OA01.01 Analysis of Lung Cancer Patients Receiving SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines Revealed a Minority Subset With Poor Antibody Responses Relative to Controls

Introduction: Patients with lung cancer (LC) were reported to have a high case fatality rate (30-40%) from SARS-CoV-2 infection, raising the question of whether LC patients mount a weaker antibody response to natural infection and/or vaccination, compared to healthy controls (HCs). We previously analyzed antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in several hundred healthy individuals, stratified by previous SARS-CoV-2 infection status. Using a validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to the full-length spike protein (PMC8183627, PMC7235504), we found strong responses to infection and a robust neutralizing antibody response to vaccination. We compare these results to data from individuals diagnosed with LC undergoing different types of cancer treatment. Methods: This is an ongoing, prospective, control-matched longitudinal cohort study of 750 LC patients in all stages with or without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or vaccination, comparing SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers at baseline (time of enrollment) and at 3-, 6-, 12- and 24-month intervals. We examine the quality, magnitude, and duration of the SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers against the full-length spike protein compared to the matched (age, tobacco history, sex and ethnicity) HC cohort. Types of Analysis and Data Reporting: ELISAs are performed in a CLIA-certified laboratory using an FDA-approved antibody assay along with other well-established, research-grade assays. We hypothesized that LC patients have a weaker antibody response to SARS-Cov-2 infection and/or vaccination due to cancer or its treatment compared to matched HCs. The non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis test was used to test this hypothesis. If confirmed, a tailored vaccination program would be necessary to ensure immune protection in patient with LC. Results: 111 LC patients have been enrolled to date;with 78 receiving at least one vaccination and 33 unvaccinated. Median age is 69, with 58% female. 39 patients were fully vaccinated (defined as 14+ days after second vaccination). Partially vaccinated (after 1st vaccine dose) LC patients had a lower median antibody level than partially vaccinated HCs (p=0.01). Fully vaccinated LC patients had substantial antibody titers but a lower median antibody level than fully vaccinated HCs (p=0.01) with a subset not raising large antibody titers. Especially important were the 30% of partially vaccinated LC patients who did not develop neutralizing antibodies. To date, there were no significant differences in median antibody levels in LC patients by gender, smoking status, age (< or > 65 years old), or treatment (with or without chemotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, or targeted therapy). Conclusion: While most (∼70%+) of LC patients mounted a good antibody response to vaccination, a subgroup had significantly lower anti-spike antibody/neutralizing levels compared to controls. Further studies are required to evaluate the role of further boost vaccinations in this patient population with a particular focus on patients not producing neutralizing antibodies to further understand the lack of response. We will continue to analyze the effect of systemic anti-cancer therapies as more data becomes available. Keywords: SARS-CoV-2, lung cancer, covid-19