Interim Results of a Phase 1-2a Trial of Ad26.COV2.S Covid-19 Vaccine

Accelerating model-informed decisions for COVID-19 vaccine candidates using a model-based meta-analysis approach

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the need for innovative quantitative decision tools to support rapid development of safe and efficacious vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. To meet that need, we developed and applied a model-based meta-analysis (MBMA) approach integrating non-clinical and clinical immunogenicity and protection data.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified studies of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in rhesus macaques (RM) and humans. Summary-level data of 13 RM and 8 clinical trials were used in the analysis. A RM MBMA model was developed to quantify the relationship between serum neutralizing (SN) titres after vaccination and peak viral load (VL) post-challenge in RM. The translation of the RM MBMA model to a clinical protection model was then carried out to predict clinical efficacies based on RM data alone. Subsequently, clinical SN and efficacy data were integrated to develop three predictive models of efficacy - a calibrated RM MBMA, a joint (RM-Clinical) MBMA, and the clinical MBMA model. The three models were leveraged to predict efficacies of vaccine candidates not included in the model and efficacies against newer strains of SARS-CoV-2.

FINDINGS

Clinical efficacies predicted based on RM data alone were in reasonable agreement with the reported data. The SN titre predicted to provide 50% efficacy was estimated to be about 21% of the mean human convalescent titre level, and that value was consistent across the three models. Clinical efficacies predicted from the MBMA models agreed with reported efficacies for two vaccine candidates (BBV152 and CoronaVac) not included in the modelling and for efficacies against delta variant.

INTERPRETATION

The three MBMA models are predictive of protection against SARS-CoV-2 and provide a translational framework to enable early Go/No-Go and study design decisions using non-clinical and/or limited clinical immunogenicity data in the development of novel SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

FUNDING

This study was funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.

The bullwhip effect, T-cell telomeres, and SARS-CoV-2

Both myeloid cells, which contribute to innate immunity, and lymphoid cells, which dominate adaptive immunity, partake in defending against SARS-CoV-2. In response to the virus, the otherwise slow haematopoietic production supply chain quickly unleashes its preconfigured myeloid element, which largely resists a bullwhip-like effect. By contrast, the lymphoid element risks a bullwhip-like effect when it produces T cells and B cells that are specifically designed to clear the virus. As T-cell production is telomere-length dependent and telomeres shorten with age, older adults are at higher risk of a T-cell shortfall when contracting SARS-CoV-2 than are younger adults. A poorly calibrated adaptive immune response, stemming from a bullwhip-like effect, compounded by a T-cell deficit, might thus contribute to the propensity of people with inherently short T-cell telomeres to develop severe COVID-19. The immune systems of these individuals might also generate an inadequate T-cell response to anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

OX40 agonist stimulation increases and sustains humoral and cell-mediated responses to SARS-CoV-2 protein and saRNA vaccines

To prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections and generate long-lasting immunity, vaccines need to generate strong viral-specific B and T cell responses. Previous results from our lab and others have shown that immunizations in the presence of an OX40 agonist antibody lead to higher antibody titers and increased numbers of long-lived antigen-specific CD4 and CD8 T cells. Using a similar strategy, we explored the effect of OX40 co-stimulation in a prime and boost vaccination scheme using an adjuvanted SARS-CoV-2 spike protein vaccine in C57BL/6 mice. Our results show that OX40 engagement during vaccination significantly increases long-lived antibody responses to the spike protein. In addition, after immunization spike protein-specific proliferation was greatly increased for both CD4 and CD8 T cells, with enhanced, spike-specific secretion of IFN-γ and IL-2. Booster (3^rd injection) immunizations combined with an OX40 agonist (7 months post-prime) further increased vaccine-specific antibody and T cell responses. Initial experiments assessing a self-amplifying mRNA (saRNA) vaccine encoding the spike protein antigen show a robust antigen-specific CD8 T cell response. The saRNA spike-specific CD8 T cells express high levels of GrzmB, IFN-γ and TNF-α which was not observed with protein immunization and this response was further increased by the OX40 agonist. Similar to protein immunizations the OX40 agonist also increased vaccine-specific CD4 T cell responses. In summary, this study compares and contrasts the effects and benefits of both protein and saRNA vaccination and the extent to which an OX40 agonist enhances and sustains the immune response against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

Design of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD vaccine antigen improves neutralizing antibody response

The receptor binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is the primary target of neutralizing antibodies and is a component of almost all current vaccines. Here, RBD immunogens were created with stabilizing amino acid changes that improve the neutralizing antibody response, as well as characteristics for production, storage, and distribution. A computational design and in vitro screening platform identified three improved immunogens, each with approximately nine amino acid changes relative to the native RBD sequence, and four key changes conserved between immunogens. The changes are adaptable to all vaccine platforms and compatible with mutations in emerging variants of concern. The immunogens elicit higher levels of neutralizing antibodies than native RBD, focus the immune response to structured neutralizing epitopes, and have increased production yields and thermostability. Incorporating these variant-independent amino acid changes in next-generation COVID vaccines may enhance the neutralizing antibody response and lead to longer duration and broader protection.

A quick scoping review of the first year of vaccination against the COVID-19 pandemic: Do we need more shots or time?

BACKGROUND

The emergence of new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants, along with the waning of vaccine-induced immunity, has increased breakthrough infections and urged booster jabs and debates. In the short term, the administration of booster doses has been reported to be safe and enhance severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-specific neutralizing antibody levels. However, the effects of these doses on the pandemic trajectory and herd immunity are unclear. There is insufficient evidence that a third booster shot of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine maintains longer immunity and covers new viral variants. The lack of sufficient evidence, combined with the fact that millions of people have not yet received 1 or 2 jabs of the COVID-19 vaccine, has raised concerns regarding the call for booster vaccinations.

METHODS

We conducted a quick scoping review to explore the literature on the need for a booster COVID-19 vaccination from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022.

RESULTS

Sixty-one relevant publications were identified, of which 17 were related to waning immunity after 2 doses of the vaccine among the general population or healthcare workers, 19 were related to the third or booster dose of vaccination after the second dose among the general population or healthcare workers, and 25 were related to booster dose among immunocompromised patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Initially, the need for a booster dose was equivocal; however, several studies demonstrated the benefit of the booster dose over time. Adequate scientific information is required regarding the administration of booster doses to the general population as well as the high-risk individuals.

Answers to common questions about COVID-19 vaccines in children with cancer

BACKGROUND

The SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in 2020 evolved into a global pandemic, and COVID-19 vaccines became rapidly available, including for pediatric patients. However, questions emerged that challenged vaccine acceptance and use. We aimed to answer these questions and give recommendations applicable for use in pediatric patients with cancer by healthcare professionals and the public.

METHODS

A 12-member global COVID-19 Vaccine in Pediatric Oncology Working Group made up of physicians and nurses from all world regions met weekly from March to July 2021. We used a modified Delphi method to select the top questions. The Working Group, in four-member subgroups, answered assigned questions by providing brief recommendations, followed by a discussion of the rationale for each answer. All Working Group members voted on each recommendation using a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being complete agreement. A "pass" recommendation corresponded to an agreement ≥7.5.

RESULTS

We selected 15 questions from 173 suggested questions. Based on existing published information, we generated answers for each question as recommendations. The overall average agreement for the 24 recommendations was 9.5 (95% CI 9.4-9.6).

CONCLUSION

Top COVID-19 vaccine-related questions could be answered using available information. Reports on COVID-19 vaccination and related topics have been published at record speed, aided by available technology and the priority imposed by the pandemic; however, all efforts were made to incorporate emerging information throughout our project. Recommendations will be periodically updated on a dedicated website.

