Initial analysis of viral dynamics and circulating viral variants during the mRNA-1273 Phase 3 COVE trial

SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in the Nasopharynx at Time of First Infection Among Unvaccinated Individuals: A Secondary Cross-Protocol Analysis of 4 Randomized Trials

Importance

SARS-CoV-2 viral load (VL) in the nasopharynx is difficult to quantify and standardize across settings, but it may inform transmission potential and disease severity.

Objective

To characterize VL at COVID-19 diagnosis among previously uninfected and unvaccinated individuals by evaluating the association of demographic and clinical characteristics, viral variant, and trial with VL, as well as the ability of VL to predict severe disease.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This secondary cross-protocol analysis used individual-level data from placebo recipients from 4 harmonized, phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials sponsored by Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax. Participants were SARS-CoV-2 negative at baseline and acquired COVID-19 during the blinded phase of the trials. The setting included the US, Brazil, South Africa, Colombia, Argentina, Peru, Chile, and Mexico; start dates were July 27, 2020, to December 27, 2020; data cutoff dates were March 26, 2021, to July 30, 2021. Statistical analysis was performed from November 2022 to June 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Linear regression was used to assess the association of demographic and clinical characteristics, viral variant, and trial with polymerase chain reaction-measured log10 VL in nasal and/or nasopharyngeal swabs taken at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis.

Results

Among 1667 participants studied (886 [53.1%] male; 995 [59.7%] enrolled in the US; mean [SD] age, 46.7 [14.7] years; 204 [12.2%] aged 65 years or older; 196 [11.8%] American Indian or Alaska Native, 150 [9%] Black or African American, 1112 [66.7%] White; 762 [45.7%] Hispanic or Latino), median (IQR) log10 VL at diagnosis was 6.18 (4.66-7.12) log10 copies/mL. Participant characteristics and viral variant explained only 5.9% of the variability in VL. The independent factor with the highest observed differences was trial: Janssen participants had 0.54 log10 copies/mL lower mean VL vs Moderna participants (95% CI, 0.20 to 0.87 log10 copies/mL lower). In the Janssen study, which captured the largest number of COVID-19 events and variants and used the most intensive post-COVID surveillance, neither VL at diagnosis nor averaged over days 1 to 28 post diagnosis was associated with COVID-19 severity.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study of placebo recipients from 4 randomized phase 3 trials, high variability was observed in SARS-CoV-2 VL at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, and only a fraction was explained by individual participant characteristics or viral variant. These results suggest challenges for future studies of interventions seeking to influence VL and elevates the importance of standardized methods for specimen collection and viral load quantitation.

A joint Bayesian hierarchical model for estimating SARS-CoV-2 genomic and subgenomic RNA viral dynamics and seroconversion

Understanding the viral dynamics of and natural immunity to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is crucial for devising better therapeutic and prevention strategies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Here, we present a Bayesian hierarchical model that jointly estimates the genomic RNA viral load, the subgenomic RNA (sgRNA) viral load (correlated to active viral replication), and the rate and timing of seroconversion (correlated to presence of antibodies). Our proposed method accounts for the dynamical relationship and correlation structure between the two types of viral load, allows for borrowing of information between viral load and antibody data, and identifies potential correlates of viral load characteristics and propensity for seroconversion. We demonstrate the features of the joint model through application to the COVID-19 post-exposure prophylaxis study and conduct a cross-validation exercise to illustrate the model's ability to impute the sgRNA viral trajectories for people who only had genomic RNA viral load data.

Quantifying how single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine efficacy depends on Spike sequence features

In the ENSEMBLE randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (NCT04505722), estimated single-dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine efficacy (VE) was 56% against moderate to severe-critical COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 Spike sequences were determined from 484 vaccine and 1,067 placebo recipients who acquired COVID-19. In this set of prespecified analyses, we show that in Latin America, VE was significantly lower against Lambda vs. Reference and against Lambda vs. non-Lambda [family-wise error rate (FWER) p < 0.05]. VE differed by residue match vs. mismatch to the vaccine-insert at 16 amino acid positions (4 FWER p < 0.05; 12 q-value ≤ 0.20); significantly decreased with physicochemical-weighted Hamming distance to the vaccine-strain sequence for Spike, receptor-binding domain, N-terminal domain, and S1 (FWER p < 0.001); differed (FWER ≤ 0.05) by distance to the vaccine strain measured by 9 antibody-epitope escape scores and 4 NTD neutralization-impacting features; and decreased (p = 0.011) with neutralization resistance level to vaccinee sera. VE against severe-critical COVID-19 was stable across most sequence features but lower against the most distant viruses.

