RESUMEN
Background: The neonatal immune system is uniquely poised to generate broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) and thus infants are ideal for evaluating HIV vaccine candidates. We present the design and safety of a novel glucopyranosyl lipid A (GLA)-stable emulsion (SE) adjuvant admixed with a first-in-infant CH505 transmitter-founder (CH505TF) gp120 immunogen designed to induce precursors for bnAbs against HIV. Methods: HVTN 135 is a phase I randomized, placebo-controlled trial of CH505TF+GLA-SE or placebo. Healthy infants in South Africa aged ≤5 days, born to mothers living with HIV but HIV nucleic acid negative at birth were randomized to five doses of CH505TF + GLA-SE or placebo at birth and 8, 16, 32, and 54 weeks. Results: 38 infants (median age = 4 days; interquartile range 4, 4.75 days) were enrolled November 2020 to January 2022. Among 28 (10) infants assigned to receive CH505TF + GLA-SE (placebo), most (32/38) completed the 5-dose immunization series and follow-up (35/38). Solicited local and systemic reactions were more frequent in vaccine (8, 28.6% local; 16, 57.1% systemic) vs. placebo recipients (1, 10% local, p = 0.25; 4, 40.0% systemic, p = 0.38). All events were Grade 1 except two Grade 2 events (pain, lethargy). Serious vaccine-related adverse events were not recorded. Conclusions: This study illustrates the feasibility of conducting trials of novel adjuvanted HIV vaccines in HIV-exposed infants receiving standard infant vaccinations. The safety profile of the CH505TF + GLA-SE vaccine was reassuring. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04607408. Funding: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Brief summary: This paper summarizes the phase 1 trial design and safety profile of an experimental CH505TF immunogen + GLA-SE HIV vaccine in infants born to mothers living with HIV.
RESUMEN
Stabilized trimers preserving the native-like HIV envelope structure may be key components of a preventive HIV vaccine regimen to induce broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs). We evaluated trimeric BG505 SOSIP.664 gp140 formulated with a novel TLR7/8 signaling adjuvant, 3M-052-AF/Alum, for safety, adjuvant dose-finding, and immunogenicity in a first-in-healthy adult (n = 17), randomized, and placebo-controlled trial (HVTN 137A). The vaccine regimen appeared safe. Robust, trimer-specific antibody, and B cell and CD4+ T cell responses emerged after vaccination. Five vaccinees developed serum autologous tier 2 nAbs (ID50 titer, 1:28-1:8647) after two to three doses targeting C3/V5 and/or V1/V2/V3 Env regions by electron microscopy and mutated pseudovirus-based neutralization analyses. Trimer-specific, B cell-derived monoclonal antibody activities confirmed these results and showed weak heterologous neutralization in the strongest responder. Our findings demonstrate the clinical utility of the 3M-052-AF/Alum adjuvant and support further improvements of trimer-based Env immunogens to focus responses on multiple broad nAb epitopes.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra el SIDA , Adyuvantes Inmunológicos , Compuestos de Alumbre , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes , Productos del Gen env del Virus de la Inmunodeficiencia Humana , Humanos , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes/inmunología , Vacunas contra el SIDA/inmunología , Vacunas contra el SIDA/administración & dosificación , Compuestos de Alumbre/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Adyuvantes Inmunológicos/administración & dosificación , Productos del Gen env del Virus de la Inmunodeficiencia Humana/inmunología , Anticuerpos Anti-VIH/inmunología , Femenino , VIH-1/inmunología , Masculino , Infecciones por VIH/inmunología , Infecciones por VIH/prevención & control , Linfocitos B/inmunología , Adyuvantes de Vacunas , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto Joven , Linfocitos T CD4-Positivos/inmunologíaRESUMEN
In the phase 3 Coronavirus Efficacy (COVE) trial (NCT04470427), post-dose two Ancestral Spike-specific binding (bAb) and neutralizing (nAb) antibodies were shown to be correlates of risk (CoR) and of protection against Ancestral-lineage COVID-19 in SARS-CoV-2 naive participants. In the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron era, Omicron subvariants with varying degrees of immune escape now dominate, seropositivity rates are high, and booster doses are administered, raising questions on whether and how these developments affect the bAb and nAb correlates. To address these questions, we assess post-boost BA.1 Spike-specific bAbs and nAbs as CoRs and as correlates of booster efficacy in COVE. For naive individuals, bAbs and nAbs inversely correlate with Omicron COVID-19: hazard ratios (HR) per 10-fold marker increase (95% confidence interval) are 0.16 (0.03, 0.79) and 0.31 (0.10, 0.96), respectively. In non-naive individuals the analogous results are similar: 0.15 (0.04, 0.63) and 0.28 (0.07, 1.08). For naive individuals, three vs two-dose booster efficacy correlates with predicted nAb titer at exposure, with estimates -8% (-126%, 48%), 50% (25%, 67%), and 74% (49%, 87%), at 56, 251, and 891 Arbitrary Units/ml. These results support the continued use of antibody as a surrogate endpoint.
