Safety and immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 MERS vaccine candidate in healthy Middle Eastern adults (MERS002): an open-label, non-randomised, dose-escalation, phase 1b trial

BACKGROUND

ChAdOx1-vectored vaccine candidates against several pathogens have been developed and tested in clinical trials and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has now been licensed for emergency use for COVID-19. We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 MERS vaccine in a phase 1b trial in healthy Middle Eastern adults.

METHOD

MERS002 is an open-label, non-randomised, dose-escalation, phase 1b trial. Healthy Middle Eastern adults aged 18-50 years were included in the study. ChAdOx1 MERS was administered as a single intramuscular injection into the deltoid muscle of the non-dominant arm at three different dose groups: 5·0 × 109 viral particles in a low-dose group, 2·5 × 1010 viral particles in an intermediate-dose group, and 5·0 × 1010 viral particles in a high-dose group. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of ChAdOx1 MERS, measured by the occurrence of solicited and unsolicited adverse events after vaccination for up to 28 days and occurrence of serious adverse events up to 6 months. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04170829.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 17, 2019, and June 1, 2020, 24 participants were enrolled (six to the low-dose, nine to the intermediate-dose, and nine to the high-dose group) and received a dose; 23 were available for follow-up at 6 months. The one dose of ChAdOx1 MERS vaccine was well tolerated with no serious adverse event reported during the 6 months of follow-up. Most adverse events were mild (67, 74%) and moderate (17, 19%). Six (7%) severe adverse events were reported by two participants in the intermediate-dose group (two feverish, two headache, one joint pain, and one muscle pain). Pain at the injection site was the most common local and overall adverse event, reported by 15 (63%) of the 24 participants. The most common systemic adverse event was headache, reported by 14 (58%), followed by muscle pain reported by 13 (54%). The vaccine induced both antibody and T cell immune responses in all volunteers; antibodies peaked at day 28 and T cell responses peaked at day 14; and continued until the end of follow-up at 6 months.

INTERPRETATION

The acceptable safety and immunogenicity data from this phase 1b trial of ChAdOx1 MERS vaccine candidate in Healthy Middle Eastern adults, combined with previous safety and immunogenicity data from a trial in the UK, support selecting the ChAdOx1 MERS vaccine for advancement into phase 2 clinical evaluation.

FUNDING

UK Department of Health and Social Care, using UK Aid funding, managed by the UK National Institute for Health Research; and King Abdullah International Medical Research Center.

Long-term effectiveness of carglumic acid in patients with propionic acidemia (PA) and methylmalonic acidemia (MMA): a randomized clinical trial

Background

Propionic acidemia (PA) and methylmalonic acidemia (MMA) are rare, autosomal recessive inborn errors of metabolism that require life-long medical treatment. The trial aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the administration of carglumic acid with the standard treatment compared to the standard treatment alone in the management of these organic acidemias.

Methods

The study was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, open-label, controlled clinical trial. Patients aged ≤ 15 years with confirmed PA and MMA were included in the study. Patients were followed up for two years. The primary outcome was the number of emergency room (ER) admissions because of hyperammonemia. Secondary outcomes included plasma ammonia levels over time, time to the first episode of hyperammonemia, biomarkers, and differences in the duration of hospital stay.

Results

Thirty-eight patients were included in the study. On the primary efficacy endpoint, a mean of 6.31 ER admissions was observed for the carglumic acid arm, compared with 12.76 for standard treatment, with a significant difference between the groups (p = 0.0095). Of the secondary outcomes, the only significant differences were in glycine and free carnitine levels.

Conclusion

Using carglumic acid in addition to standard treatment over the long term significantly reduces the number of ER admissions because of hyperammonemia in patients with PA and MMA.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13023-021-02032-8.

A Trial of Favipiravir and Hydroxychloroquine combination in Adults Hospitalized with moderate and severe Covid-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

The selected combination was based on limited evidence clinically and in vitro on the efficacy of the Favipiravir and Hydroxychloroquine in SARS-CoV-2. The two medications were listed in many guidelines as treatment options and ongoing trials assessing their efficacy and safety. Thus, we want to prove the clinical effectiveness of the combination as therapy.

TRIAL DESIGN

This is an Open label, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of novel therapeutic agents in hospitalized adults diagnosed with COVID-19. It is a multicenter trial that will compare Favipiravir plus Hydroxychloroquine combination (experimental arm) to a control arm.

