Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35176326›Full record

ReviewKidney international2022

COVID-19 in dialysis: clinical impact, immune response, prevention, and treatment.

Khalil El Karoui, An S De Vriese

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Kidney international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 87 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
87citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
15.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

87 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 153 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Kidney involvement and anemia in COVID-19 infection.World journal of nephrology · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

27 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Khalil El KarouiDepartment of Nephrology and Transplantation, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Fédération Hospitalo-Universitaire TRUE, Université Paris Est, Créteil, France.
An S De VrieseDivision of Nephrology and Infectious Diseases, AZ Sint-Jan Brugge-Oostende AV, Brugge, Belgium; Department of Internal Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. Electronic address: an.devriese@azsintjan.be.
Ghent University · BEUniversité Paris-Est Créteil · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has profound adverse effects on the population on dialysis. Patients requiring dialysis are at an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality, and many have experienced psychological distress as well as delayed or suboptimal care. COVID-19 survivors have prolonged viral shedding, but generally develop a robust and long-lasting humoral immune response that correlates with initial disease severity. However, protection against reinfection is incomplete. A growing body of evidence reveals delayed and blunted immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Administration of a third dose within 1 to 2 months of prime-boost vaccination significantly increases antibody levels, in particular in patients with poor initial responses. Patients on dialysis have inferior immune responses to adenoviral vector vaccines than to mRNA vaccines. The immunogenicity of the mRNA-1273 vaccine is markedly better than that of the BNT162b2 vaccine, most likely by virtue of its higher mRNA content. Despite suboptimal immune responses in patients on dialysis, preliminary data suggest that vaccination partially protects against infection and severe disease requiring hospitalization. However, progressive waning of immunity and emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants with a high potential of immune escape call for a booster dose in all patients on dialysis 4 to 6 months after prime-boost vaccination. Patients with persistent poor vaccine responses may be candidates for primary prophylaxis strategies. In the absence of specific data in patients on dialysis, therapeutic strategies in the event of established COVID-19 must be extrapolated from evidence obtained in the population not on dialysis. Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies may be an attractive option after a high-risk exposure or during the early course of infection.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-22019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273Antibodies, ViralBNT162 VaccineCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansImmunity, HumoralPandemicsRenal DialysisVaccination2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273Antibodies, ViralBNT162 VaccineCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19dialysishemodialysisimmune responseSARS-CoV-2treatmentvaccination

Identifiers

PMID35176326
PMCPMC8842412
OpenAlexW4212956138

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.