Asunto(s)
Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273 , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes , Anticuerpos Antivirales , COVID-19 , Inmunización Secundaria , SARS-CoV-2 , Glicoproteína de la Espiga del Coronavirus , Humanos , COVID-19/inmunología , COVID-19/virología , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes/inmunología , Anticuerpos Antivirales/inmunología , Anticuerpos Antivirales/sangre , Glicoproteína de la Espiga del Coronavirus/inmunología , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273/administración & dosificación , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273/inmunología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Masculino , Adulto , Eficacia de las VacunasRESUMEN
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines reduce severe disease and mortality and may lessen transmission, measured by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load (VL). Evaluating vaccine associations in VL at COVID-19 diagnosis in 4 phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled vaccine trials, July 2020 to July 2021, VL reductions were 2.78 log10 copies/mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-4.18; n = 60 placebo, 11 vaccine) and 2.12 log10 copies/mL (95% CI, 1.44-2.80; n = 594 placebo, 36 vaccine) for NVX-CoV2373 and mRNA-1273, respectively. Associations were not significant for AZD1222 (0.59 log10 copies/mL; 95% CI, -.19 to 1.36; n = 90 placebo, 78 vaccine) or Ad26.COV2.S (0.23 log10 copies/mL; 95% CI, -.01 to .47; n = 916 placebo, 424 vaccine). Thus, vaccines potentially decreased transmission when ancestral SARS-CoV-2 predominated. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04470427, NCT04505722, NCT04516746, NCT04611802.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The introduction of vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic provided an opportunity to slow transmission of SARS-CoV-2, but initial uptake of COVID-19 vaccination was slow. We analyzed data from a randomized clinical trial of the mRNA-1273 vaccine (NCT04811664) to describe the patterns of uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among young adults. METHODS: The CoVPN 3006 trial randomized adults ages 18-29 from 44 sites in the United States to receive 1) immediate mRNA-1273 vaccination from the study site, or 2) standard of care, including the option to seek vaccination at any time in the future. Randomization occurred between March and November 2021, and an observational arm of adults who declined vaccination was enrolled beginning June 2021. Among participants in the standard of care (SoC) or Vaccine Declined arms, we estimated demographic, behavioral, and health history correlates of vaccination, and the four-month cumulative incidence of COVID-19 vaccination using inverse probability weighted Kaplan-Meier estimators. RESULTS: Among 728 SoC and 470 Vaccine Declined participants, 79% and 16% received COVID-19 vaccination, respectively. SoC and Vaccine Declined participants were more likely to seek and receive vaccination if they reported COVID-19 preventive behaviors, including wearing masks, physically distancing, and avoiding large gatherings. We identified strong predictors of vaccination in the Vaccine Declined arm, including attending class in person (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21, 1.03), having a COVID-19 relevant medical condition (aRR: 1.95, 95% CI: 0.89, 4.26), and avoiding large gatherings (aRR: 2.24, 95% CI: 1.18, 4.25), though low vaccination rates in this arm led to imprecise estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals who initially decline vaccination can be convinced to vaccinate, particularly if they are already practicing other forms of COVID-19 prevention. Continued outreach and education from the scientific community can combat low vaccine confidence.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunación , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , Adulto Joven , Adulto , Estados Unidos , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273/inmunologíaRESUMEN