Prospects of animal models and their application in studies on adaptive immunity to SARS-CoV-2

The adaptive immune response induced by SARS-CoV-2 plays a key role in the antiviral process and can protect the body from the threat of infection for a certain period of time. However, owing to the limitations of clinical studies, the antiviral mechanisms, protective thresholds, and persistence of the immune memory of adaptive immune responses remain unclear. This review summarizes existing research models for SARS-CoV-2 and elaborates on the advantages of animal models in simulating the clinical symptoms of COVID-19 in humans. In addition, we systematically summarize the research progress on the SARS-CoV-2 adaptive immune response and the remaining key issues, as well as the application and prospects of animal models in this field. This paper provides direction for in-depth analysis of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 mechanism of the adaptive immune response and lays the foundation for the development and application of vaccines and drugs.

Full seroconversion in initial non-responders with higher antibody levels after heterologous COVID-19 vaccination schedule

Antibody testing after COVID-19 vaccination is generally not recommended. Here, we present the results of a retrospective study, in which we analyzed antibody levels before and after the first dose of the ChAdOx1 vector vaccine. We identified 5% non-responders (43.6 ± 10.6 years; females: 41%) and 3.4% low-responders (44.2 ± 10.1 years; females: 64%) after the first dose. Of these, 61 individuals received a timely second dose either with a homologous (ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1) or heterologous (ChAdOx1/mRNA-1273) schedule. All vaccinees achieved positive S1-specific IgG titers to the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain after the second dose, but antibody levels as well as neutralization titers against the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain were higher after the heterologous schedule. However, Omicron-specific neutralizing antibodies were not detectable after two doses in either group, indicating that a third vaccine dose is needed to enhance cross-reactive antibodies against currently circulating and emerging variants of concern.

Efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Older adults are more susceptible to severe health outcomes for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Universal vaccination has become a trend, but there are still doubts and research gaps regarding the COVID-19 vaccination in the elderly. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in older people aged ≥ 55 years and their influencing factors.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials from inception to April 9, 2022, were systematically searched in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. We estimated summary relative risk (RR), rates, or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using random-effects meta-analysis. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022314456).

Results

Of the 32 eligible studies, 9, 21, and 25 were analyzed for efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety, respectively. In older adults, vaccination was efficacious against COVID-19 (79.49%, 95% CI: 60.55−89.34), with excellent seroconversion rate (92.64%, 95% CI: 86.77−96.91) and geometric mean titer (GMT) (SMD 3.56, 95% CI: 2.80−4.31) of neutralizing antibodies, and provided a significant protection rate against severe disease (87.01%, 50.80−96.57). Subgroup and meta-regression analyses consistently found vaccine types and the number of doses to be primary influencing factors for efficacy and immunogenicity. Specifically, mRNA vaccines showed the best efficacy (90.72%, 95% CI: 86.82−93.46), consistent with its highest seroconversion rate (98.52%, 95% CI: 93.45−99.98) and GMT (SMD 6.20, 95% CI: 2.02−10.39). Compared to the control groups, vaccination significantly increased the incidence of total adverse events (AEs) (RR 1.59, 95% CI: 1.38−1.83), including most local and systemic AEs, such as pain, fever, chill, etc. For inactivated and DNA vaccines, the incidence of any AEs was similar between vaccination and control groups (p > 0.1), while mRNA vaccines had the highest risk of most AEs (RR range from 1.74 to 7.22).

Conclusion

COVID-19 vaccines showed acceptable efficacy, immunogenicity and safety in older people, especially providing a high protection rate against severe disease. The mRNA vaccine was the most efficacious, but it is worth surveillance for some AEs it caused. Increased booster coverage in older adults is warranted, and additional studies are urgently required for longer follow-up periods and variant strains.

A critical overview of current progress for COVID-19: development of vaccines, antiviral drugs, and therapeutic antibodies

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic remains a global public health crisis, presenting a broad range of challenges. To help address some of the main problems, the scientific community has designed vaccines, diagnostic tools and therapeutics for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The rapid pace of technology development, especially with regard to vaccines, represents a stunning and historic scientific achievement. Nevertheless, many challenges remain to be overcome, such as improving vaccine and drug treatment efficacies for emergent mutant strains of SARS-CoV-2. Outbreaks of more infectious variants continue to diminish the utility of available vaccines and drugs. Thus, the effectiveness of vaccines and drugs against the most current variants is a primary consideration in the continual analyses of clinical data that supports updated regulatory decisions. The first two vaccines granted Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs), BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, still show more than 60% protection efficacy against the most widespread current SARS-CoV-2 variant, Omicron. This variant carries more than 30 mutations in the spike protein, which has largely abrogated the neutralizing effects of therapeutic antibodies. Fortunately, some neutralizing antibodies and antiviral COVID-19 drugs treatments have shown continued clinical benefits. In this review, we provide a framework for understanding the ongoing development efforts for different types of vaccines and therapeutics, including small molecule and antibody drugs. The ripple effects of newly emergent variants, including updates to vaccines and drug repurposing efforts, are summarized. In addition, we summarize the clinical trials supporting the development and distribution of vaccines, small molecule drugs, and therapeutic antibodies with broad-spectrum activity against SARS-CoV-2 strains.

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody quantitative titer reporting using the World Health Organization International Standard Units by four commercial assays

The accurate measurement of serological response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is needed to correlate responses with effective protective immunity. The World Health Organization (WHO) has created an international standard to allow harmonization of immune response assessment to an arbitrary unit across different commercial assays; however, the accuracy of reporting of SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody titers in international standard units (BAU or IU/mL) from commercial assays is not well studied. Here, we report the performance comparison of four quantitative commercial assays testing for SARS-CoV-2 spike immunoglobins using the WHO's international standard. Sera, EDTA-plasma and heparinized plasma collected from individuals who are vaccine naïve or received BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna) or ChAdOx1-S (Oxford-AstraZeneca) were tested using Abbott Architect AdviseDx SARS-CoV-2 IgG II, DiaSorin LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG, Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S and GenScript cPass SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization assays. The sensitivities ranged from 90% to 100%, and specificities from 88% to 100%. These four assays had excellent agreement (0.79–0.93) and correlation (0.87–0.97); however, Passing-Bablok regression analysis indicated that data generated by these assays were not comparable. Our data suggests that natural SARS-CoV-2 infection elicited a greater antibody response compared to vaccines, evident by a significantly higher neutralizing antibody titer in unvaccinated individuals who seroconverted.

3D Lung Tissue Models for Studies on SARS-CoV-2 Pathophysiology and Therapeutics

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has provoked more than six million deaths worldwide and continues to pose a major threat to global health. Enormous efforts have been made by researchers around the world to elucidate COVID-19 pathophysiology, design efficacious therapy and develop new vaccines to control the pandemic. To this end, experimental models are essential. While animal models and conventional cell cultures have been widely utilized during these research endeavors, they often do not adequately reflect the human responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Therefore, models that emulate with high fidelity the SARS-CoV-2 infection in human organs are needed for discovering new antiviral drugs and vaccines against COVID-19. Three-dimensional (3D) cell cultures, such as lung organoids and bioengineered organs-on-chips, are emerging as crucial tools for research on respiratory diseases. The lung airway, small airway and alveolus organ chips have been successfully used for studies on lung response to infection by various pathogens, including corona and influenza A viruses. In this review, we provide an overview of these new tools and their use in studies on COVID-19 pathogenesis and drug testing. We also discuss the limitations of the existing models and indicate some improvements for their use in research against COVID-19 as well as future emerging epidemics.