Evaluation of the analytical performance of the 15-minute point-of-care DASH™ SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR test

Accurate and timely diagnosis for COVID-19 diagnosis allows highly effective antiviral medications to be prescribed. The DASH™ Rapid PCR System is a sample-to-answer point-of-care platform combining state-of-the-art PCR kinetics with sequence specific hybridization. The platform's first assay, the DASH™ SARS-CoV-2/S test for anterior nares direct swab specimens, received FDA Emergency Use Authorization in March 2022 for point-of-care use. Here we report the analytical characteristics of the assay including limit of detection, dynamic range, and robustness of SARS-CoV-2 variant detection. The limit of detection was determined by testing swabs contrived with one hundred copies of wild type or Omicron BA.5 virus and detecting 20/20 and 19/20, respectively. The dynamic range was assessed with contrived swabs containing 102-106 copies; the log-linear relationship between Cq and copy input was plotted, and the qPCR efficiency calculated from the slope of the line was 101.4%. Detection of seven SARS-CoV-2 variants was demonstrated.

Stochastic interventional approach to assessing immune correlates of protection: Application to the COVE messenger RNA-1273 vaccine trial

BACKGROUND

Stochastic interventional vaccine efficacy (SVE) analysis is a new approach to correlate of protection (CoP) analysis of a phase III trial that estimates how vaccine efficacy (VE) would change under hypothetical shifts of an immune marker.

METHODS

We applied nonparametric SVE methodology to the COVE trial of messenger RNA-1273 vs placebo to evaluate post-dose 2 pseudovirus neutralizing antibody (nAb) titer against the D614G strain as a CoP against COVID-19. Secondly, we evaluated the ability of these results to predict VE against variants based on shifts of geometric mean titers to variants vs D614G. Prediction accuracy was evaluated by 13 validation studies, including 12 test-negative designs.

RESULTS

SVE analysis of COVE supported post-dose 2 D614G titer as a CoP: estimated VE ranged from 66.9% (95% confidence interval: 36.2, 82.8%) to 99.3% (99.1, 99.4%) at 10-fold decreased or increased titer shifts, respectively. The SVE estimates only weakly predicted variant-specific VE estimates (concordance correlation coefficient 0.062 for post 2-dose VE).

CONCLUSION

SVE analysis of COVE supports nAb titer as a CoP for messenger RNA vaccines. Predicting variant-specific VE proved difficult due to many limitations. Greater anti-Omicron titers may be needed for high-level protection against Omicron vs anti-D614G titers needed for high-level protection against pre-Omicron COVID-19.

Efficacy of Messenger RNA-1273 Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Acquisition in Young Adults From March to December 2021

Background

The efficacy of messenger RNA (mRNA)-1273 against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is not well defined, particularly among young adults.

Methods

Adults aged 18-29 years with no known history of SARS-CoV-2 infection or prior vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were recruited from 44 US sites from 24 March to 13 September 2021 and randomized 1:1 to immediate vaccination (receipt of 2 doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine at months 0 and 1) or the standard of care (receipt of COVID-19 vaccine). Randomized participants were followed up for SARS-CoV-2 infection measured by nasal swab testing and symptomatic COVID-19 measured by nasal swab testing plus symptom assessment and assessed for the primary efficacy outcome. A vaccine-declined observational group was also recruited from 16 June to 8 November 2021 and followed up for SARS-CoV-2 infection as specified for the randomized participants.

Results

The study enrolled 1149 in the randomized arms and 311 in the vaccine-declined group and collected >122 000 nasal swab samples. Based on randomized participants, the efficacy of 2 doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infection was 52.6% (95% confidence interval, -14.1% to 80.3%), with the majority of infections due to the Delta variant. Vaccine efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 was 71.0% (95% confidence interval, -9.5% to 92.3%). Precision was limited owing to curtailed study enrollment and off-study vaccination censoring. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the vaccine-declined group was 1.8 times higher than in the standard-of-care group.

Conclusions

mRNA-1273 vaccination reduced the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection from March to September 2021, but vaccination was only one factor influencing risk.

Clinical Trials Registration

NCT04811664.