Background: Rising hepatitis C and B virus (HCV and HBV) rates have been reported in men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women (TGW). This study characterizes HCV and HBV infections longitudinally among 2,496 MSM/TGW aged 18-50 years and at risk for HIV acquisition enrolled in an HIV-1 vaccine trial in 18 U.S. cities between 2009-2013. Methods: Participants completed behavioral surveys, HIV testing, and blood collection over 24 months. Of the 2,397 participants who consented for future testing, 1,792 (74.8%) had available paired stored blood samples at baseline and a later timepoint (Month 24 [N = 999]; if unavailable, M12 [N = 775] or M15 [N = 18]). Results: Among 1,792 participants, 98.1% were MSM, 0.8% were TGW, and the median age was 30 years (IQR 24, 40). Participants reported a median number of 3 male sex partners (IQR 1,5) within the past 3 months. Condomless insertive anal sex was reported by 55.8% and condomless receptive anal sex by 46.7%.1.3% reported injection drug use. During follow-up, 1.4% reported pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use. At baseline 11/1792 (0.61%) participants had HCV infection (HCV AB positive, RNA detectable), with all having persistent detectable RNA and chronic HCV infection at follow-up. Phylogenetic analysis showed no clusters of HCV infection. 8 participants had HCV AB positive, RNA undetectable at baseline and follow-up, representing past HCV infection with clearance; only 2 acquired HCV, which cleared over 12-24 months. At baseline, 2 participants (2/1792 = 0.11%) had positive HBsAg, indicating chronic HBV infection. Over 12-24 months, 4 (4/1790, 0.22%) developed HBsAg positivity; these participants had HBcAB positivity at baseline, thereby likely representing reactivation. There were no new HBV infections during follow-up. Conclusion: Among 1,792 men who have sex with men and transgender women aged 18-50 years and at risk for HIV acquisition enrolled in a U.S. HIV-1 vaccine trial, incident hepatitis C infection rates were extremely low, with no cases of incident hepatitis B infection. These rates of incident HCV infection and HBSAg positivity are lower than previously reported among MSM/TGW.
RESUMEN
Rates of new HIV acquisition remain unacceptably high in most populations in low-income, middle-income, and high-income settings despite advances in treatment and prevention strategies. Although biomedical advances in primary prevention of new infections exist, systematic scale-up of these interventions has not occurred at the pace required to end AIDS by 2030. Low population coverage, adherence to oral pre-exposure prophylaxis in settings with high rates of HIV acquisition, and the fact that a significant proportion of new HIV infections occurs in populations not identified as high risk and are hence not targeted for prevention approaches impedes current prevention strategies. Although long-acting injectables and monoclonal antibodies are promising approaches to help reduce incidence, high cost and the need for high coverage rates mean that a vaccine or vaccine-like intervention still remains the most likely scenario to produce a population-level impact on HIV incidence, especially in countries with generalised epidemics. Current global efforts are not sufficient to meet 2030 HIV epidemic goals; acknowledgment of this issue is required to ensure persistent advocacy for population-based control of the ongoing HIV pandemic.
Asunto(s)
Epidemias , Infecciones por VIH , Humanos , Infecciones por VIH/prevención & control , Infecciones por VIH/epidemiología , Epidemias/prevención & control , Profilaxis Pre-Exposición , Incidencia , Salud GlobalRESUMEN
Stabilized trimers preserving the native-like HIV envelope structure may be key components of a preventive HIV vaccine regimen to induce broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs). We evaluated trimeric BG505 SOSIP.664 gp140, formulated with a novel TLR7/8 signaling adjuvant, 3M-052-AF/Alum, for safety, adjuvant dose-finding and immunogenicity in a first-in-healthy adult (n=17), randomized, placebo-controlled trial (HVTN 137A). The vaccine regimen appeared safe. Robust, trimer-specific antibody, B-cell and CD4+ T-cell responses emerged post-vaccination. Five vaccinees developed serum autologous tier-2 nAbs (ID50 titer, 1:28-1:8647) after 2-3 doses targeting C3/V5 and/or V1/V2/V3 Env regions by electron microscopy and mutated pseudovirus-based neutralization analyses. Trimer-specific, B-cell-derived monoclonal antibody activities confirmed these results and showed weak heterologous neutralization in the strongest responder. Our findings demonstrate the clinical utility of the 3M-052-AF/alum adjuvant and support further improvements of trimer-based Env immunogens to focus responses on multiple broad nAb epitopes. KEY TAKEAWAY/TAKE-HOME MESSAGES: HIV BG505 SOSIP.664 trimer with novel 3M-052-AF/alum adjuvant in humans appears safe and induces serum neutralizing antibodies to matched clade A, tier 2 virus, that map to diverse Env epitopes with relatively high titers. The novel adjuvant may be an important mediator of vaccine response.