Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 105
Filtrar
1.
2.
J Infect Dis ; 2024 Apr 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38657001

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Although antivirals remain important for the treatment COVID-19, methods to assess treatment efficacy are lacking. Here, we investigated the impact of remdesivir on viral dynamics and their contribution to understanding antiviral efficacy in the multicenter ACTT-1 clinical trial that randomized patients to remdesivir or placebo. METHODS: Longitudinal specimens collected during hospitalization from a substudy of 642 COVID-19 patients were measured for viral RNA (upper respiratory tract and plasma), viral nucleocapsid antigen (serum), and host immunologic markers. Associations with clinical outcomes and response to therapy were assessed. RESULTS: Higher baseline plasma viral loads were associated with poorer clinical outcomes, and decreases in viral RNA and antigen in blood but not the upper respiratory tract correlated with enhanced benefit from remdesivir. The treatment effect of remdesivir was most pronounced in patients with elevated baseline nucleocapsid antigen levels: the recovery rate ratio was 1.95 (95%CI 1.40-2.71) for levels >245 pg/ml vs 1.04 (95%CI 0.76-1.42) for levels < 245 pg/ml. Remdesivir also accelerated the rate of viral RNA and antigen clearance in blood, and patients whose blood levels decreased were more likely to recover and survive. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in SARS-CoV-2 RNA and antigen levels in blood correlated with clinical benefit from antiviral therapy.

3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2024 Apr 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38598658

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Although the 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, 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 (NTIS) individuals starting at 14 days after completion of the primary series through the blinded phase for each of the four trials. An analysis of participants living with well-controlled HIV was conducted using the same methods. RESULTS: 3,852/30,351 (12.7%) Moderna participants, 3,088/29,868 (10.3%) Novavax participants, 3,549/32,380 (11.0%) AstraZeneca participants, and 5,047/43,788 (11.5%) Janssen participants were identified as having a TIS. Most TIS conditions (73.9%) were due to metabolism and nutritional disorders. Vaccination (versus 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 vs NTIS for either symptomatic or severe COVID-19 for each trial, nor was VE significantly different in the symptomatic endpoint for participants with HIV. CONCLUSIONS: For individuals with mildly immunocompromising conditions, there is no evidence of differences in VE against symptomatic or severe COVID-19 compared to those with non-tempered immune systems in the four COVID-19 vaccine randomized controlled efficacy trials.

4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2024 Mar 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38537255

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: A surge of human influenza A(H7N9) cases began in 2016 in China due to an antigenically distinct lineage. Data are needed about the safety and immunogenicity of 2013 and 2017 A(H7N9) inactivated influenza vaccines (IIVs) and the effects of AS03 adjuvant, prime-boost interval, and priming effects of 2013 and 2017 A(H7N9) IIVs. METHODS: Healthy adults (n=180), ages 19-50 years, were enrolled into this partially-blinded, randomized, multi-center Phase 2 clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 6 vaccination groups evaluating homologous versus heterologous prime-boost strategies with two different boost intervals (21 versus 120 days) and two dosages (3.75 or 15 µg of hemagglutinin) administered with or without AS03 adjuvant. Reactogenicity, safety, and immunogenicity measured by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and neutralizing antibody titers were assessed. RESULTS: Two doses of A(H7N9) IIV were well tolerated, and no safety issues were identified. Although most participants had injection site and systemic reactogenicity, these symptoms were mostly mild to moderate in severity; injection site reactogenicity was greater in vaccination groups receiving adjuvant. Immune responses were greater after an adjuvanted second dose, and with a longer interval between prime and boost. The highest HAI GMT (95%CI) observed against the 2017 A(H7N9) strain was 133.4 (83.6, 212.6) among participants who received homologous, adjuvanted 3.75 ug+AS03/2017 doses with delayed boost interval. CONCLUSIONS: Administering AS03 adjuvant with the second H7N9 IIV dose and extending the boost interval to 4 months resulted in higher peak antibody responses. These observations can broadly inform strategic approaches for pandemic preparedness. (NCT03589807).