Stochastic Interventional Vaccine Efficacy and Principal Surrogate Analyses of Antibody Markers as Correlates of Protection against Symptomatic COVID-19 in the COVE mRNA-1273 Trial

The COVE trial randomized participants to receive two doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine or placebo on Days 1 and 29 (D1, D29). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike IgG binding antibodies (bAbs), anti-receptor binding domain IgG bAbs, 50% inhibitory dilution neutralizing antibody (nAb) titers, and 80% inhibitory dilution nAb titers were measured at D29 and D57. We assessed these markers as correlates of protection (CoPs) against COVID-19 using stochastic interventional vaccine efficacy (SVE) analysis and principal surrogate (PS) analysis, frameworks not used in our previous COVE immune correlates analyses. By SVE analysis, hypothetical shifts of the D57 Spike IgG distribution from a geometric mean concentration (GMC) of 2737 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL (estimated vaccine efficacy (VE): 92.9% (95% CI: 91.7%, 93.9%)) to 274 BAU/mL or to 27,368 BAU/mL resulted in an overall estimated VE of 84.2% (79.0%, 88.1%) and 97.6% (97.4%, 97.7%), respectively. By binary marker PS analysis of Low and High subgroups (cut-point: 2094 BAU/mL), the ignorance interval (IGI) and estimated uncertainty interval (EUI) for VE were [85%, 90%] and (78%, 93%) for Low compared to [95%, 96%] and (92%, 97%) for High. By continuous marker PS analysis, the IGI and 95% EUI for VE at the 2.5th percentile (519.4 BAU/mL) vs. at the 97.5th percentile (9262.9 BAU/mL) of D57 Spike IgG concentration were [92.6%, 93.4%] and (89.2%, 95.7%) vs. [94.3%, 94.6%] and (89.7%, 97.0%). Results were similar for other D29 and D57 markers. Thus, the SVE and PS analyses additionally support all four markers at both time points as CoPs.

The dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated and vaccinated populations in Mumbai, India, between 28 December 2020 and 30 August 2021

The emergence and evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants that could compromise vaccine efficacy (VE) with re-infections in immunized individuals have necessitated continuous surveillance of VE. Here, the occurrence and dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the context of vaccination during the second wave of infection in Mumbai were evaluated. RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values of the open reading frame (ORF)/envelope (E)/nucleocapsid (N) genes obtained from a total of 42415 samples, comprising unvaccinated (96.88%) and vaccinated cases (3.12%) were analyzed between December 28, 2020, and August 30, 2021. A lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in fully vaccinated cases (5.07%) compared to partially vaccinated cases (6.5%) and unvaccinated cases (13.453%) was recorded. VE was significant after the first dose of vaccination (ORF gene p-value = 0.003429, and E/N gene p-value = 0.000866). Furthermore, VE was observed to be significant when the post-immunization (first dose) period was stratified to within 30 days (ORF gene p-value = 0.0094 and E/N gene p-value = 0.0023) and to 60 days following the second dose of vaccination (ORF gene p-value = 0.0238). Also, significantly higher efficacy was observed within individuals receiving two doses compared to a single dose (ORF gene p-value = 0.0132 and E/N gene p-value = 0.0387). The emergence of breakthrough infections was also evident (odds ratio= 0.34; 95% confidence interval= 0.27-0.43). Interestingly, viral loads trended towards being higher in some groups of partially vaccinated individuals compared to completely vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Finally, our results delineated a significantly higher incidence of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition in males, asymptomatic individuals, individuals with comorbidities, and those who were unvaccinated.

Assessing the robustness of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials: systematic review and meta-analysis, January 2023

BackgroundVaccines play a crucial role in the response to COVID-19 and their efficacy is thus of great importance.AimTo assess the robustness of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy (VE) trial results using the fragility index (FI) and fragility quotient (FQ) methodology.MethodsWe conducted a Cochrane and PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of COVID-19 VE trials published worldwide until 22 January 2023. We calculated the FI and FQ for all included studies and assessed their associations with selected trial characteristics using Wilcoxon rank sum tests and Kruskal-Wallis H tests. Spearman correlation coefficients and scatter plots were used to quantify the strength of correlation of FIs and FQs with trial characteristics.ResultsOf 6,032 screened records, we included 40 trials with 54 primary outcomes, comprising 909,404 participants with a median sample size per outcome of 13,993 (interquartile range (IQR): 8,534-25,519). The median FI and FQ was 62 (IQR: 22-123) and 0.50% (IQR: 0.24-0.92), respectively. FIs were positively associated with sample size (p < 0.001), and FQs were positively associated with type of blinding (p = 0.023). The Spearman correlation coefficient for FI with sample size was moderately strong (0.607), and weakly positive for FI and FQ with VE (0.138 and 0.161, respectively).ConclusionsThis was the largest study on trial robustness to date. Robustness of COVID-19 VE trials increased with sample size and varied considerably across several other important trial characteristics. The FI and FQ are valuable complementary parameters for the interpretation of trial results and should be reported alongside established trial outcome measures.

