) after the first dose of the inactivated vaccine. Ten days after the second inoculation, stool frequency increased to 15–20 times/day with pus and blood. Detailed questioning regarding mesalazine (5-ASA) compliance, however, revealed dosing medication irregularities over several years and discontinuation of 5-ASA long before vaccination. The patient’s condition improved after restarting 5-ASA. The second patient (female, 42 years old) reported a slight increase in stool frequency 7 days after the first dose of the inactivated vaccine, up to 2–3 times/day, possibly related to increased peach consumption. Twenty-five days after the first inoculation, pus and blood began to appear in the stool and the frequency increased to 6–7 times/day. Her symptoms worsened after increasing her mesalazine (5-ASA) dose.

Discussion

During the COVID-19 outbreak, IBD patients are strongly recommended to be vaccinated by the International Organization for the Study of IBD because it is considered to be the most effective method of controlling the epidemic. Existing phase III studies of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, however, did not include patients with IBD. Thus, scruples remain for IBD patients to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, which represents concerns regarding AEs, weakens the efficacy of IBD medications, and aggravates the disease. To our knowledge, no previous study has investigated the safety of SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccination in patients with IBD. Our study shows that the coverage of at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccination was 49.3% (206/419) in the adult IBD population at our center by the end of 29 July 2021. A survey from Europe showed that, as of July 2021, 79.6% of IBD patients had received at least one dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and the vaccination rate was much higher than that in our center. As of 29 July 2021, China has reported more than 1.6 billion COVID-19 vaccinations, and the vaccination rate in Beijing has exceeded 95%, indicating that the vaccination rate in the IBD population is much lower than that in the general population. In our study, we found that IBD patients on biologics might prefer to avoid COVID-19 vaccinations, while patients on 5-ASA were more inclined to be vaccinated. In addition, the younger age of unvaccinated IBD patients compared with vaccinated patients is of particular concern. A study in the United Kingdom also pointed to a higher level of vaccine hesitancy in younger age groups, highlighting the possibility that female patients of childbearing age may be hesitant about the vaccine. Furthermore, larger studies on the long-term safety of the vaccine in diverse IBD populations are needed. Above all, vaccination rates in the IBD population need to be improved, especially in the younger age group on biologics. To further explore the reason why IBD patients hesitated to receive the COVID-19 vaccination, we conducted a questionnaire survey and the results showed that the most common reason for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination hesitancy was ‘Concerned about the safety of vaccine (such as AE) because or not because IBD’ (47.4%) in IBD participants. The data of ‘reasons for COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy’ from two recent surveys in the United States showed results similar to those of our study.[22,23] These studies revealed that the most common reasons for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination hesitancy were also associated with vaccine safety. In addition, a recent survey showed that approximately 70% of patients with IBD wanted to obtain data on vaccine safety. Thus, data on the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the real world are urgently required. In our study, the most common AE after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in participants with IBD was injection-site pain, which agrees with previous studies on SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccines, including BBIBP-CorV, CoronaVac, and COVILO. Furthermore, the incidence of AEs in IBD patients was similar to that in non-IBD populations, without serious AEs (grade 3 or 4). Moreover, we found no differences in AEs after vaccination between IBD patients with and without 5-aminosalicylic acid/glucocorticoid/immunosuppressant/biologic use. Previous studies on other vaccine types have also indicated that inactivated vaccines are safe for patients receiving immunosuppressants. Our data further support the safety of SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccines in patients with IBD, regardless of their treatment regimen.[6,24,25] UC relapse was reported in two patients post-vaccination, but a causal relationship could not be established, as serious medication compliance issues were noted in the first case and poor dietary habits in the second. Currently, there are no reports of IBD recurrence and/or worsening of other immune-related diseases (such as systemic lupus erythematosus) caused by COVID-19 vaccines. Studies with larger sample sizes are required to establish a causal relationship between UC relapse and COVID-19 vaccination. Fifty participants with IBD who hesitated to be inoculated received SARS-CoV-2 vaccines while the study was ongoing. The reason for the change in mind was the recommendations of their attending physicians, clearly underlining the important role of physicians in improving vaccination rates. Our findings are in accordance with previous reports in which only two of 56 IBD patients declined vaccination after the recommendation of a dedicated physician. Our study and others emphasize the indisputable role of IBD physicians as key influencers in improving COVID-19 vaccination rates, and that physician education must focus on providing answers to hesitant patients.[2,27,28] The study limitations include (1) the small sample size, (2) lack of ethnic diversity, (3) potential recall bias, and (4) different individual pain sensitivities. Thus, a multicenter study with a larger sample size may provide additional evidence. In conclusion, the inoculation of IBD patients with SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccines is safe, with an AE profile that is not different from that encountered in a healthy general population. The IBD type and/or treatment regimen does not increase the risk of AEs. Click here for additional data file. Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-tag-10.1177_17562848221101722 for SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccine hesitancy and the safety in inflammatory bowel disease patients: a single-center study by Yubin Cao, Jiaming Feng, Shihao Duan, Yi Yang and Yan Zhang in Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology Click here for additional data file. Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-tag-10.1177_17562848221101722 for SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccine hesitancy and the safety in inflammatory bowel disease patients: a single-center study by Yubin Cao, Jiaming Feng, Shihao Duan, Yi Yang and Yan Zhang in Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology Click here for additional data file. Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-tag-10.1177_17562848221101722 for SARS-CoV-2-inactivated vaccine hesitancy and the safety in inflammatory bowel disease patients: a single-center study by Yubin Cao, Jiaming Feng, Shihao Duan, Yi Yang and Yan Zhang in Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology
  25 in total