5.
Vaccine X ; 16: 100422, 2024 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38192618

RESUMO

Background: Studies have demonstrated low hepatitis A virus (HAV) vaccination rates among persons with HIV (PWH). Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of persons entering HIV care at two clinics in Houston, Texas between 2010 and 2018. We defined those eligible for HAV vaccination as those who had no history of HAV vaccination and had a negative anti-HAV IgG at entry to care. Kaplan-Meier curves summarized time to receipt of HAV vaccines. The proportions of patients who received 1 and 2 HAV vaccines at 6, 12, and 24 months were estimated. Cox proportional hazards regression evaluated associations between patient characteristics and vaccination. Significant factors were included in a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Of 6,515 patients, 1372 were eligible for HAV vaccination. Of eligible patients, 29.2 % received 1 HAV vaccination at 6 months, 37.1 % at 12 months, and 47.8 % at 24 months. At 6 months, 10 % received 2 HAV vaccinations, 21.1 % at 12 months, and 33.4 % at 24 months. In multivariable analysis, men who have sex with men (adjusted HR 1.35, 95 % CI 1.06, 1.73) or those who had CD4 count ≥ 200 cells/µl (adjusted HR 2.52, 95 % CI 1.89, 3.37) had their second vaccination sooner than those who were not men who have sex with men or who had CD4 counts < 200 cells/µl, respectively. Patients > 50 years of age had their second vaccination sooner than those aged 30-50 years (adjusted HR 1.47, 95 % CI 1.08, 1.99). Those with active substance history had a longer time to second vaccination compared to those with no substance use history (adjusted HR 0.57, 95 % CI 0.40, 0.82). Conclusions: HAV vaccination rates were low and highlight the need for effective solutions to address HAV immunization gaps in PWH, especially among young patients, those with active substance use disorders, and those with significant immunocompromise.

6.
J Infect Dis ; 229(2): 327-340, 2024 Feb 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37466221

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Influenza A (H7N9) has caused multiple disease waves with evidence of strain diversification. Optimal influenza A (H7N9) prime-boost vaccine strategies are unknown. METHODS: We recruited participants who had received monovalent inactivated A/Shanghai/2/2013 (H7N9) vaccine (MIV) approximately 5 years earlier, as follows: MIV with MF59 (MF59 × 2 group), MIV with AS03 (AS03 × 2 group), unadjuvanted MIV (No Adj group), MIV with MF59 or AS03 followed by unadjuvanted MIV (Adjx1 group), and A/H7-naive (unprimed group). Participants were randomized to receive 1 dose of AS03-adjuvanted or unadjuvanted A/Hong Kong/125/2017 (H7N9) MIV and were followed for safety and immunogenicity using hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and neutralizing antibody assays. RESULTS: We enrolled 304 participants: 153 received the adjuvanted boost and 151 received the unadjuvanted boost. At 21 days postvaccination, the proportion of participants with HAI antibody titers against the boosting vaccine strain of ≥40 in the adjuvanted and unadjuvanted arms, respectively, were 88% and 49% in MF59 × 2 group, 89% and 75% in AS03 × 2 group, 59% and 20% in No Adj group, 94% and 55% in Adjx1group, and 9% and 11% in unprimed group. CONCLUSIONS: Serologic responses to a heterologous A(H7N9) MIV boost were highest in participants primed and boosted with adjuvant-containing regimens. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03738241.


Assuntos
Subtipo H7N9 do Vírus da Influenza A , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Adjuvantes Imunológicos , Anticorpos Antivirais , China , Testes de Inibição da Hemaglutinação , Imunogenicidade da Vacina , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Polissorbatos , Esqualeno
7.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 10(11): ofad543, 2023 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38033987

RESUMO

Background: Studies have demonstrated low hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccine series completion among persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Methods: We conducted a retrospective record review of persons entering HIV care at 2 clinics in Houston, Texas, between 2010 and 2018. Kaplan-Meier curves summarized time to receipt of HBV vaccines for those eligible for vaccination. We estimated the proportions of patients who had received 1, 2, or 3 HBV vaccine doses at 12 and 24 months after entry to care. A Prentice Williams and Peterson total time model was used to evaluate associations between patient characteristics and time to vaccination. Results: Of the 5357 patients who entered care, 2718 were eligible for HBV vaccination. After 2 years of follow-up, 51.2% of those eligible had received 1 HBV vaccine, 43.2% had received 2, and 28.4% received 3 vaccines. With adjustment for significant cofactors, patients whose CD4 cell count was ≥200/µL (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.43 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.29-1.59]) and transgender patients (1.49 [1.08-2.04]) received any given vaccine dose sooner than those with CD4 cell counts <200/µL or cisgender patients, respectively. Compared with non-Hispanic whites, Hispanic patients were vaccinated sooner (aHR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.07-1.53]). Those with an active substance use history had a significantly longer time to vaccination than those with no substance use history (aHR, 0.73 [95% CI, .62-.85]). Conclusions: Strategies are needed to increase HBV vaccine completion rates in our study population, particularly among those with CD4 cell counts <200/µL or with a substance use disorder.

