Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of a first booster with BNT162b2 or full-dose mRNA-1273: A randomised VACCELERATE trial in adults ≥75 years (EU-COVAT-1)

BACKGROUND

Vaccination remains crucial for protection against severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially for people of advanced age, however, optimal dosing regimens are as yet lacking.

METHODS

EU-COVAT-1-AGED Part A is a randomised controlled, adaptive, multicentre phase II trial evaluating safety and immunogenicity of a 3rd vaccination (1st booster) in individuals ≥75 years. Fifty-three participants were randomised to full-doses of either mRNA-1273 (Spikevax®, 100 µg) or BNT162b2 (Comirnaty®, 30 µg). The primary endpoint was the rate of 2-fold circulating antibody titre increase 14 days post-vaccination measured by quantitative electrochemiluminescence (ECL) immunoassay, targeting RBD region of Wuhan wild-type SARS-CoV-2. Secondary endpoints included the changes in neutralising capacity against wild-type and 25 variants of concern at 14 days and up to 12 months. Safety was assessed by monitoring of solicited adverse events (AEs) for seven days after on-study vaccination. Unsolicited AEs were collected until the end of follow-up at 12 months, SAEs were pursued for a further 30 days.

RESULTS

Between 08th of November 2021 and 04th of January 2022, 53 participants ≥75 years received a COVID-19 vaccine as 1st booster. Fifty subjects (BNT162b2 n = 25/mRNA-1273 n = 25) were included in the analyses for immunogenicity at day 14. The primary endpoint of a 2-fold anti-RBD IgG titre increase 14 days after vaccination was reached for all subjects. A 3rd vaccination of full-dose mRNA-1273 provided higher anti-RBD IgG titres (Geometric mean titre) D14 mRNA-127310711 IU/mL (95 %-CI: 8003;14336) vs. BNT162b2: 7090 IU/mL (95 %-CI: 5688;8837). We detected a pattern showing higher neutralising capacity of full-dose mRNA-1273 against wild-type as well as for 23 out of 25 tested variants.

INTERPRETATION

Third doses of either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 provide substantial circulating antibody increase 14 days after vaccination. Full-dose mRNA-1273 provides higher antibody levels with an overall similar safety profile for people ≥75 years.

FUNDING

This trial was funded by the European Commission (Framework Program HORIZON 2020).

A multinational, phase 2, randomised, adaptive protocol to evaluate immunogenicity and reactogenicity of different COVID-19 vaccines in adults ≥75 already vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 (EU-COVAT-1-AGED): a trial conducted within the VACCELERATE network

Background

In the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, advanced age is a risk factor for a severe clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Thus, older people may benefit in particular from booster doses with potent vaccines and research should focus on optimal vaccination schedules. In addition to each individual’s medical history, immunosenescence warrants further research in this population. This study investigates vaccine-induced immune response over 1 year.

Methods/design

EU-COVAT-1-AGED is a randomised controlled, adaptive, multicentre phase II protocol evaluating different booster strategies in individuals aged ≥75 years (n=600) already vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The initial protocol foresaw a 3rd vaccination (1st booster) as study intervention. The present modified Part B of this trial foresees testing of mRNA-1273 (Spikevax®) vs. BNT162b2 (Comirnaty®) as 4th vaccination dose (2nd booster) for comparative assessment of their immunogenicity and safety against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and variants. The primary endpoint of the trial is to assess the rate of 2-fold antibody titre increase 14 days after vaccination measured by quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Anti-RBD-ELISA) against wild-type virus. Secondary endpoints include the changes in neutralising antibody titres (Virus Neutralisation Assay) against wild-type as well as against Variants of Concern (VOC) at 14 days and up to 12 months. T cell response measured by qPCR will be performed in subgroups at 14 days as exploratory endpoint. Biobanking samples are being collected for neutralising antibody titres against potential future VOC. Furthermore, potential correlates between humoral immune response, T cell response and neutralising capacity will be assessed.

The primary endpoint analysis will be triggered as soon as for all patients the primary endpoint (14 days after the 4th vaccination dose) has been observed.