Review 1.  ACG Clinical Guideline: Preventive Care in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Authors:  Francis A Farraye; Gil Y Melmed; Gary R Lichtenstein; Sunanda V Kane
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 2.  British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults.

Authors:  Christopher Andrew Lamb; Nicholas A Kennedy; Tim Raine; Philip Anthony Hendy; Philip J Smith; Jimmy K Limdi; Bu'Hussain Hayee; Miranda C E Lomer; Gareth C Parkes; Christian Selinger; Kevin J Barrett; R Justin Davies; Cathy Bennett; Stuart Gittens; Malcolm G Dunlop; Omar Faiz; Aileen Fraser; Vikki Garrick; Paul D Johnston; Miles Parkes; Jeremy Sanderson; Helen Terry; Daniel R Gaya; Tariq H Iqbal; Stuart A Taylor; Melissa Smith; Matthew Brookes; Richard Hansen; A Barney Hawthorne
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  The race for coronavirus vaccines: a graphical guide.

Authors:  Ewen Callaway
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  3rd European Evidence-based Consensus on the Diagnosis and Management of Crohn's Disease 2016: Part 1: Diagnosis and Medical Management.

Authors:  Fernando Gomollón; Axel Dignass; Vito Annese; Herbert Tilg; Gert Van Assche; James O Lindsay; Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet; Garret J Cullen; Marco Daperno; Torsten Kucharzik; Florian Rieder; Sven Almer; Alessandro Armuzzi; Marcus Harbord; Jost Langhorst; Miquel Sans; Yehuda Chowers; Gionata Fiorino; Pascal Juillerat; Gerassimos J Mantzaris; Fernando Rizzello; Stephan Vavricka; Paolo Gionchetti
Journal:  J Crohns Colitis       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 9.071

5.  Effect of an Inactivated Vaccine Against SARS-CoV-2 on Safety and Immunogenicity Outcomes: Interim Analysis of 2 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Shengli Xia; Kai Duan; Yuntao Zhang; Dongyang Zhao; Huajun Zhang; Zhiqiang Xie; Xinguo Li; Cheng Peng; Yanbo Zhang; Wei Zhang; Yunkai Yang; Wei Chen; Xiaoxiao Gao; Wangyang You; Xuewei Wang; Zejun Wang; Zhengli Shi; Yanxia Wang; Xuqin Yang; Lianghao Zhang; Lili Huang; Qian Wang; Jia Lu; Yongli Yang; Jing Guo; Wei Zhou; Xin Wan; Cong Wu; Wenhui Wang; Shihe Huang; Jianhui Du; Ziyan Meng; An Pan; Zhiming Yuan; Shuo Shen; Wanshen Guo; Xiaoming Yang
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-09-08       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  COVID-19 Vaccination Intent and Perceptions Among Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.

Authors:  Rahul S Dalal; Emma McClure; Jenna Marcus; Rachel W Winter; Matthew J Hamilton; Jessica R Allegretti
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 11.382

Review 7.  SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a British Society of Gastroenterology Inflammatory Bowel Disease section and IBD Clinical Research Group position statement.

Authors:  James L Alexander; Gordon W Moran; Daniel R Gaya; Tim Raine; Ailsa Hart; Nicholas A Kennedy; James O Lindsay; Jonathan MacDonald; Jonathan P Segal; Shaji Sebastian; Christian P Selinger; Miles Parkes; Philip J Smith; Anjan Dhar; Sreedhar Subramanian; Ramesh Arasaradnam; Christopher A Lamb; Tariq Ahmad; Charlie W Lees; Liz Dobson; Ruth Wakeman; Tariq H Iqbal; Ian Arnott; Nick Powell
Journal:  Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2021-01-26

Review 8.  Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for Immunizations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)-Part 2: Inactivated Vaccines.

Authors:  Jennifer L Jones; Frances Tse; Matthew W Carroll; Jennifer C deBruyn; Shelly A McNeil; Anne Pham-Huy; Cynthia H Seow; Lisa L Barrett; Talat Bessissow; Nicholas Carman; Gil Y Melmed; Otto G Vanderkooi; John K Marshall; Eric I Benchimol
Journal:  J Can Assoc Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-07-29

9.  SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in IBD: more pros than cons.

Authors:  Ferdinando D'Amico; Christian Rabaud; Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet; Silvio Danese
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 46.802

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.