Comparing antibody assays as correlates of protection against COVID-19 in the COVE mRNA-1273 vaccine efficacy trial

The best assay or marker to define mRNA-1273 vaccine-induced antibodies as a correlate of protection (CoP) is unclear. In the COVE trial, participants received two doses of the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine or placebo. We previously assessed IgG binding antibodies to the spike protein (spike IgG) or receptor binding domain (RBD IgG) and pseudovirus neutralizing antibody 50 or 80% inhibitory dilution titer measured on day 29 or day 57, as correlates of risk (CoRs) and CoPs against symptomatic COVID-19 over 4 months after dose. Here, we assessed a new marker, live virus 50% microneutralization titer (LV-MN50), and compared and combined markers in multivariable analyses. LV-MN50 was an inverse CoR, with a hazard ratio of 0.39 (95% confidence interval, 0.19 to 0.83) at day 29 and 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 1.04) at day 57 per 10-fold increase. In multivariable analyses, pseudovirus neutralization titers and anti-spike binding antibodies performed best as CoRs; combining antibody markers did not improve correlates. Pseudovirus neutralization titer was the strongest independent correlate in a multivariable model. Overall, these results supported pseudovirus neutralizing and binding antibody assays as CoRs and CoPs, with the live virus assay as a weaker correlate in this sample set. Day 29 markers performed as well as day 57 markers as CoPs, which could accelerate immunogenicity and immunobridging studies.

Antibody responses to second doses of COVID-19 vaccination in lung cancer patients undergoing treatment

BACKGROUND

Several reports have revealed that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection tends to have more severe outcomes in cancer patients. Although vaccination reduces the risk of severe disease, data on antibody titers achieved by vaccination is scarce in cancer patients.

METHODS

We collected 79 blood samples (69 lung cancer patients and 10 control individuals) and conducted an anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay to compare the antibody titer achieved with current treatment. Sixty-eight patients (86%) received the BNT162 mRNA vaccine and 11 (14%) received the mRNA-1273 vaccine. They were categorized according to the current treatment: control individuals without cancer (cohort A), lung cancer patients who were treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy (cohort B), immunotherapy (cohort C), combination of cytotoxic chemotherapy and immunotherapy (cohort D), tyrosine kinase inhibitors (cohort E), and radiation therapy (cohort F).

RESULTS

Among 69 lung cancer patients (cohort B-F), 57 (83%) had adenocarcinoma, and 66 (96%) had advanced-stage cancer. In the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay, the antibody titer was significantly lower in lung cancer patients than in control individuals (p = 0.01). The median antibody titers were 161 AU/ml in control individuals and 59.9 AU/ml in lung cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibody titers after the second vaccination were lower in cancer patients than those in healthy individuals. Our findings provide essential information for understanding the benefits and necessity of additional vaccination to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in lung cancer patients.

Kinetics of the Antibody Response to Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Individuals in the Blinded Phase of the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy Trial

Background

Hybrid immunity is associated with more durable protection against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We describe the antibody responses following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.

Methods

The 55 vaccine arm COVID-19 cases diagnosed during the blinded phase of the Coronavirus Efficacy trial were matched with 55 placebo arm COVID-19 cases. Pseudovirus neutralizing antibody (nAb) activity to the ancestral strain and binding antibody (bAb) responses to nucleocapsid and spike antigens (ancestral and variants of concern [VOCs]) were assessed on disease day 1 (DD1) and 28 days later (DD29).

Results

The primary analysis set was 46 vaccine cases and 49 placebo cases with COVID-19 at least 57 days post-first dose. For vaccine group cases, there was a 1.88-fold rise in ancestral antispike bAbs 1 month post-disease onset, although 47% had no increase. The vaccine-to-placebo geometric mean ratios for DD29 antispike and antinucleocapsid bAbs were 6.9 and 0.04, respectively. DD29 mean bAb levels were higher for vaccine vs placebo cases for all VOCs. DD1 nasal viral load positively correlated with bAb levels in the vaccine group.