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Reactogenicity informs vaccine safety, and may influence vaccine uptake. We evaluated factors associated with reactogenicity in HVTN 702, a typical HIV vaccine efficacy trial with multiple doses and products. METHODS: HVTN 702, a phase 2b/3 double-blind placebo-controlled trial, randomized 5404 African participants aged 18-35 years without HIV to placebo, or ALVAC-HIV (vCP2438) at months 0, 1 and ALVAC-HIV (vCP2438) + Bivalent Subtype C gp120/MF59 at months 3, 6, 12 and 18. Using multivariate logistic regression, we evaluated associations between reactogenicity with clinical, sociodemographic and laboratory variables. RESULTS: More vaccine than placebo-recipients reported local symptoms (all p < 0.001), arthralgia (p = 0.008), chills (p = 0.012) and myalgia (p < 0.001). Reactogenicity was associated with female sex at birth (ORv = 2.50, ORp = 1.81, both p < 0.001) and geographic region. Amongst vaccine-recipients, each year of age was associated with 3 % increase in reactogenicity (OR = 1.03, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Vaccine receipt, female sex at birth, older age, and region may affect reactogenicity.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra el SIDA , Infecciones por VIH , Humanos , Vacunas contra el SIDA/efectos adversos , Vacunas contra el SIDA/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra el SIDA/inmunología , Femenino , Masculino , Adulto , Adulto Joven , Infecciones por VIH/prevención & control , Adolescente , Método Doble Ciego , Eficacia de las VacunasRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Nasofaringe , SARS-CoV-2 , Carga Viral , Humanos , Nasofaringe/virología , Carga Viral/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estados Unidos , AncianoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Malaria is a potentially life-threatening disease caused by Plasmodium protozoa transmitted by infected Anopheles mosquitoes. Controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) trials are used to assess the efficacy of interventions for malaria elimination. The operating characteristics of statistical methods for assessing the ability of interventions to protect individuals from malaria is uncertain in small CHMI studies. This paper presents simulation studies comparing the performance of a variety of statistical methods for assessing efficacy of intervention in CHMI trials. METHODS: Two types of CHMI designs were investigated: the commonly used single high-dose design (SHD) and the repeated low-dose design (RLD), motivated by simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) challenge studies. In the context of SHD, the primary efficacy endpoint is typically time to infection. Using a continuous time survival model, five statistical tests for assessing the extent to which an intervention confers partial or full protection under single dose CHMI designs were evaluated. For RLD, the primary efficacy endpoint is typically the binary infection status after a specific number of challenges. A discrete time survival model was used to study the characteristics of RLD versus SHD challenge studies. RESULTS: In a SHD study with the continuous time survival model, log-rank test and t-test are the most powerful and provide more interpretable results than Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and Lachenbruch tests, while the likelihood ratio test is uniformly most powerful but requires knowledge of the underlying probability model. In the discrete time survival model setting, SHDs are more powerful for assessing the efficacy of an intervention to prevent infection than RLDs. However, additional information can be inferred from RLD challenge designs, particularly using a likelihood ratio test. CONCLUSIONS: Different statistical methods can be used to analyze controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) experiments, and the choice of method depends on the specific characteristics of the experiment, such as the sample size allocation between the control and intervention groups, and the nature of the intervention. The simulation results provide guidance for the trade off in statistical power when choosing between different statistical methods and study designs.