Development of antibody resistance in emerging mutant strains of SARS CoV-2: Impediment for COVID-19 vaccines

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), a highly infectious agent associated with unprecedented morbidity and mortality. A failure to stop growth of COVID-19-linked morbidity rates is caused by SARS-CoV-2 mutations and the emergence of new highly virulent SARS-CoV-2 strains. Several acquired SARS-CoV-2 mutations reflect viral adaptations to host immune defence. Mutations in the virus Spike-protein were associated with the lowered effectiveness of current preventive therapies, including vaccines. Recent in vitro studies detected diminished neutralisation capacity of vaccine-induced antibodies, which are targeted to bind Spike receptor-binding and N-terminal domains in the emerging strains. Lower than expected inhibitory activity of antibodies was reported against viruses with E484K Spike mutation, including B.1.1.7 (UK), P.1 (Brazil), B.1.351 (South African), and new Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) with E484A mutation. The vaccine effectiveness is yet to be examined against new mutant strains of SARS-CoV-2 originating in Europe, Nigeria, Brazil, South Africa, and India. To prevent the loss of anti-viral protection in vivo, often defined as antibody resistance, it is required to target highly conserved viral sequences (including Spike protein) and enhance the potency of antibody cocktails. In this review, we assess the reported mutation-acquiring potential of coronaviruses and compare efficacies of current COVID-19 vaccines against 'parent' and 'mutant' strains of SARS-CoV-2 (Kappa (B.1.617.1), Delta (B.1.617.2), and Omicron (B.1.1.529)).

Shedding of infectious SARS-CoV-2 despite vaccination

The SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant of Concern is highly transmissible and contains mutations that confer partial immune escape. The emergence of Delta in North America caused the first surge in COVID-19 cases after SARS-CoV-2 vaccines became widely available. To determine whether individuals infected despite vaccination might be capable of transmitting SARS-CoV-2, we compared RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) data from 20,431 test-positive anterior nasal swab specimens from fully vaccinated (n = 9,347) or unvaccinated (n = 11,084) individuals tested at a single commercial laboratory during the interval 28 June- 1 December 2021 when Delta variants were predominant. We observed no significant effect of vaccine status alone on Ct value, nor when controlling for vaccine product or sex. Testing a subset of low-Ct (<25) samples, we detected infectious virus at similar rates, and at similar titers, in specimens from vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. These data indicate that vaccinated individuals infected with Delta variants are capable of shedding infectious SARS-CoV-2 and could play a role in spreading COVID-19.

Heterologous Ad.26.COV2.S versus homologous BNT162b2/mRNA-1273 as a third dose in solid organ transplant recipients seronegative after two-dose mRNA vaccination

Heterologous vaccination ("mixing platforms") for the third (D3) dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine is a potential strategy to improve antibody responses in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs), but data are mixed regarding potential differential immunogenicity. We assessed for differences in immunogenicity and tolerability of homologous (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273; D3-mRNA) versus heterologous (Ad.26.COV2.S; D3-JJ) D3 among 377 SARS-CoV-2-infection naïve SOTRs who remained seronegative after two mRNA vaccines. We measured anti-spike titers and used weighted Poisson regression to evaluate seroconversion and development of high-titers, comparing D3-JJ to D3-mRNA, at 1-, 3-, and 6 month post-D3. 1-month post-D3, seroconversion (63% vs. 52%, p = .3) and development of high-titers (29% vs. 25%, p = .7) were comparable between D3-JJ and D3-mRNA recipients. 3 month post-D3, D3-JJ recipients were 1.4-fold more likely to seroconvert (80% vs. 57%, weighted incidence-rate-ratio: wIRR = _1.10 1.40_1.77 , p = .006) but not more likely to develop high-titers (27% vs. 22%, wIRR = _0.44 0.92_1.93 , p = .8). 6 month post-D3, D3-JJ recipients were 1.41-fold more likely to seroconvert (88% vs. 59%, wIRR = _1.04 1.41_1.93 , p = .029) and 2.63-fold more likely to develop high-titers (59% vs. 21%, wIRR = _1.38 2.63_5.00 , p = .003). There was no differential signal in alloimmune events or reactogenicity between platforms. SOTRs without antibody response after two mRNA vaccines may derive benefit from heterologous Ad.26.COV2.S D3.

A Review on Immunological Responses to SARS-CoV-2 and Various COVID-19 Vaccine Regimens

The transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has caused serious health crises globally. So far, 7 vaccines that are already being assessed in Phase IV clinical trials are, Comirnaty/ Pfizer; Spikevax/Moderna (m RNA vaccine); Vaxzevria or Covishield; Ad26.COV2.S; Ad5-nCoV (adenoviral vector-based vaccine); CoronaVac and BBIBP-CorV (inactivated virus vaccine). Besides, there are about 280 vaccines that are undergoing preclinical and clinical trials including Sputnik-V, Covaxin or BBV152, and NVX-CoV2373. These vaccines are being studied for their immunological responses and efficiency against COVID-19, and have been reported to demonstrate effective T and B cell responses. However, the long-lasting immunity of these vaccine regimens still needs to be investigated. An in-depth understanding of the vaccine efficacy and immune control mechanism is imperative for the rational purposing and implementation of the vaccines. Hence, in this review, we have comprehensively discussed the immune response induced in COVID-19 patients, as well as in the convalescent individuals to avoid reinfection. Moreover, we have also summarized the immunological responses and prophylactic efficacy of various COVID-19 vaccine regimens. In this context, this review can give insights into the development of effective vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants in the future.

Evaluating risk factors associated with COVID-19 infections among vaccinated people early in the U.S. vaccination campaign: an observational study of five states, January-March 2021

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccines are an effective tool to prevent illness due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, infection after vaccination still occurs. We evaluated all infections identified among recipients of either the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccine in five U.S. states during January-March 2021.

METHODS

Using observational data reported to CDC, we compared the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated and unvaccinated persons, and the sex, age, and vaccine product received for individuals with vaccine breakthrough infections to those of the vaccinated population using Poisson regression models. We also compared the proportion of vaccine breakthrough cases due to a SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern to data reported to CDC's national genomic surveillance program.

RESULTS

The age-adjusted incidence of reported SARS-CoV-2 infection was 97% lower among vaccinated as compared to unvaccinated persons aged ≥ 16 years (68 vs 2252 cases per 100,000 people). Vaccinated adults aged ≥ 85 years were 1.6 times (95% CI 1.3-1.9) as likely to become infected with SARS-CoV-2 than vaccinated adults aged < 65 years. Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine recipients were 1.4 times (95% CI 1.3-1.6) as likely to experience infection compared to Moderna COVID-19 recipients. The proportion of infections among vaccinated persons caused by SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern was similar to the proportion of circulating viruses identified as variants of concern in the five states during the same time.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccinated persons had a substantially lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to unvaccinated persons. Adults aged ≥ 85 years and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine recipients had a higher risk of infection following vaccination. We provide an analytic framework for ongoing evaluation of patterns associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated persons using observational surveillance and immunization data. Our findings reinforce the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing infection in real-world settings.