Conclusions

Following COVID-19, vaccinated participants had higher levels and greater breadth of antispike bAbs and higher nAb titers than unvaccinated participants. These were largely attributable to the primary immunization series.

Immune correlates of protection for SARS-CoV-2, Ebola and Nipah virus infection

Correlates of protection (CoP) are biological parameters that predict a certain level of protection against an infectious disease. Well-established correlates of protection facilitate the development and licensing of vaccines by assessing protective efficacy without the need to expose clinical trial participants to the infectious agent against which the vaccine aims to protect. Despite the fact that viruses have many features in common, correlates of protection can vary considerably amongst the same virus family and even amongst a same virus depending on the infection phase that is under consideration. Moreover, the complex interplay between the various immune cell populations that interact during infection and the high degree of genetic variation of certain pathogens, renders the identification of immune correlates of protection difficult. Some emerging and re-emerging viruses of high consequence for public health such as SARS-CoV-2, Nipah virus (NiV) and Ebola virus (EBOV) are especially challenging with regards to the identification of CoP since these pathogens have been shown to dysregulate the immune response during infection. Whereas, virus neutralising antibodies and polyfunctional T-cell responses have been shown to correlate with certain levels of protection against SARS-CoV-2, EBOV and NiV, other effector mechanisms of immunity play important roles in shaping the immune response against these pathogens, which in turn might serve as alternative correlates of protection. This review describes the different components of the adaptive and innate immune system that are activated during SARS-CoV-2, EBOV and NiV infections and that may contribute to protection and virus clearance. Overall, we highlight the immune signatures that are associated with protection against these pathogens in humans and could be used as CoP.

Efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines

BACKGROUND

Different forms of vaccines have been developed to prevent the SARS-CoV-2 virus and subsequent COVID-19 disease. Several are in widespread use globally.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines (as a full primary vaccination series or a booster dose) against SARS-CoV-2.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and the COVID-19 L·OVE platform (last search date 5 November 2021). We also searched the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, regulatory agency websites, and Retraction Watch.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing COVID-19 vaccines to placebo, no vaccine, other active vaccines, or other vaccine schedules.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for all except immunogenicity outcomes.  We synthesized data for each vaccine separately and presented summary effect estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).  MAIN RESULTS: We included and analyzed 41 RCTs assessing 12 different vaccines, including homologous and heterologous vaccine schedules and the effect of booster doses. Thirty-two RCTs were multicentre and five were multinational. The sample sizes of RCTs were 60 to 44,325 participants. Participants were aged: 18 years or older in 36 RCTs; 12 years or older in one RCT; 12 to 17 years in two RCTs; and three to 17 years in two RCTs. Twenty-nine RCTs provided results for individuals aged over 60 years, and three RCTs included immunocompromized patients. No trials included pregnant women. Sixteen RCTs had two-month follow-up or less, 20 RCTs had two to six months, and five RCTs had greater than six to 12 months or less. Eighteen reports were based on preplanned interim analyses. Overall risk of bias was low for all outcomes in eight RCTs, while 33 had concerns for at least one outcome. We identified 343 registered RCTs with results not yet available.  This abstract reports results for the critical outcomes of confirmed symptomatic COVID-19, severe and critical COVID-19, and serious adverse events only for the 10 WHO-approved vaccines. For remaining outcomes and vaccines, see main text. The evidence for mortality was generally sparse and of low or very low certainty for all WHO-approved vaccines, except AD26.COV2.S (Janssen), which probably reduces the risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.67; 1 RCT, 43,783 participants; high-certainty evidence). Confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 High-certainty evidence found that BNT162b2 (BioNtech/Fosun Pharma/Pfizer), mRNA-1273 (ModernaTx), ChAdOx1 (Oxford/AstraZeneca), Ad26.COV2.S, BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm-Beijing), and BBV152 (Bharat Biotect) reduce the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 compared to placebo (vaccine efficacy (VE): BNT162b2: 97.84%, 95% CI 44.25% to 99.92%; 2 RCTs, 44,077 participants; mRNA-1273: 93.20%, 95% CI 91.06% to 94.83%; 2 RCTs, 31,632 participants; ChAdOx1: 70.23%, 95% CI 62.10% to 76.62%; 2 RCTs, 43,390 participants; Ad26.COV2.S: 66.90%, 95% CI 59.10% to 73.40%; 1 RCT, 39,058 participants; BBIBP-CorV: 78.10%, 95% CI 64.80% to 86.30%; 1 RCT, 25,463 participants; BBV152: 77.80%, 95% CI 65.20% to 86.40%; 1 RCT, 16,973 participants). Moderate-certainty evidence found that NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax) probably reduces the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 compared to placebo (VE 82.91%, 95% CI 50.49% to 94.10%; 3 RCTs, 42,175 participants). There is low-certainty evidence for CoronaVac (Sinovac) for this outcome (VE 69.81%, 95% CI 12.27% to 89.61%; 2 RCTs, 19,852 participants). Severe or critical COVID-19 High-certainty evidence found that BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, Ad26.COV2.S, and BBV152 result in a large reduction in incidence of severe or critical disease due to COVID-19 compared to placebo (VE: BNT162b2: 95.70%, 95% CI 73.90% to 99.90%; 1 RCT, 46,077 participants; mRNA-1273: 98.20%, 95% CI 92.80% to 99.60%; 1 RCT, 28,451 participants; AD26.COV2.S: 76.30%, 95% CI 57.90% to 87.50%; 1 RCT, 39,058 participants; BBV152: 93.40%, 95% CI 57.10% to 99.80%; 1 RCT, 16,976 participants). Moderate-certainty evidence found that NVX-CoV2373 probably reduces the incidence of severe or critical COVID-19 (VE 100.00%, 95% CI 86.99% to 100.00%; 1 RCT, 25,452 participants). Two trials reported high efficacy of CoronaVac for severe or critical disease with wide CIs, but these results could not be pooled. Serious adverse events (SAEs) mRNA-1273, ChAdOx1 (Oxford-AstraZeneca)/SII-ChAdOx1 (Serum Institute of India), Ad26.COV2.S, and BBV152 probably result in little or no difference in SAEs compared to placebo (RR: mRNA-1273: 0.92, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.08; 2 RCTs, 34,072 participants; ChAdOx1/SII-ChAdOx1: 0.88, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.07; 7 RCTs, 58,182 participants; Ad26.COV2.S: 0.92, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.22; 1 RCT, 43,783 participants); BBV152: 0.65, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.97; 1 RCT, 25,928 participants). In each of these, the likely absolute difference in effects was fewer than 5/1000 participants. Evidence for SAEs is uncertain for BNT162b2, CoronaVac, BBIBP-CorV, and NVX-CoV2373 compared to placebo (RR: BNT162b2: 1.30, 95% CI 0.55 to 3.07; 2 RCTs, 46,107 participants; CoronaVac: 0.97, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.51; 4 RCTs, 23,139 participants; BBIBP-CorV: 0.76, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.06; 1 RCT, 26,924 participants; NVX-CoV2373: 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.14; 4 RCTs, 38,802 participants). For the evaluation of heterologous schedules, booster doses, and efficacy against variants of concern, see main text of review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to placebo, most vaccines reduce, or likely reduce, the proportion of participants with confirmed symptomatic COVID-19, and for some, there is high-certainty evidence that they reduce severe or critical disease. There is probably little or no difference between most vaccines and placebo for serious adverse events. Over 300 registered RCTs are evaluating the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, and this review is updated regularly on the COVID-NMA platform (covid-nma.com). Implications for practice Due to the trial exclusions, these results cannot be generalized to pregnant women, individuals with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, or immunocompromized people. Most trials had a short follow-up and were conducted before the emergence of variants of concern. Implications for research Future research should evaluate the long-term effect of vaccines, compare different vaccines and vaccine schedules, assess vaccine efficacy and safety in specific populations, and include outcomes such as preventing long COVID-19. Ongoing evaluation of vaccine efficacy and effectiveness against emerging variants of concern is also vital.

Measuring the Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines Used during a Surge of the Delta Variant of SARS-CoV-2 in Bangladesh: A Test-Negative Design Evaluation

BACKGROUND

From May to December 2021, Bangladesh experienced a major surge in the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2. The earlier rollout of several vaccines offered the opportunity to evaluate vaccine effectiveness against this variant.

METHODS

A prospective, test-negative case-control study was conducted in five large hospitals in Dhaka between September and December 2021. The subjects were patients of at least 18 years of age who presented themselves for care, suffering COVID-like symptoms of less than 10 days' duration. The cases had PCR-confirmed infections with SARS-CoV-2, and up to 4 PCR test-negative controls were matched to each case, according to hospital, date of presentation, and age. Vaccine protection was assessed as being the association between the receipt of a complete course of vaccine and the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 disease, with symptoms beginning at least 14 days after the final vaccine dose.