PARTICIPANTS

All study procedures will be conducted in eight centres in Saudia Arabia: King Abdulaziz Medical City National Guard Health Affairs in Riyadh. King Abdulaziz Hospital - Al Ahsa, Saudi Arabia AlMadina General Hospital, Madnia, Saudi Arabia Al-Qatif Central Hospital, Saudi Arabia Imam Abdulrahman Al Faisal Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia King Abdulaziz Medical City, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia King Abdulaziz Hospital, Makkah, Saudi Arabia Imam Abdulrahman Alfaisal Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Inclusion Criteria • Should be at least 18 years of age, • Male or nonpregnant female, • Diagnosed with COVID-19 by PCR confirmed SARS-coV-2 viral infection. • Able to sign the consent form and agree to clinical samples collection (or their legal surrogates if subjects are or become unable to make informed decisions).. • Moderate or Severe COVID-19, defined as oxygen saturation (Sao2) of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or significant clinical symptoms that require hospital admission. • patients had to be enrolled within 10 days of disease onset. Exclusion Criteria • Patients who are pregnant or breastfeeding. • Will be transferred to a non-study site hospital or discharged from hospital within 72 hours. • Known sensitivity/allergy to hydroxychloroquine or Favipiravir • Current use of hydroxychloroquine for another indication • Prior diagnosis of retinopathy • Prior diagnosis of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency • Major comorbidities increasing the risk of study drug including: i. Hematologic malignancy, ii. Advanced (stage 4-5) chronic kidney disease or dialysis therapy, iii. Known history of ventricular arrhythmias, iv. Current use of drugs that prolong the QT interval, Severe liver damage (Child-Pugh score ≥ C, AST> 5 times the upper limit), HIV. • The investigator believes that participating in the trial is not in the best interests of the patient, or the investigator considers unsuitable for enrollment (such as unpredictable risks or subject compliance issues). • Clinical prognostic non-survival, palliative care, or in deep coma and no have response to supportive treatment within three hours of admission • Patient with irregular rhythm • Patient with a history of heart attack (myocardial infarction) • Patient with a family history of sudden death from heart attack before the age of 50 • Take other drugs that can cause prolonged QT interval • Patient who is receiving immunosuppressive therapy (cyclosporin) which cannot be switched to another agent or adjusted while using the investigational drug • Gout/history of Gout or hyperuricemia (above the ULN), hereditary xanthinuria or xanthine calculi of the urinary tract.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

The treatment intervention would be for a maximum of 10 days from randomization and it would be as follows: Favipiravir for 10 days: Administer 1800 mg (9 tablets) by mouth twice daily for one day, followed by 800mg (4 tablets) twice daily (total days of therapy is 10 days) Hydroxychloroquine for 5 days: (400mg) twice daily on day 1; for days 2-5 (200mg) twice daily. Reference Comparator Therapy: Standard of care is defined as: Treatment that is accepted by medical experts as a proper treatment for Covid-19 disease. Standard care comprised of, as necessary, supplemental oxygen, noninvasive and invasive ventilation, antibiotic agents, vasopressor support, renal-replacement therapy, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), and antiviral therapy except Favipiravir. Also, it may include intravenous fluids and medications for symptoms relief .

MAIN OUTCOMES

The primary endpoint is the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to an improvement of two points (from the status at randomization) on a seven-category ordinal scale or live discharge from the hospital, whichever came first (14 days from Randomization).

RANDOMISATION

Eligible participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the combination group (Favipiravir and Hydroxychloroquine) or a control group. The patients will be randomized utilizing Web based data entry System with a stratification based on the centre and the ICU admission.

BLINDING (MASKING)

This is an Open label study and only the analyst will be blinded during the study conduct.

NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE)

Under the classical two arm parallel design the total effective sample sizes needed is 472 subjects (236 subjects per group).

TRIAL STATUS

Protocol version 3.1 (dated 11 Aug 2020), and currently recruitment is ongoing. The date recruitment started was May 21, 2020 and the investigators anticipate the trial will finish recruiting by the end of December 2020.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04392973 , 19 May 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Evaluation of long-term effectiveness of the use of carglumic acid in patients with propionic acidemia (PA) or methylmalonic acidemia (MMA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Propionic acidemia (PA) and methylmalonic acidemia (MMA) are rare autosomal recessive inborn errors of metabolism characterized by hyperammonemia due to N-acetylglutamate synthase (NAGS) dysfunction. Carglumic acid (Carbaglu®; Orphan Europe Ltd.) is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) for the treatment of hyperammonemia due hepatic NAGS deficiency. Here we report the rationale and design of a phase IIIb trial that is aimed at determining the long-term efficacy and safety of carglumic acid in the management of PA and MMA.