Covid-19, an unfinished story

The Covid-19 pandemic appeared in China in December 2019 as a cluster of transmissible pneumonia caused by a new betacoronavirus. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared it a pandemic. Covid-19 is a mild infection in 80% of cases, serious in 15% and critical in 5%. Symptomatic forms include a first phase of flu-like viral invasion, and at times a second phase, dysimmune and inflammatory, with acute respiratory distress syndrome, multiorgan failure and thromboembolic complications. Degree of severity is related to age and comorbidities. SARS-CoV-2 is the third highly pathogenic Betacoronavirus to cross the species barrier. Its genome, an RNA of 29,903 nucleotides, shows strong homogeneity with bat coronaviruses from southern China, but the conditions for its passage in humans have yet to be elucidated. Mutations can give rise to variants of concern (VOC) that are more transmissible and able to evade the host's immune response. Several VOCs have succeeded and replaced one another: Alpha in October 2020, Beta and Gamma in December 2020, Delta in spring 2021 and Omicron in November 2021. The Covid-19 pandemic has evolved in five waves of unequal amplitude and severity, with geographical disparities. Worldwide, it has caused 395,000,000 confirmed cases including 5,700,000 deaths. Epidemiological surveillance applies several indicators (incidence rate, test positivity rate, effective R and occupancy rate of intensive care beds) supplemented by genomic monitoring to detect variants by sequencing. Non-pharmacological measures, particularly face mask wearing, have been effective in preventing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Few currently available drugs have proven useful, with the exception of dexamethazone for patients requiring oxygen therapy. Development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines began early on many platforms. Innovation was brought about by the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna messenger RNA vaccines, which claim protective efficacy of 95% and 94.1% respectively, far higher than the 70% minimum set by the WHO. Governments have hesitated between two strategies, mitigation and suppression. The second has been favored in critical periods such as April 2020, when 2.5 billion people throughout the world were confined. Vaccination campaigns got underway at the end of December 2020 and progressed without reaching sufficient herd immunity, leading some nations to consider compulsory vaccination or to require a vaccine or health pass, in order for persons to access different activities. Will the pandemic stop with Omicron and become endemic? This part of the Covid-19 story remains to be told.

Clinical Performance Characteristics of the Swift Normalase Amplicon Panel for Sensitive Recovery of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Genomes

Amplicon-based sequencing methods are central in characterizing the diversity, transmission, and evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but need to be rigorously assessed for clinical utility. Herein, we validated the Swift Biosciences' SARS-CoV-2 Swift Normalase Amplicon Panels using remnant clinical specimens. High-quality genomes meeting our established library and sequence quality criteria were recovered from positive specimens, with 95% limit of detection of 40.08 SARS-CoV-2 copies/PCR. Breadth of genome recovery was evaluated across a range of CT values (11.3 to 36.7; median, 21.6). Of 428 positive samples, 413 (96.5%) generated genomes with <10% unknown bases, with a mean genome coverage of 13,545× ± SD 8382×. No genomes were recovered from PCR-negative specimens (n = 30) or from specimens positive for non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory viruses (n = 20). Compared with whole-genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing (n = 14) or Sanger sequencing for the spike gene (n = 11), pairwise identity between consensus sequences was 100% in all cases, with highly concordant allele frequencies (R2 = 0.99) between Swift and shotgun libraries. When samples from different clades were mixed at varying ratios, expected variants were detected even in 1:99 mixtures. When deployed as a clinical test, 268 tests were performed in the first 23 weeks, with a median turnaround time of 11 days, ordered primarily for outbreak investigations and infection control.

Evaluation of safety and immunogenicity of receptor-binding domain-based COVID-19 vaccine (Corbevax) to select the optimum formulation in open-label, multicentre, and randomised phase-1/2 and phase-2 clinical trials

Background

We assessed the efficacy of a receptor-binding domain (RBD)-based protein subunit COVID-19 vaccine.

Methods

A randomised Phase-1/2 trial followed by a Phase-2 trial were conducted to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the COVID-19 vaccine Corbevax and select to an optimum formulation. Healthy adults (n=460) without COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Phase-1/2 study were randomly divided into four vaccine formulation groups.

Findings

A low incidence of adverse events was reported post-vaccination. All formulations showed similar profiles of humoral and cellular immune responses that were associated with the content of CpG1018 adjuvant in the vaccine. In the Phase-2 study, 750 µg of CpG1018 showed significant improvement (> 4-fold increase from baseline) in immune responses, including the titres of anti-RBD IgG and neutralising antibody (nAb), and cellular immune responses, while maintaining the safety profile. Antibodies persisted consistently for 12 months after the second dose of vaccine.

Interpretations

Corbevax (two-dose schedule with 28 days of interval between doses) was well tolerated with no observed safety concerns. Previous observations from efficacy studies by Moderna and AstraZeneca and the correlation between nAb titres post-vaccination and a human convalescent serum panel showed that Corbevax induced significantly high nAb titres. These studies were prospectively registered with the Clinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI/2021/06/034014 and CTRI/2020/11/029032).

Funding

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, BIRAC-Division of Department of Biotechnology, Govt of India, and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations funded this study.

BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is safe in a setting of patients on biologic therapy with inflammatory bowel diseases: a monocentric real-life study

OBJECTIVES

: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease were excluded from trials that led to the approval of anti-COVID-19 vaccines and are worthy of real-life studies providing information on the safety of these vaccines in this clinical setting.

METHODS

: A prospective observational study was performed to estimate BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine local and systemic adverse events (AEs) incidence related to administration in patients with inflammatory bowel disease through a questionnaire administered at the first, second, and third doses. Disease activity by Mayo Partial Score and Harvey-Bradshaw Index was also evaluated.

RESULTS

80 patients with a median age of 47.5 years were initially enrolled. The local AEs rate was 26.25%, 58.75%, and 28.37% at the first, second, and third doses of the vaccine, respectively. In contrast, the systemic AEs rate was 52.2%, 48.75%, and 43.24%. Clinic-demographic predictor variables for AEs were not identified. Vaccination did not affect disease activity and no statistically significant difference in disease activity index scores was observed between the three doses. No serious adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSION

This vaccine is safe in a population of patients with inflammatory bowel disease and, therefore, can be safely administered in this clinical setting.

Correlates of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease

Antibodies against epitopes in S1 give the most accurate CoP against infection by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. Measurement of those antibodies by neutralization or binding assays both have predictive value, with binding antibody titers giving the highest statistical correlation. However, the protective functions of antibodies are multiple. Antibodies with multiple functions other than neutralization influence efficacy. The role of cellular responses can be discerned with respect to CD4+ T cells and their augmentation of antibodies, and with respect to CD8+ cells with regard to control of viral replication, particularly in the presence of insufficient antibody. More information is needed on mucosal responses.

Efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Several vaccines showed a good safety profile and significant efficacy against COVID-19. Moreover, in the absence of direct head to head comparison between COVID-19 vaccines, a network meta-analysis that indirectly compares between them is needed.

METHODS

Databases PubMed, CENTRAL, medRxiv, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched. Studies were included if they were placebo-controlled clinical trials and reported the safety profile and/or effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials and the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for nonrandomized trials.

RESULTS

Forty-nine clinical trials that included 421,173 participants and assessed 28 vaccines were included in this network meta-analysis. The network meta-analysis showed that Pfizer is the most effective in preventing COVID-19 infection whereas the Sputnik Vaccine was the most effective in preventing severe COVID-19 infection. In terms of the local and systemic side, the Sinopharm and V-01 vaccines were the safest.

CONCLUSION

We found that almost all of the vaccines included in this study crossed the threshold of 50% efficacy. However, some of them did not reach the previously mentioned threshold against the B.1.351 variant while the remainder have not yet investigated vaccine efficacy against this variant. Since each vaccine has its own strong and weak points, we strongly advocate continued vaccination efforts in individualized manner that recommend the best vaccine for each group in the community which is abundantly required to save lives and to avert the emergence of future variants.

Immunogenicity and efficacy of Ad26.COV2.S: An adenoviral vector-based COVID-19 vaccine

Since its emergence in late 2019, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused substantial morbidity and mortality. Despite the availability of efficacious vaccines, new variants with reduced sensitivity to vaccine-induced protection are a troubling new reality. The Ad26.COV2.S vaccine is a recombinant, replication-incompetent human adenovirus type 26 vector encoding a full-length, membrane-bound severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein in a prefusion-stabilized conformation. This review discusses the immunogenicity and efficacy of Ad26.COV2.S as a single-dose primary vaccination and as a homologous or heterologous booster vaccination. Ad26.COV2.S elicits broad humoral and cellular immune responses, which are associated with protective efficacy/effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection, moderate to severe/critical COVID-19, and COVID-19-related hospitalization and death, including against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. The humoral immune responses elicited by Ad26.COV2.S vaccination are durable, continue to increase for at least 2-3 months postvaccination, and involve a range of functional antibodies. Ad26.COV2.S given as a heterologous booster to mRNA vaccine-primed individuals markedly increases humoral and cellular immune responses. The use of Ad26.COV2.S as primary vaccination and as part of booster regimens is supporting the ongoing efforts to control and mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic.

