Could covid vaccine affect efficacy of psoriasis treatments

[Fred]

Just updated my thread Tremfya for psoriatic arthritis Fred's journey but I will mention it here too.

Had my third Pfizer jab last Thursday afternoon, and things have been good until today and I can feel a psoriatic arthritis flare coming.

that's a bugger Fred and points to the vaccine causing another flare up.... I hope it's just a temporary blip

It is looking that way Jim, but I still can;t be sure.

[jiml]

Just updated my thread Tremfya for psoriatic arthritis Fred's journey but I will mention it here too.

Had my third Pfizer jab last Thursday afternoon, and things have been good until today and I can feel a psoriatic arthritis flare coming.

that's a bugger Fred and points to the vaccine causing another flare up.... I hope it's just a temporary blip

It is looking that way Jim, but I still can;t be sure. 

no I agree it needs more evidence of others on bios to get a clearer picture. But something is affecting you badly

[Turnedlight]

Third? Did I miss something..

I don’t know about the vaccine affecting our treatments but it could be our treatments affect the jab - I read one anecdote the other day, someone on a bio had received both jabs. They got a blood test to see if they had mounted an immune response and they hadn’t..
I have not been offered any such checks, has anyone else?

[Caroline]

Third? Did I miss something..

I don’t know about the vaccine affecting our treatments but it could be our treatments affect the jab - I read one anecdote the other day, someone on a bio had received both jabs. They got a blood test to see if they had mounted an immune response and they hadn’t..
I have not been offered any such checks, has anyone else?

Morning, Turnedlight.

Very good point. I did not know of this anecdote of course. But I have never heard or seen anybody using a psoriasis treatment who had an after check on his immune response.

I do have read over course that it has been investigated that the immune response of people using MTX, is low, and that they would need a third Covid jab. But from all other treatments no sign of regular checks.

[KatT]

Not offered any checks for me!  Would have been nice to know if I had an immune response.  I had absolutely no reactions for both jabs which leaves me wondering if it was effective 

[Fred]

No you have not missed anything TL, as far as I know it's only in France. 3 Covid jabs in France for patients on Immunosuppressants

But I have not been offered a test to see if I had a response to the jabs.

[Kat]

I'm not on biologics, however my doctor did run a test, actually he ran two related to the virus:

SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies, Total (IgG/IgA/IgM) was nonreactive.  That means I haven't had covid.  Of course it has the disclaimer: 
Nonreactive results do
- not rule out SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection, particularly in those who have
- been recently exposed to the virus and prior to sero-conversion.


SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies, Spike Protein 815.00  H <0.80 (U/mL) 

Now I looked online and the <80 was worrisome until I read that means I have not had covid-19, the write up says something else so it's confusing unless the <80 means negative which means the write up is generic information and not actually pertaining to my numbers.  Now the 815 H I THINK means 815 High which I HOPE means there is a lot of something there protecting me    however, I don't have a clue what it means.  When I checked online all I could find is that at present they do not a clear and definitive answer on what test numbers mean as in they have to take quite a bit of things into consideration.  I just got these results and have not discussed them with my doctor.  The write up on this test reads as follows:

- Positive results suggest recent or past infection with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19),
- due to detection of antibodies (IgG, IgA, and IgM) to the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S)
- protein receptor binding domain (RBD), but do not necessarily indicate
- immunity.  To date, no study has provided conclusive evidence that the presence
- of antibodies confers immunity to subsequent infection by the same or other
- strains of SARS-CoV-2 in humans.  Results from antibody testing should not be
- used as the sole basis to diagnose or exclude prior SARS-CoV-2 infection,
- especially in low prevalence populations.
- This test is intended for medical purposes only and is performed under the Food
- and Drug Administration's Emergency Use Authorization. This test should not be
- used for the screening of donated blood.

So basically the testing doesn't give a lot of information and I'm thinking the write up is just generic info.  But it's good to have the test for future reference (I think anyway) when it comes to them knowing what those numbers actually should be at and will be interesting to see if that 815 slowly goes down in time meaning perhaps that the effectiveness is getting less or some such.

But just found this:
Reactive (Positive, ≥50.0 AU/mL) results may be due to immunization or past or present infection with SARS-CoV-2. Results from antibody testing should not be used as the sole basis to diagnose or exclude SARS-CoV-2 infection or to inform infection status.  So, over 50 may be positive instead of negative.... I dunno it's very confusing to me!

[Fred]

Thank you Kat, but yes a bit difficult to understand.

[jiml]

I'm totally confused now

[Fred]

I'm totally confused now