Asunto(s)
Malaria , Humanos , Malaria/prevención & control , Animales , Proyectos de Investigación , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados como Asunto , Modelos Estadísticos , Anopheles/parasitologíaRESUMEN
The South Asia International Center of Excellence for Malaria Research, an NIH-funded collaborative program, investigated the epidemiology of malaria in the Indian state of Goa through health facility-based data collected from the Goa Medical College and Hospital (GMC), the state's largest tertiary healthcare facility, between 2012 and 2021. Our study investigated region-specific spatial and temporal patterns of malaria transmission in Goa and the factors driving such patterns. Over the past decade, the number of malaria cases, inpatients, and deaths at the GMC decreased significantly after a peak in 2014-2015. However, the proportion of severe malaria cases increased over the study period. Also, a trend of decreasing average parasitemia and increasing average gametocyte density suggests a shift toward submicroscopic infections and an increase in transmission commitment characteristic of low-transmission regions. Although transmission occurred throughout the year, 75% of the cases occurred between June and December, overlapping with the monsoon (June-October), which featured rainfall above yearly average, minimal diurnal temperature variation, and high relative humidity. Sociodemographic factors also had a significant association with malaria cases, with cases being more frequent in the 15-50-year-old age group, men, construction workers, and people living in urban areas within the GMC catchment region. Our environmental model of malaria transmission projects almost negligible transmission at the beginning of 2025 (annual parasitic index: 0.0095, 95% CI: 0.0075-0.0114) if the current control measures continue undisrupted.
Asunto(s)
Malaria , Humanos , India/epidemiología , Adolescente , Femenino , Adulto , Masculino , Niño , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto Joven , Preescolar , Lactante , Malaria/transmisión , Malaria/epidemiología , Malaria/prevención & control , Anciano , Estaciones del Año , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Erradicación de la Enfermedad , Malaria Falciparum/epidemiología , Malaria Falciparum/transmisión , Malaria Falciparum/prevención & controlRESUMEN
While rapid development and roll out of COVID-19 vaccines is necessary in a pandemic, the process limits the ability of clinical trials to assess longer-term vaccine efficacy. We leveraged COVID-19 surveillance data in the U.S. to evaluate vaccine efficacy in U.S. Government-funded COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials with a three-step estimation process. First, we used a compartmental epidemiological model informed by county-level surveillance data, a "population model", to estimate SARS-CoV-2 incidence among the unvaccinated. Second, a "cohort model" was used to adjust the population SARS-CoV-2 incidence to the vaccine trial cohort, taking into account individual participant characteristics and the difference between SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease. Third, we fit a regression model estimating the offset between the cohort-model-based COVID-19 incidence in the unvaccinated with the placebo-group COVID-19 incidence in the trial during blinded follow-up. Counterfactual placebo COVID-19 incidence was estimated during open-label follow-up by adjusting the cohort-model-based incidence rate by the estimated offset. Vaccine efficacy during open-label follow-up was estimated by contrasting the vaccine group COVID-19 incidence with the counterfactual placebo COVID-19 incidence. We documented good performance of the methodology in a simulation study. We also applied the methodology to estimate vaccine efficacy for the two-dose AZD1222 COVID-19 vaccine using data from the phase 3 U.S. trial (ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT04516746). We estimated AZD1222 vaccine efficacy of 59.1% (95% uncertainty interval (UI): 40.4%-74.3%) in April, 2021 (mean 106 days post-second dose), which reduced to 35.7% (95% UI: 15.0%-51.7%) in July, 2021 (mean 198 days post-second-dose). We developed and evaluated a methodology for estimating longer-term vaccine efficacy. This methodology could be applied to estimating counterfactual placebo incidence for future placebo-controlled vaccine efficacy trials of emerging pathogens with early termination of blinded follow-up, to active-controlled or uncontrolled COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials, and to other clinical endpoints influenced by vaccination.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/uso terapéutico , Estudios de Seguimiento , Incidencia , Vigilancia de la Población/métodos , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Eficacia de las Vacunas/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines are highly efficacious at preventing severe disease in the general population, current data are lacking regarding vaccine efficacy (VE) for individuals with mild immunocompromising conditions. METHODS: A post hoc, cross-protocol analysis of participant-level data from the blinded phase of four randomized, placebo-controlled, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine phase 3 trials (Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax) was performed. We defined a "tempered immune system" (TIS) variable via a consensus panel based on medical history and medications to determine VE against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 cases in TIS participants versus non-TIS individuals starting at 14 days after completion of the primary series through the blinded phase for each of the 4 trials. An analysis of participants living with well-controlled human immunodeficiency virus was conducted using the same methods. RESULTS: A total of 3852/30 351 (12.7%) Moderna participants, 3088/29 868 (10.3%) Novavax participants, 3549/32 380 (11.0%) AstraZeneca participants, and 5047/43 788 (11.5%) Janssen participants were identified as having a TIS. Most TIS conditions (73.9%) were due to metabolism and nutritional disorders. Vaccination (vs placebo) significantly reduced the likelihood of symptomatic and severe COVID-19 for all participants for each trial. VE was not significantly different for TIS participants versus non-TIS for either symptomatic or severe COVID-19 for each trial, nor was VE significantly different in the symptomatic endpoint for participants with human immunodeficiency virus. CONCLUSIONS: For individuals with mildly immunocompromising conditions, there is no evidence of differences in VE against symptomatic or severe COVID-19 compared with those with non-TIS in the 4 COVID-19 vaccine randomized controlled efficacy trials.