Insights into COVID-19 vaccines development: Translation from benchside to bedside

Over the past decades, the rapid pace of vaccine development saved 37 million lives, mostly children. The ongoing corona virus disease (COVID-19) pandemic caused the death of more than 4 million worldwide. During 2020, to encounter the pandemic, scientists developed more than 300 vaccines projects against SARS-CoV (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2). In 2021, the results emerging from the clinical trials led to the approval and rollout of few vaccines in different countries. To date, at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine has been received by more than 3.81 billion people worldwide, equal to about 49.7 percent of the world population. This review was written to the aim of providing a snapshot of COVID-19 disease, highlighting the well-known vaccines, and, finally understanding the effect of mix and match vaccines from different types.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in children and adolescents: Can immunization prevent hospitalization?

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its variants of concern can infect people of all ages and can cause severe diseases in children, such as encephalitis, which require intensive care. Therefore, vaccines are urgently required to prevent severe disease in all age groups. We reviewed the safety and efficacy profiles of mRNA vaccines-BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273-demonstrated by clinical trials or observed in the real world. mRNA-1273 is effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection in preschool children (6 months-6 years old). Both BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 are effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection in school-aged children and adolescents, thereby preventing post-coronavirus disease (COVID) conditions. The common side effects of vaccination are pain at the injection site, fatigue, and headache. Myocarditis and pericarditis are uncommon. Monitoring post-vaccination troponin levels may help prevent severe cardiac events. The SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus mutates its genome to overcome the herd immunity provided by mass vaccinations; therefore, we may need to develop new generations of vaccines, such as those using viral nucleocapsid proteins as antigens. In conclusion, the mRNA vaccines are generally safe and effective in preventing severe diseases and hospitalization among children and adolescents.

Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccines

Immunological memory is the basis of protective immunity provided by vaccines and previous infections. Immunological memory can develop from multiple branches of the adaptive immune system, including CD4 T cells, CD8 T cells, B cells, and long-lasting antibody responses. Extraordinary progress has been made in understanding memory to SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccines, addressing development; quantitative and qualitative features of different cellular and anatomical compartments; and durability of each cellular component and antibodies. Given the sophistication of the measurements; the size of the human studies; the use of longitudinal samples and cross-sectional studies; and head-to-head comparisons between infection and vaccines or between multiple vaccines, the understanding of immune memory for 1 year to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccines already supersedes that of any other acute infectious disease. This knowledge may help inform public policies regarding COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines, as well as the scientific development of future vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and other diseases.

Viral vector and nucleic acid vaccines against COVID-19: A narrative review

After about 2 years since the first detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 that resulted in a worldwide pandemic, 6.2 million deaths have been recorded. As a result, there is an urgent need for the development of a safe and effective vaccine for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Endeavors for the production of effective vaccines inexhaustibly are continuing. At present according to the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 vaccine tracker and landscape, 153 vaccine candidates are developing in the clinical phase all over the world. Some new and exciting platforms are nucleic acid-based vaccines such as Pfizer Biontech and Moderna vaccines consisting of a messenger RNA (mRNA) encoding a viral spike protein in host cells. Another novel vaccine platform is viral vector vaccine candidates that could be replicating or nonreplicating. These types of vaccines that have a harmless viral vector like adenovirus contain a genome encoding the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, which induces significant immune responses. This technology of vaccine manufacturing has previously been used in many human clinical trials conducted for adenoviral vector-based vaccines against different infectious agents, including Ebola virus, Zika virus, HIV, and malaria. In this paper, we have a review of nucleic acid-based vaccines that are passing their phase 3 and 4 clinical trials and discuss their efficiency and adverse effects.

Measuring Vaccine Efficacy Against Infection and Disease in Clinical Trials: Sources and Magnitude of Bias in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccine Efficacy Estimates

BACKGROUND

Phase III trials have estimated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine efficacy (VE) against symptomatic and asymptomatic infection. We explore the direction and magnitude of potential biases in these estimates and their implications for vaccine protection against infection and against disease in breakthrough infections.

METHODS

We developed a mathematical model that accounts for natural and vaccine-induced immunity, changes in serostatus, and imperfect sensitivity and specificity of tests for infection and antibodies. We estimated expected biases in VE against symptomatic, asymptomatic, and any severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections and against disease following infection for a range of vaccine characteristics and measurement approaches, and the likely overall biases for published trial results that included asymptomatic infections.

RESULTS

VE against asymptomatic infection measured by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or serology is expected to be low or negative for vaccines that prevent disease but not infection. VE against any infection is overestimated when asymptomatic infections are less likely to be detected than symptomatic infections and the vaccine protects against symptom development. A competing bias toward underestimation arises for estimates based on tests with imperfect specificity, especially when testing is performed frequently. Our model indicates considerable uncertainty in Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 and Janssen Ad26.COV2.S VE against any infection, with slightly higher than published, bias-adjusted values of 59.0% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 38.4-77.1) and 70.9% (95% UI 49.8-80.7), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple biases are likely to influence COVID-19 VE estimates, potentially explaining the observed difference between ChAdOx1 and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines. These biases should be considered when interpreting both efficacy and effectiveness study results.

Current Vaccine Platforms in Enhancing T-Cell Response

The induction of T cell-mediated immunity is crucial in vaccine development. The most effective vaccine is likely to employ both cellular and humoral immune responses. The efficacy of a vaccine depends on T cells activated by antigen-presenting cells. T cells also play a critical role in the duration and cross-reactivity of vaccines. Moreover, pre-existing T-cell immunity is associated with a decreased severity of infectious diseases. Many technical and delivery platforms have been designed to induce T cell-mediated vaccine immunity. The immunogenicity of vaccines is enhanced by controlling the kinetics and targeted delivery. Viral vectors are attractive tools that enable the intracellular expression of foreign antigens and induce robust immunity. However, it is necessary to select an appropriate viral vector considering the existing anti-vector immunity that impairs vaccine efficacy. mRNA vaccines have the advantage of rapid and low-cost manufacturing and have been approved for clinical use as COVID-19 vaccines for the first time. mRNA modification and nanomaterial encapsulation can help address mRNA instability and translation efficacy. This review summarizes the T cell responses of vaccines against various infectious diseases based on vaccine technologies and delivery platforms and discusses the future directions of these cutting-edge platforms.