Discussion

The EU-COVAT-1-AGED trial Part B compares immunogenicity and safety of mRNA-1273 (Spikevax®) and BNT162b2 (Comirnaty®) as 4th SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose in adults ≥75 years of age. The findings of this trial have the potential to optimise the COVID-19 vaccination strategy for this at-risk population.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.govNCT05160766. Registered on 16 December 2021.

Protocol version: V06_0: 27 July 2022

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06791-y.

VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry: A European study participant database to facilitate clinical trial enrolment

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has evidenced the key role of vaccine design, obtention, production and administration to successfully fight against infectious diseases and to provide efficient remedies for the citizens. Although clinical trials were rapidly established during this pandemic, identifying suitable study subjects can be challenging. For this reason, the University Hospital Cologne established a volunteer registry for participation in clinical trials first in Germany, which has now been incorporated into the European VACCELERATE clinical trials network and grew to a European Volunteer Registry. As such, VACCELERATE's Volunteer Registry aims to become a common entry point for potential volunteers in future clinical trials in Europe.

METHODS

Interested volunteers who would like to register for clinical trials in the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry can access the registration questionnaire via http://www.vaccelerate.eu/volunteer-registry. Potential volunteers are requested to provide their current country and area of residence, contact information, including first and last name and e-mail address, age, gender, comorbidities, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination status, and maximum distance willing to travel to a clinical trial site. The registry is open to both adults and children, complying with national legal consent requirements.

RESULTS

As of May 2022, the questionnaire is available in 12 countries and 14 languages. Up to date, more than 36,000 volunteers have registered, mainly from Germany. Within the first year since its establishment, the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry has matched more than 15,000 volunteers to clinical trials. The VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry will be launched in further European countries in the coming months.

CONCLUSIONS

The VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry is an active single-entry point for European residents interested in COVID-19 clinical trials participation in 12 countries (i.e., Austria, Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Lithuania, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Turkey). To date, more than 15,000 registered individuals have been connected to clinical trials in Germany alone. The registry is currently in the implementation phase in 5 additional countries (i.e., Belgium, Czech Republic, Hungary, Israel and the Netherlands).

Informed consent process in clinical trials: development of a patient-reported questionnaire

OBJECTIVE

To develop a Spanish-language questionnaire aimed at  evaluating patients' perception of the way they are briefed and their  consent is obtained prior to participating in clinical trials. The tool was  conceived to evaluate the following aspects: patients' personal experience,  the way the informed consent process was implemented in practice,  patients' level of satisfaction with the process, and their level of  understanding of the study itself.

METHOD

This study looked into the development, adaptation and  validation of a self-administered questionnaire intended to evaluate the  informed consent process on the basis of information provided by  respondents. The steps followed included: literature review, generation of  an items pool, drawing up of the questionnaire, expert review, piloting, and reading ease optimization and analysis. A commonly-used English- language questionnaire was evaluated, translated into Spanish and  adapted so as to determine the extent to which subjects understood the  information conveyed to them.

RESULTS

In its final version, the questionnaire came to comprise four sections intended to evaluate: 1) socio-demographic data; 2) practical aspects related with the development of the informed consent  process; 3) patients' perception of the process (satisfaction, expectations  and motivations); and 4) their level of understanding. Understanding was gaged using the QuIC questionnaire, translated by three bilingual  translators. Additional questions were included to evaluate the  understanding of concepts related with blinding and therapeutic  misconception. The validity of the contents was evaluated by consulting  with an expert panel. The reading ease analysis yielded an IFSZ score of  64.34, equivalent to an "average difficulty" grade on the Inflesz scale. In  the pilot study, interviews were held with 32 patients, who did not appear to have any difficulties in understanding the questions asked of  them or in using Likert-type scales to respond. Mean completion time was 16.6 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

The tool developed as part of this study has shown itself capable of providing an understanding and an assessment of the  informed consent process from the perspective of a patient who is invited  to participate in a clinical trial. Implementation of the questionnaire could help investigators ascertain that the process has been correctly  executed and identify specific aspects that may require to be changed or  optimized.