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/inmunología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Masculino , Femenino , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Huésped Inmunocomprometido , Anciano , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
Objectives: Vigorous discussions are ongoing about future efficacy trial designs of candidate human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention interventions. The study design challenges of HIV prevention interventions are considerable given rapid evolution of the prevention landscape and evidence of multiple modalities of highly effective products; future trials will likely be 'active-controlled', i.e., not include a placebo arm. Thus, novel design approaches are needed to accurately assess new interventions against these highly effective active controls. Methods: To discuss active control design challenges and identify solutions, an initial virtual workshop series was hosted and supported by the International AIDS Enterprise (October 2020-March 2021). Subsequent symposia discussions continue to advance these efforts. As the non-inferiority design is an important conceptual reference design for guiding active control trials, we adopt several of its principles in our proposed design approaches. Results: We discuss six potential study design approaches for formally evaluating absolute prevention efficacy given data from an active-controlled HIV prevention trial including using data from: 1) a registrational cohort, 2) recency assays, 3) an external trial placebo arm, 4) a biomarker of HIV incidence/exposure, 5) an anti-retroviral drug concentration as a mediator of prevention efficacy, and 6) immune biomarkers as a mediator of prevention efficacy. Conclusions: Our understanding of these proposed novel approaches to future trial designs remains incomplete and there are many future statistical research needs. Yet, each of these approaches, within the context of an active-controlled trial, have the potential to yield reliable evidence of efficacy for future biomedical interventions.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Developing alternative approaches to evaluating absolute efficacy of new HIV prevention interventions is a priority, as active-controlled designs, whereby individuals without HIV are randomized to the experimental intervention or an active control known to be effective, are increasing. With this design, however, the efficacy of the experimental intervention to prevent HIV acquisition relative to placebo cannot be evaluated directly. METHODS: One proposed approach to estimate absolute prevention efficacy is to use an HIV exposure marker, such as incident rectal gonorrhea, to infer counterfactual placebo HIV incidence. We formalize a statistical framework for this approach, specify working regression and likelihood-based estimation approaches, lay out three assumptions under which valid inference can be achieved, evaluate finite-sample performance, and illustrate the approach using a recent active-controlled HIV prevention trial. RESULTS: We find that in finite samples and under correctly specified assumptions accurate and precise estimates of counterfactual placebo incidence and prevention efficacy are produced. Based on data from the DISCOVER trial in men and transgender women who have sex with men, and assuming correctly specified assumptions, the estimated prevention efficacy for tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine is 98.1% (95% confidence interval: 96.4%-99.4%) using the working model approach and 98.1% (95% confidence interval: 96.4%-99.7%) using the likelihood-based approach. CONCLUSION: Careful assessment of the underlying assumptions, study of their violation, evaluation of the approach in trials with placebo arms, and advancement of improved exposure markers are needed before the HIV exposure marker approach can be relied upon in practice.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Anti-VIH , Infecciones por VIH , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Fármacos Anti-VIH/uso terapéutico , Infecciones por VIH/epidemiología , Infecciones por VIH/prevención & control , Infecciones por VIH/tratamiento farmacológico , Incidencia , Funciones de Verosimilitud , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas , Humanos , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes , Anticuerpos Antivirales , COVID-19/prevención & control , ARN Mensajero/genéticaRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes , Anticuerpos Antivirales , COVID-19/prevención & control , Inmunoglobulina G , Eficacia de las VacunasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. METHODS: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7-15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. FINDINGS: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05-0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01-0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. INTERPRETATION: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.