Vaccines based on the replication-deficient simian adenoviral vector ChAdOx1: Standardized template with key considerations for a risk/benefit assessment

Replication-deficient adenoviral vectors have been under investigation as a platform technology for vaccine development for several years and have recently been successfully deployed as an effective COVID-19 counter measure. A replication-deficient adenoviral vector based on the simian adenovirus type Y25 and named ChAdOx1 has been evaluated in several clinical trials since 2012. The Brighton Collaboration Benefit-Risk Assessment of VAccines by TechnolOgy (BRAVATO) was formed to evaluate the safety and other key features of new platform technology vaccines. This manuscript reviews key features of the ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines. The simian adenovirus Y25 was chosen as a strategy to circumvent pre-existing immunity to common human adenovirus serotypes which could impair immune responses induced by adenoviral vectored vaccines. Deletion of the E1 gene renders the ChAdOx1 vector replication incompetent and further genetic engineering of the E3 and E4 genes allows for increased insertional capability and optimizes vaccine manufacturing processes. ChAdOx1 vectored vaccines can be manufactured in E1 complementing cell lines at scale and are thermostable. The first ChAdOx1 vectored vaccines approved for human use, against SARS-CoV-2, received emergency use authorization in the UK on 30th December 2020, and is now approved in more than 180 countries. Safety data were compiled from phase I-III clinical trials of ChAdOx1 vectored vaccines expressing different antigens (influenza, tuberculosis, malaria, meningococcal B, prostate cancer, MERS-CoV, Chikungunya, Zika and SARS-CoV-2), conducted by the University of Oxford, as well as post marketing surveillance data for the COVID-19 Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. Overall, ChAdOx1 vectored vaccines have been well tolerated. Very rarely, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS), capillary leak syndrome (CLS), immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), and Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) have been reported following mass administration of the COVID-19 Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. The benefits of this COVID-19 vaccination have outweighed the risks of serious adverse events in most settings, especially with mitigation of risks when possible. Extensive immunogenicity clinical evaluation of ChAdOx1 vectored vaccines reveal strong, durable humoral and cellular immune responses to date; studies to refine the COVID-19 protection (e.g., via homologous/heterologous booster, fractional dose) are also underway. New prophylactic and therapeutic vaccines based on the ChAdOx1 vector are currently undergoing pre-clinical and clinical assessment, including vaccines against viral hemorrhagic fevers, Nipah virus, HIV, Hepatitis B, amongst others.

COVID-19 and vaccination: myths vs science

INTRODUCTION

Several vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been developed since the inception of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in December 2019, at unprecedented speed. However, these rapidly developed vaccines raised many questions related to the efficacy and safety of vaccines in different communities across the globe. Various hypotheses regarding COVID-19 and its vaccines were generated, and many of them have also been answered with scientific evidence. Still, there are many myths/misinformation related to COVID-19 and its vaccines, which create hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccination, and must be addressed critically to achieve success in the battle against the pandemic.

AREA COVERED

The development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines against COVID-19, their safety and efficacy, and myths/misinformation relating to COVID-19 and vaccines are presented.

EXPERT OPINION

In this pandemic we have seen a global collaborative effort of researchers, governments, and industry, supported by billions of dollars in funding, have allowed the development of vaccines far more quickly than in the past. Vaccines go through rigorous testing, analysis, and evaluations in clinical settings prior to their approval, even if they are approved for emergency use. Despite the myths, vaccination represents an important strategy to get back to normality.

COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials: A Bird’s Eye Perspective

Several Phase-III clinical studies investigating vaccine safety and effectiveness have been published a year following the first breakout of the COVID-19 pandemic. These vaccine candidates were produced using a variety of vaccination technologies, including mRNA, recombinant protein, adenoviral vector, and inactivated virus-based platforms, by various research organizations and pharmaceutical firms. Despite many successful clinical studies, participants are restricted by trial inclusion and exclusion criteria, geographic location, and the current state of the virus epidemic. Many concerns remain, particularly for specific populations such as the elderly, women who are pregnant or nursing, and teenagers. Vaccine effectiveness against asymptomatic infection and particular viral variations, on the other hand, is still largely unclear. This review will focus on vaccination candidates that have completed Phase-III clinical trials and will examine the scientific evidence that has been gathered so far for these vaccine candidates for various subgroups of individuals and virus variations.

The epitranscriptome of Vero cells infected with SARS-CoV-2 assessed by direct RNA sequencing reveals m6A pattern changes and DRACH motif biases in viral and cellular RNAs

The epitranscriptomics of the SARS-CoV-2 infected cell reveals its response to viral replication. Among various types of RNA nucleotide modifications, the m6A is the most common and is involved in several crucial processes of RNA intracellular location, maturation, half-life and translatability. This epitranscriptome contains a mixture of viral RNAs and cellular transcripts. In a previous study we presented the analysis of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA m6A methylation based on direct RNA sequencing and characterized DRACH motif mutations in different viral lineages. Here we present the analysis of the m6A transcript methylation of Vero cells (derived from African Green Monkeys) and Calu-3 cells (human) upon infection by SARS-CoV-2 using direct RNA sequencing data. Analysis of these data by nonparametric statistics and two computational methods (m6anet and EpiNano) show that m6A levels are higher in RNAs of infected cells. Functional enrichment analysis reveals increased m6A methylation of transcripts involved in translation, peptide and amine metabolism. This analysis allowed the identification of differentially methylated transcripts and m6A unique sites in the infected cell transcripts. Results here presented indicate that the cell response to viral infection not only changes the levels of mRNAs, as previously shown, but also its epitranscriptional pattern. Also, transcriptome-wide analysis shows strong nucleotide biases in DRACH motifs of cellular transcripts, both in Vero and Calu-3 cells, which use the signature GGACU whereas in viral RNAs the signature is GAACU. We hypothesize that the differences of DRACH motif biases, might force the convergent evolution of the viral genome resulting in better adaptation to target sequence preferences of writer, reader and eraser enzymes. To our knowledge, this is the first report on m6A epitranscriptome of the SARS-CoV-2 infected Vero cells by direct RNA sequencing, which is the sensu stricto RNA-seq.

Dynamics of the Immune response in Hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 Infected Cancer Patients

Seroconversion rates were compared between oncological and non-oncological patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 during a 14-day hospitalization time. All COVID-19 non-oncological and solid malignancies patients reached 100% seroconversion at day 14, while less than half of the hematological patients were seroconverted at the same time point. Despite the limited number and variability of the patient's cohort, we conclude that there is a delayed seroconversion in the hematological malignancies group, which may be linked to changes in the hematological parameters, immune suppression and/or oncological treatments that are typically associated with these patients.

Drug hypersensitivity, in vitro tools, biomarkers, and burden with COVID-19 vaccines

Hypersensitivity reactions to drugs are increasing worldwide. They display a large degree of variability in the immunological mechanisms involved, which impacts both disease severity and the optimal diagnostic procedure. Therefore, drug hypersensitivity diagnosis relies on both in vitro and in vivo assessments, although most of the methods are not well standardized. Moreover, several biomarkers can be used as valuable parameters for precision medicine that provide information on the endotypes, diagnosis, prognosis, and prediction of drug hypersensitivity development, as well on the identification of therapeutic targets and treatment efficacy monitoring. Furthermore, in the last 2 years, the SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus) pandemic has had an important impact on health system, leading us to update approaches on how to manage hypersensitivity reactions to drugs used for its treatment and on COVID-19 (Coronavirus disease) vaccines used for its prevention. This article reviews recent advances in these 3 areas regarding drug hypersensitivity: in vitro tools for drug hypersensitivity diagnosis, recently identified biomarkers that could guide clinical decision making and management of hypersensitivity reactions to drugs and vaccines used for COVID-19.

Thermal stabilization of diverse biologics using reversible hydrogels

Improving the thermal stability of biologics, including vaccines, is critical to reduce the economic costs and health risks associated with the cold chain. Here, we designed a versatile, safe, and easy-to-use reversible PEG-based hydrogel platform formed via dynamic covalent boronic ester cross-linking for the encapsulation, stabilization, and on-demand release of biologics. Using these reversible hydrogels, we thermally stabilized a wide range of biologics up to 65°C, including model enzymes, heat-sensitive clinical diagnostic enzymes (DNA gyrase and topoisomerase I), protein-based vaccines (H5N1 hemagglutinin), and whole viruses (adenovirus type 5). Our data support a generalized protection mechanism for the thermal stabilization of diverse biologics using direct encapsulation in reversible hydrogels. Furthermore, preliminary toxicology data suggest that the components of our hydrogel are safe for in vivo use. Our reversible hydrogel platform offers a simple material solution to mitigate the costs and risks associated with reliance on a continuous cold chain for biologic transport and storage.