RESULTS

In total, 313 cases were matched to 1196 controls. The genotyping of case isolates revealed 99.6% to be the Delta variant. Receipt of any vaccine was associated with 12% (95% CI: -21 to 37, p = 0.423) protection against all episodes of SARS-CoV-2. Among the three vaccines for which protection was evaluable (Moderna (mRNA-1273); Sinopharm (Vero Cell-Inactivated); Serum Institute of India (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19)), only the Moderna vaccine was associated with significant protection (64%; 95% CI: 10 to 86, p = 0.029). Protection by the receipt of any vaccine against severe disease was 85% (95% CI: 27 to 97, p = 0.019), with protection estimates of 75% to 100% for the three vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccine protection against COVID-19 disease of any severity caused by the Delta variant was modest in magnitude and significant for only one of the three evaluable vaccines. In contrast, protection against severe disease was high in magnitude and consistent for all three vaccines. Because our findings are not in complete accord with evaluations of the same vaccines in more affluent settings, our study underscores the need for country-level COVID-19 vaccine evaluations in developing countries.

Recent approaches to mRNA vaccine delivery by lipid-based vectors prepared by continuous-flow microfluidic devices

Advancements in nanotechnology have resulted in the introduction of several nonviral delivery vectors for the nontoxic, efficient delivery of encapsulated mRNA-based vaccines. Lipid- and polymer-based nanoparticles (NP) have proven to be the most potent delivery systems, providing increased delivery efficiency and protection of mRNA molecules from degradation. Here, the authors provide an overview of the recent studies carried out using lipid NPs and their functionalized forms, polymeric and lipid-polymer hybrid nanocarriers utilized mainly for the encapsulation of mRNAs for gene and immune therapeutic applications. A microfluidic system as a prevalent methodology for the preparation of NPs with continuous flow enables NP size tuning, rapid mixing and production reproducibility. Continuous-flow microfluidic devices for lipid and polymeric encapsulated RNA NP production are specifically reviewed.

SARS-CoV-2-The Role of Natural Immunity: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Both natural immunity and vaccine-induced immunity to COVID-19 may be useful to reduce the mortality/morbidity of this disease, but still a lot of controversy exists.

AIMS

This narrative review analyzes the literature regarding these two immunitary processes and more specifically: (a) the duration of natural immunity; (b) cellular immunity; (c) cross-reactivity; (d) the duration of post-vaccination immune protection; (e) the probability of reinfection and its clinical manifestations in the recovered patients; (f) the comparisons between vaccinated and unvaccinated as to the possible reinfections; (g) the role of hybrid immunity; (h) the effectiveness of natural and vaccine-induced immunity against Omicron variant; (i) the comparative incidence of adverse effects after vaccination in recovered individuals vs. COVID-19-naïve subjects.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

through multiple search engines we investigated COVID-19 literature related to the aims of the review, published since April 2020 through July 2022, including also the previous articles pertinent to the investigated topics.

RESULTS

nearly 900 studies were collected, and 246 pertinent articles were included. It was highlighted that the vast majority of the individuals after suffering from COVID-19 develop a natural immunity both of cell-mediated and humoral type, which is effective over time and provides protection against both reinfection and serious illness. Vaccine-induced immunity was shown to decay faster than natural immunity. In general, the severity of the symptoms of reinfection is significantly lower than in the primary infection, with a lower degree of hospitalizations (0.06%) and an extremely low mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

this extensive narrative review regarding a vast number of articles highlighted the valuable protection induced by the natural immunity after COVID-19, which seems comparable or superior to the one induced by anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Consequently, vaccination of the unvaccinated COVID-19-recovered subjects may not be indicated. Further research is needed in order to: (a) measure the durability of immunity over time; (b) evaluate both the impacts of Omicron BA.5 on vaccinated and healed subjects and the role of hybrid immunity.

Exhaled breath SARS-CoV-2 shedding patterns across variants of concern

OBJECTIVES

We performed exhaled breath (EB) and nasopharyngeal (NP) quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and NP rapid antigen testing (NP RAT) of SARS-CoV-2 infections with different variants.

METHODS

We included immuno-naïve alpha-infected (n = 11) and partly boosted omicron-infected patients (n = 8) as high-risk contacts. We compared peak NP and EB qPCR cycle time (ct) values between cohorts (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test). Test positivity was compared for three infection phases using Cochran Q test.