Conversion from Prograf to Advagraf in adolescents with stable liver transplants: comparative pharmacokinetics and 1-year follow-up

The recommended dose of Advagraf for conversion from Prograf is considered to be 1:1 on a milligram basis. However, the long-term equivalence of Prograf and Advagraf has been questioned. The relative bioavailability of Advagraf and Prograf was evaluated in a single-center, open-label study of Prograf-to-Advagraf conversion in 20 patients, ranging in age from 12 to 18 years, who had a stable liver transplant and were receiving Prograf. After the supervised administration of Prograf for 7 days, the patients were converted to Advagraf. On days 7 and 14, serial blood samples were obtained for tacrolimus determinations. The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated with a noncompartmental approach, and the relative bioavailability of both formulations was calculated according to standard statistical methods. Polymorphisms in cytochrome P450 3A5 (rs776746), adenosine triphosphate-binding cassette B1 (rs1045642), POR*28 (rs1057868), and POR (rs2868177) were determined with standard methods. The clinical and analytical data from a 1-year follow-up period were collected for all patients 30, 90, 180, and 360 days after conversion. The mean ratios for Cmax and AUC0-24 were 96.9 (90% confidence interval = 85.37-110.19) and 100.1 (90% confidence interval = 90.8-112.1), respectively. No relationship was found between the patients' genotypes and the pharmacokinetic tacrolimus values. During the follow-up, biochemical parameters (aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, bilirubin, cystatin C, and creatinine) did not change significantly; 3 patients presented with relevant clinical events, but no event was considered to be related to tacrolimus. A decrease in tacrolimus blood levels and an increase in dose/level ratios were observed 3 and 6 months after conversion, but they returned to basal levels by month 12. In conclusion, conversion from Prograf to Advagraf with a 1:1 dose equivalence is appropriate as an initial guideline. Our 1-year follow-up showed a transient decrease in tacrolimus levels, so closer monitoring of tacrolimus levels may be required after conversion.

[Drug synergism in analgesia treated with ibuprofen and codeine]

One of the principal characteristics of a good pharmacological combination is drug synergism. A new analgesic combination of ibuprofen, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, used frequently in clinical practice due to good quotient of efficacy and safety, and codeine, a minor opiate used very much as second analgesic step in combination, has recently come on the market. We have conducted a review in MEDLINE of the principal studies published in the medical literature as regards the efficacy and safety of both drugs separately and finally, a review of the clinical experience showed in studies with analgesic combinations in general and on the hypothesis of a possible drug synergism between NSAIDs and Opiates.

Tobramycin penetration into epithelial lining fluid of patients with pneumonia

OBJECTIVE

To study the penetration of tobramycin in lung tissue evaluated as the concentration in epithelial lining fluid and to characterize the time course of the drug in the treatment of patients with pneumonia.

METHODS

The subjects were 16 patients with pneumonia and taking tobramycin who had clinical indications for bronchoscopy. Bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage of the pneumonic area was performed once on each patient 1/2%, 2, 4, or 8 hours after the previous tobramycin dose. Urea was used as an endogenous marker for quantification of epithelial lining fluid obtained at bronchoalveolar lavage. Tobramycin concentrations in serum were measured for all patients at the aforementioned 4 time points. Tobramycin concentration was determined by means of fluorescent polarization immunoassay modified for bronchoalveolar samples.

RESULTS

Levels of tobramycin in the fluid of the epithelial lining were 2.33+/-0.5 at 1/2 hour, 1.67+/-0.6 at 2 hours, 1.62+/-1.19 at 4 hours, and 0.77+/-0.38 microg/mL at 8 hours. The ratio of epithelial lining fluid to serum concentration of tobramycin was 0.30+/-0.03 at 1/2 hour, 0.42+/-0.16 at 2 hours, 0.64+/-0.37 at 4 hours, and 1.53+/-0.76 at 8 hours. The ratio at peak serum time was similar to that reported for tobramycin and netilmicin.

CONCLUSIONS

High peak serum concentrations of tobramycin are necessary to obtain microbiologically active concentrations at the alveolar level. The fluid of the epithelial lining constitutes a deep compartment for aminoglycosides. The disappearance of tobramycin was slower than at the serum level.