Individualized, heterologous chimpanzee adenovirus and self-amplifying mRNA neoantigen vaccine for advanced metastatic solid tumors: phase 1 trial interim results

Checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapies provide limited benefit to patients with tumors of low immune reactivity. T cell-inducing vaccines hold promise to exert long-lasting disease control in combination with CPI therapy. Safety, tolerability and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of an individualized, heterologous chimpanzee adenovirus (ChAd68) and self-amplifying mRNA (samRNA)-based neoantigen vaccine in combination with nivolumab and ipilimumab were assessed as primary endpoints in an ongoing phase 1/2 study in patients with advanced metastatic solid tumors (NCT03639714). The individualized vaccine regimen was safe and well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) >10% included pyrexia, fatigue, musculoskeletal and injection site pain and diarrhea. Serious TRAEs included one count each of pyrexia, duodenitis, increased transaminases and hyperthyroidism. The RP2D was 10¹² viral particles (VP) ChAd68 and 30 µg samRNA. Secondary endpoints included immunogenicity, feasibility of manufacturing and overall survival (OS). Vaccine manufacturing was feasible, with vaccination inducing long-lasting neoantigen-specific CD8 T cell responses. Several patients with microsatellite-stable colorectal cancer (MSS-CRC) had improved OS. Exploratory biomarker analyses showed decreased circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patients with prolonged OS. Although small study size limits statistical and translational analyses, the increased OS observed in MSS-CRC warrants further exploration in larger randomized studies.

Vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory pathology in COVID-19 hamsters after TH2-biased immunization

Vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) is a severe complication for some respiratory infections. To investigate the potential for VAERD induction in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), we evaluate two vaccine leads utilizing a severe hamster infection model: a T helper type 1 (T_H1)-biased measles vaccine-derived candidate and a T_H2-biased alum-adjuvanted, non-stabilized spike protein. The measles virus (MeV)-derived vaccine protects the animals, but the protein lead induces VAERD, which can be alleviated by dexamethasone treatment. Bulk transcriptomic analysis reveals that our protein vaccine prepares enhanced host gene dysregulation in the lung, exclusively up-regulating mRNAs encoding the eosinophil attractant CCL-11, T_H2-driving interleukin (IL)-19, or T_H2 cytokines IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13. Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) identifies lung macrophages or lymphoid cells as sources, respectively. Our findings imply that VAERD is caused by the concerted action of hyperstimulated macrophages and T_H2 cytokine-secreting lymphoid cells and potentially links VAERD to antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). In summary, we identify the cytokine drivers and cellular contributors that mediate VAERD after T_H2-biased vaccination.

Viral vector vaccines

Over the past two years, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has highlighted the impact that emerging pathogens can have on global health. The development of new and effective vaccine technologies is vital in the fight against such threats. Viral vectors are a relatively new vaccine platform that relies on recombinant viruses to deliver selected immunogens into the host. In response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the development and subsequent rollout of adenoviral vector vaccines has shown the utility, impact, scalability and efficacy of this platform. Shown to elicit strong cellular and humoral immune responses in diverse populations, these vaccine vectors will be an important approach against infectious diseases in the future.

Comparative Profiles of SARS-CoV-2 Spike-Specific Human Milk Antibodies Elicited by mRNA- and Adenovirus-Based COVID-19 Vaccines

Background: Numerous COVID-19 vaccines are authorized globally. To date, ∼71% of doses comprise the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, and ∼17% the Moderna/NIH vaccine, both of which are messenger RNA (mRNA) based. The chimpanzee Ad-based Oxford/AstraZeneca (AZ) vaccine comprises ∼9%, while the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen (J&J) human adenovirus (Ad26) vaccine ranks fourth at ∼2%. No COVID-19 vaccine is yet available for children 0-4. One method to protect this population may be passive immunization through antibodies (Abs) provided in the milk of a lactating vaccinated person. Our early work and other reports have demonstrated that unlike the post-SARS-CoV-2 infection milk Ab profile, which is rich in specific secretory (s)IgA, the vaccine response is highly IgG dominant. Results: In this report, we present a comparative assessment of the milk Ab response elicited by Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, and AZ vaccines. This analysis revealed 86-100% of mRNA vaccine recipient milk exhibited Spike-specific IgG endpoint titers, which were 12- to 28-fold higher than those measured for Ad vaccine recipient milk. Ad-based vaccines elicited Spike-specific milk IgG in only 33-38% of recipients. Specific IgA was measured in 52-71% of mRNA vaccine recipient milk and 17-23% of Ad vaccine recipient milk. J&J recipient milk exhibited significantly lower IgA than Moderna recipients, and AZ recipients exhibited significantly lower IgA titers than Moderna and Pfizer. Less than 50% of milk of any group exhibited specific secretory Ab, with Moderna recipient IgA titers measuring significantly higher than AZ. Moderna appeared to most frequently elicit greater than twofold increases in specific secretory Ab titer relative to prevaccine sample. Conclusion: These data indicate that current Ad-based COVID-19 vaccines poorly elicit Spike-specific Ab in milk compared to mRNA-based vaccines, and that mRNA vaccines are preferred for immunizing the lactating population. This study highlights the need to design vaccines better aimed at eliciting an optimal milk Ab response.

Systemic sclerosis in the time of COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic represents one of the biggest challenges of the 21st century. In addition to the general effect on society and health-care systems, patients with systemic sclerosis and their physicians face specific challenges related to the chronic nature of their disease, the involvement of multiple organs, and the use of immunosuppressive treatments. Data from registries and single centre cohorts indicate that the risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 does not seem to increase substantially in people with systemic sclerosis; conversely, severe COVID-19 outcomes are seen more frequently in these patients than in the general population. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is therefore highly recommended for patients with systemic sclerosis; however, no specific recommendations are available regarding the different vaccine platforms. Both patients and physicians should be aware that the effectiveness of vaccines might be reduced in patients taking immunosuppressive therapy, because antibody responses might be blunted, specifically in patients treated with rituximab and mycophenolate mofetil.

Durable antibody responses elicited by 1 dose of Ad26.COV2.S and substantial increase after boosting: 2 randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Ad26.COV2.S is a well-tolerated and effective vaccine against COVID-19. We evaluated durability of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies elicited by single-dose Ad26.COV2.S and the impact of boosting.

METHODS

In randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2a and phase 2 trials, participants received single-dose Ad26.COV2.S (5 × 1010 viral particles [vp]) followed by booster doses of 5 × 1010 vp or 1.25 × 1010 vp. Neutralizing antibody levels were determined by a virus neutralization assay (VNA) approximately 8-9 months after dose 1. Binding and neutralizing antibody levels were evaluated by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and pseudotyped VNA 6 months after dose 1 and 7 and 28 days after boosting.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed from phase 1/2a participants enrolled from 22 July-18 December 2020 (Cohort 1a, 18-55 years [y], N = 25; Cohort 2a, 18-55y, N = 17; Cohort 3, ≥65y, N = 22), and phase 2 participants from 14 to 22 September 2020 (18-55y and ≥ 65y, N = 73). Single-dose Ad26.COV2.S elicited stable neutralizing antibodies for at least 8-9 months and stable binding antibodies for at least 6 months, irrespective of age. A 5 × 1010 vp 2-month booster dose increased binding antibodies by 4.9- to 6.2-fold 14 days post-boost versus 28 days after initial immunization. A 6-month booster elicited a steep and robust 9-fold increase in binding antibody levels 7 days post-boost. A 5.0-fold increase in neutralizing antibodies was observed by 28 days post-boost for the Beta variant. A 1.25 × 1010 vp 6-month booster elicited a 3.6-fold increase in binding antibody levels at 7 days post-boost versus pre-boost, with a similar magnitude of post-boost responses in both age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-dose Ad26.COV2.S elicited durable antibody responses for at least 8 months and elicited immune memory. Booster-elicited binding and neutralizing antibody responses were rapid and robust, even with a quarter vaccine dose, and stronger with a longer interval since primary vaccination.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04436276, NCT04535453.