Methods

This prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel group phase IIIb study will be conducted in Saudi Arabia. Patients with PA or MMA (≤15 years of age) will be randomized 1:1 to receive twice daily carglumic acid (50 mg/kg/day) plus standard therapy (protein-restricted diet, L-carnitine, and metronidazole) or standard therapy alone for a 2-year treatment period. The primary efficacy outcome is the number of emergency room visits due to hyperammonemia. Safety will be assessed throughout the study and during the 1 month follow-up period after the study.

Discussion

Current guidelines recommend conservative medical treatment as the main strategy for the management of PA and MMA. Although retrospective studies have suggested that long-term carglumic acid may be beneficial in the management of PA and MMA, current literature lacks evidence for this indication. This clinical trial will determine the long-term safety and efficacy of carglumic acid in the management of PA and MMA.

Trial registration

King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (KAIMRC): (RC13/116) 09/1/2014.

Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA) (33066) 08/14/2014.

ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT02426775) 04/22/2015.

Effect of combined dexamethasone therapy with nebulized r-epinephrine or salbutamol in infants with bronchiolitis: A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial

Background:

This study investigated the effect of combining oral dexamethasone with either nebulized racemic epinephrine or salbutamol compared to bronchodilators alone for the treatment of infants with bronchiolitis.

Materials and Methods:

This was a double-blind, randomized controlled trial on infants (1 to 12 months) who were diagnosed in the emergency department with moderate-to-severe bronchiolitis. The primary outcome was the rate of hospital admission within 7 days of the first dose of treatment, and the secondary outcomes were changes in respiratory distress assessment instrument score, heart rate, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation (O₂ Sat) over a 4-hour observation period. Infants (n = 162) were randomly assigned to four groups: A (dexamethasone + racemic epinephrine) = 45, B (placebo and racemic epinephrine) =39, C (dexamethasone and salbutamol) = 40, or D (placebo and salbutamol) = 38.

Results:

Patients who had received dexamethasone + epinephrine exhibited similar admission rates compared to placebo + epinephrine or salbutamol (P = 0.64). Similarly, no statistically significant difference was observed in the rate of hospitalization for patients who received dexamethasone + salbutamol compared to those who received placebo + epinephrine or salbutamol (P = 0.51). Clinical parameters were improved at the end of the 4-hour observation period for all treatment groups. Treatment with dexamethasone + epinephrine resulted in a statistically significant change in HR over time (P < 0.005) compared to the other groups.

Conclusions:

This study adds to a body of evidence suggesting that corticosteroids have no role in the management of bronchiolitis for young infants who are first time wheezers with no risk of atopy.

The safety of H1N1 vaccine in children in Saudi Arabia: a cohort study using modern technology in a developing country

BACKGROUND

With its rapid introduction in 2009, concerns about the safety of the H1N1 vaccines have been raised. Data were especially limited on the pediatric safety of H1N1 vaccine in Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to investigate the safety of the H1N1 vaccine (Pandemrix(®)) in children and examine the feasibility of obtaining information on possibly associated adverse reactions using mobile telephone contact with child caregivers.

METHODS

A cohort study was conducted in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Patients were included if they were aged between 6 and 18 years and had received one dose of the H1N1 vaccine. A control group involved children from the same school system who had not received the vaccine. Six months following vaccination, a clinical pharmacist called the caregiver of the child to ask about hospitalization, emergency room visits and events related to H1N1 vaccine administration using a standardized questionnaire.

RESULTS

Caregivers of 372 school-age children were contacted. The response rate was 97% (n = 359). A total of 169 children who received at least one dose of the H1N1 vaccine were compared with 190 children in the control group who had not received the vaccine. Controlling for age, sex, education and use of medications, the odds ratio (OR) of hospitalization or emergency room visits for children within the 6 months after vaccination relative to the unvaccinated children was 1.25 (95% CI 0.47, 3.35). The risk of influenza-like symptoms was significantly reduced in vaccinated children compared with unvaccinated children (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.41, 0.99).

CONCLUSION

School-age children in Saudi Arabia who received the H1N1 vaccine did not have an increased risk of hospitalization or emergency room visits. Larger studies are needed to confirm these results. Proactive pharmacovigilance is important in assessing the safety of vaccines and other medications. It is feasible to collect information on adverse drug reactions using mobile telephones, a method that can be of benefit in both developed and developing countries.