RESULTS

Peak median NP ct was 11.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 10.1-12.1) for alpha and 12.2 (IQR 11.1-15.3) for omicron infections. Peak median EB ct was 25.2 (IQR 24.5-26.9) and 28.3 (IQR 26.4-30.8) for alpha and omicron infections, respectively. Distributions did not differ between cohorts for NP (P = 0.19) or EB (P = 0.09). SARS-CoV-2 shedding peaked on day 1 in EB (confidence interval [CI] 0.0 - 4.5) and day 3 in NP (CI 1.5 - 6.0). EB qPCR positivity equaled NP qPCR positivity on D0-D1 (P = 0.44) and D2-D6 (P = 1.0). It superseded NP RAT positivity on D0-D1 (P = 0.003) and D2-D6 (P = 0.008). It was inferior to both on D7-D10 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Peak EB and nasopharynx shedding were comparable across variants. EB qPCR positivity matched NP qPCR and superseded NP RAT in the first week of infection.

Antinucleocapsid Antibodies After SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the Blinded Phase of the Randomized, Placebo-Controlled mRNA-1273 COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Immunoassays for determining past SARS-CoV-2 infection have not been systematically evaluated in vaccinated persons in comparison with unvaccinated persons.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate antinucleocapsid antibody (anti-N Ab) seropositivity in mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccinees with breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection.

DESIGN

Nested substudy of a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled vaccine efficacy trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04470427).

SETTING

99 sites in the United States, July 2020 through March 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were aged 18 years or older, had no known history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and were at risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe COVID-19. Substudy participants were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection during the trial's blinded phase.

INTERVENTION

2 mRNA-1273 or placebo injections 28 days apart.

MEASUREMENTS

Nasopharyngeal swabs from days 1 and 29 (vaccination days) and from symptom-prompted illness visits were tested for SARS-CoV-2 via polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Serum samples from days 1, 29, and 57 and the participant decision visit (PDV, when participants were informed of treatment assignment; median day 149) were tested for anti-N Abs by the Elecsys immunoassay.

RESULTS

Among 812 participants with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 illness during the blinded phase of the trial (through March 2021), seroconversion to anti-N Abs (median of 53 days after diagnosis) occurred in 21 of 52 mRNA-1273 vaccinees (40% [95% CI, 27% to 54%]) versus 605 of 648 placebo recipients (93% [CI, 92% to 95%]). Each 1-log increase in SARS-CoV-2 viral copies at diagnosis was associated with 90% higher odds of anti-N Ab seroconversion (odds ratio, 1.90 [CI, 1.59 to 2.28]).

LIMITATION

The scope was restricted to mRNA-1273 vaccinees and the Elecsys assay, the sample size was small, data on Delta and Omicron infections were lacking, and the analysis did not address a prespecified objective of the trial.

CONCLUSION

Vaccination status should be considered when interpreting seroprevalence and seropositivity data based solely on anti-N Ab testing.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health.

SARS-CoV-2 accelerated clearance using a novel nitric oxide nasal spray (NONS) treatment: A randomized trial

Background

Methods

Findings

Interpretation

Funding

Immune Correlates Analysis of a Single Ad26.COV2.S Dose in the ENSEMBLE COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy Clinical Trial

Anti-spike IgG binding antibody, anti-receptor binding domain IgG antibody, and pseudovirus neutralizing antibody measurements four weeks post-vaccination were assessed as correlates of risk of moderate to severe-critical COVID-19 outcomes through 83 days post-vaccination and as correlates of protection following a single dose of Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine in the placebo-controlled phase of ENSEMBLE, an international, randomized efficacy trial. Each marker had evidence as a correlate of risk and of protection, with strongest evidence for 50% inhibitory dilution (ID50) neutralizing antibody titer. The outcome hazard ratio was 0.49 (95% confidence interval 0.29, 0.81; p=0.006) per 10-fold increase in ID50; vaccine efficacy was 60% (43, 72%) at nonquantifiable ID50 (< 2.7 IU50/ml) and rose to 89% (78, 96%) at ID50 = 96.3 IU50/ml. Comparison of the vaccine efficacy by ID50 titer curves for ENSEMBLE-US, the COVE trial of the mRNA-1273 vaccine, and the COV002-UK trial of the AZD1222 vaccine supported consistency of the ID50 titer correlate of protection across trials and vaccine types.