Clinical characteristics and outcome of hospitalized elderly patients with COVID- 19 after vaccine failure

We described clinical characteristics and outcome of 160 patients over 65 years (01 September to 31 August 2021) who had a first positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR- test more than 14 days after full vaccination and were hospitalized with COVID-19. Median age of included patients was 84 years, 61.2% were over 80 years; 50.6% were male and most (82.5%) has at least one comorbidity. Up to 84% received specific treatment against COVID-19, including 76.9% low-flow oxygen therapy. We found that overall mortality was 25.6% and 30.6% in those older than 80 years. A higher mortality was significantly associated with older age and treatment with tocilizumab. Our data showed that although COVID-19 vaccines continue protecting elderly patients against hospitalization and death and might improve the prognosis after hospitalization in patients with breakthrough infections, mortality in this population -especially in those older than 80 years- remains very high.

Population-wide persistent hemostatic changes after vaccination with ChAdOx1-S

Various vaccines were developed to reduce the spread of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Cov-2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. Quickly after the start of vaccination, reports emerged that anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, including ChAdOx1-S, could be associated with an increased risk of thrombosis. We investigated the hemostatic changes after ChAdOx1-S vaccination in 631 health care workers. Blood samples were collected 32 days on average after the second ChAdOx1-S vaccination, to evaluate hemostatic markers such as D-dimer, fibrinogen, α2-macroglobulin, FVIII and thrombin generation. Endothelial function was assessed by measuring Von Willebrand Factor (VWF) and active VWF. IL-6 and IL-10 were measured to study the activation of the immune system. Additionally, SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleoside and anti-spike protein antibody titers were determined. Prothrombin and fibrinogen levels were significantly reduced after vaccination (-7.5% and -16.9%, p < 0.0001). Significantly more vaccinated subjects were outside the normal range compared to controls for prothrombin (42.1% vs. 26.4%, p = 0.026) and antithrombin (23.9% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.0010). Thrombin generation indicated a more procoagulant profile, characterized by a significantly shortened lag time (-11.3%, p < 0.0001) and time-to-peak (-13.0% and p < 0.0001) and an increased peak height (32.6%, p = 0.0015) in vaccinated subjects compared to unvaccinated controls. Increased VWF (+39.5%, p < 0.0001) and active VWF levels (+24.1 %, p < 0.0001) pointed toward endothelial activation, and IL-10 levels were significantly increased (9.29 pg/mL vs. 2.43 pg/mL, p = 0.032). The persistent increase of IL-10 indicates that the immune system remains active after ChAdOx1-S vaccination. This could trigger a pathophysiological mechanism causing an increased thrombin generation profile and vascular endothelial activation, which could subsequently result in and increased risk of thrombotic events.

Waning and boosting of functional humoral immunity to SARS-CoV-2

Since the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, we have witnessed a revolution in vaccine development with the rapid emergence and deployment of both traditional and novel vaccine platforms. The inactivated CoronaVac vaccine and the mRNA-based Pfizer/BNT162b2 vaccine are among the most widely distributed vaccines, both demonstrating high, albeit variable, vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19 over time. Beyond the ability of the vaccines to generate neutralizing antibodies, antibodies can attenuate disease via their ability to recruit the cytotoxic and opsinophagocytic functions of the immune response. However, whether Fc-effector functions are induced differentially, wane with different kinetics, and are boostable, remains unknown. Here, using systems serology, we profiled the Fc-effector profiles induced by the CoronaVac and BNT162b2 vaccines, over time. Despite the significantly higher antibody functional responses induced by the BNT162b2 vaccine, CoronaVac responses waned more slowly, albeit still found at levels below those present in the systemic circulation of BNT162b2 immunized individuals. However, mRNA boosting of the CoronaVac vaccine responses resulted in the induction of significantly higher peak antibody functional responses with increased humoral breadth, including to Omicron. Collectively, the data presented here point to striking differences in vaccine platform-induced functional humoral immune responses, that wane with different kinetics, and can be functionally rescued and expanded with boosting.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, ABO blood group and risk of COVID-19: population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes between O and non-O blood groups, and by modified RNA (mRNA) and adenovirus-vectored (Ad-V) vaccines.

DESIGN

Population-based cohort study.

SETTING

All of Ontario, Canada. Linked data sets captured clinical encounters, vaccinations and laboratory testing for SARS-CoV-2.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals aged 12+ years with known ABO blood group and free of SARS-CoV-2 before 15 January 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The main exposure, first SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, was modelled in a time-varying manner. O and non-O blood group was known prior to vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 infection, and severe COVID-19 (hospitalisation or death), were assessed starting 14 days after vaccination, up to 27 June 2021.

RESULTS

2 472 261 individuals were included. 1 743 916 (70.5%) had at least one vaccination, of which 24.6% were fully vaccinated. Those vaccinated were more likely to be women, older in age, residing in a higher-income area and have higher rates of certain comorbid conditions, like cancer, diabetes and hypertension. Relative to unvaccinated, after receiving their first mRNA (adjusted HR (aHR) 0.46, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.47) or Ad-V (aHR 0.49, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.54) vaccine, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was lower, as was severe COVID-19 (aHR 0.29, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.43 (mRNA); aHR 0.29, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.33 (Ad-V)). Stratifying by blood group produced similar results. For example, after first mRNA vaccination, the aHR of severe COVID-19 was 0.31 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.36) among non-O blood groups, and 0.27 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.32) among O blood groups, relative to unvaccinated. Fully vaccinated individuals had the lowest risk of SARS-CoV-2 and severe COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 are reduced by vaccination. This effect does not vary by vaccine type or blood group, but is more pronounced among fully, than partially, vaccinated individuals.

Viral Vector Vaccine Development and Application during the COVID-19 Pandemic

With the accumulation of mutations in SARS-CoV-2 and the continuous emergence of new variants, the importance of developing safer and effective vaccines has become more prominent in combating the COVID-19 pandemic. Both traditional and genetically engineered vaccines have contributed to the prevention and control of the pandemic. However, in recent years, the trend of vaccination research has gradually transitioned from traditional to genetically engineered vaccines, with the development of viral vector vaccines attracting increasing attention. Viral vector vaccines have several unique advantages compared to other vaccine platforms. The spread of Omicron has also made the development of intranasal viral vector vaccines more urgent, as the infection site of Omicron is more prominent in the upper respiratory tract. Therefore, the present review focuses on the development of viral vector vaccines and their application during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients with 1, 2 and 3 doses of Vaccination against COVID-19 in Australia

Background

Vaccination has been shown to be highly effective in preventing death and severe disease from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) infection. Currently few studies have directly compared vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with severe COVID‐19 in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Aims

Our aim was to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of vaccine recipients and unvaccinated patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection admitted to the ICU in a nationwide setting.

Materials and Methods

Data were extracted from the Short PeRiod IncideNce sTudy of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection Australia, in 57 ICUs during Delta and Omicron predominant periods of the COVID‐19 pandemic. The primary outcome was in‐hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, and ICU mortality.

Results

2,970 patients were admitted to ICU across participating sites from 26 June 2021 to 8 February 2022. 1,134 (38.2%) patients were vaccine recipients, and 1,836 (61.8%) patients were unvaccinated. Vaccine recipients were older, more comorbid, and less likely to require organ support. Unadjusted in‐hospital mortality was greater in the vaccinated cohort. After adjusting for age, gender and comorbid status, no statistically significant association between in‐hospital or ICU mortality, and vaccination status, was apparent.

Conclusion

We found COVID‐19 infection can cause severe disease and death in vaccine recipients, though comorbid status and older age were significant contributors to mortality. Organ support requirements and the number of deaths were highest in the unvaccinated cohort.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.