8.
Viruses ; 15(10)2023 09 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37896806

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , COVID-19 , Humanos , Anticorpos Neutralizantes , Anticorpos Antivirais , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Imunoglobulina G , Eficácia de Vacinas
9.
Int J Infect Dis ; 137: 28-39, 2023 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37820782

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas , Humanos , Anticorpos Neutralizantes , Anticorpos Antivirais , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , RNA Mensageiro/genética
10.
Front Immunol ; 14: 1247876, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37705976

RESUMO

Zika virus (ZIKV) is a flavivirus primarily transmitted by Aedes species mosquitoes, first discovered in Africa in 1947, that disseminated through Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands in the 2000s. The first ZIKV infections in the Americas were identified in 2014, and infections exploded through populations in Brazil and other countries in 2015/16. ZIKV infection during pregnancy can cause severe brain and eye defects in offspring, and infection in adults has been associated with higher risks of Guillain-Barré syndrome. We initiated a study to describe the natural history of Zika (the disease) and the immune response to infection, for which some results have been reported. In this paper, we identify ZIKV-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell epitopes that induce responses during infection. Two screening approaches were utilized: an untargeted approach with overlapping peptide arrays spanning the entire viral genome, and a targeted approach utilizing peptides predicted to bind human MHC molecules. Immunoinformatic tools were used to identify conserved MHC class I supertype binders and promiscuous class II binding peptide clusters predicted to bind 9 common class II alleles. T cell responses were evaluated in overnight IFN-γ ELISPOT assays. We found that MHC supertype binding predictions outperformed the bulk overlapping peptide approach. Diverse CD4+ T cell responses were observed in most ZIKV-infected participants, while responses to CD8+ T cell epitopes were more limited. Most individuals developed a robust T cell response against epitopes restricted to a single MHC class I supertype and only a single or few CD8+ T cell epitopes overall, suggesting a strong immunodominance phenomenon. Noteworthy is that many epitopes were commonly immunodominant across persons expressing the same class I supertype. Nearly all of the identified epitopes are unique to ZIKV and are not present in Dengue viruses. Collectively, we identified 31 immunogenic peptides restricted by the 6 major class I supertypes and 27 promiscuous class II epitopes. These sequences are highly relevant for design of T cell-targeted ZIKV vaccines and monitoring T cell responses to Zika virus infection and vaccination.


Assuntos
Aedes , Infecção por Zika virus , Zika virus , Adulto , Animais , Feminino , Gravidez , Humanos , Epitopos de Linfócito T , Genes MHC Classe I
11.
EBioMedicine ; 96: 104799, 2023 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37738833

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos , Vacinação
12.
Nat Med ; 29(9): 2334-2346, 2023 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37640860

RESUMO

Vaccine protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection wanes over time, requiring updated boosters. In a phase 2, open-label, randomized clinical trial with sequentially enrolled stages at 22 US sites, we assessed safety and immunogenicity of a second boost with monovalent or bivalent variant vaccines from mRNA and protein-based platforms targeting wild-type, Beta, Delta and Omicron BA.1 spike antigens. The primary outcome was pseudovirus neutralization titers at 50% inhibitory dilution (ID50 titers) with 95% confidence intervals against different SARS-CoV-2 strains. The secondary outcome assessed safety by solicited local and systemic adverse events (AEs), unsolicited AEs, serious AEs and AEs of special interest. Boosting with prototype/wild-type vaccines produced numerically lower ID50 titers than any variant-containing vaccine against all variants. Conversely, boosting with a variant vaccine excluding prototype was not associated with decreased neutralization against D614G. Omicron BA.1 or Beta monovalent vaccines were nearly equivalent to Omicron BA.1 + prototype or Beta + prototype bivalent vaccines for neutralization of Beta, Omicron BA.1 and Omicron BA.4/5, although they were lower for contemporaneous Omicron subvariants. Safety was similar across arms and stages and comparable to previous reports. Our study shows that updated vaccines targeting Beta or Omicron BA.1 provide broadly crossprotective neutralizing antibody responses against diverse SARS-CoV-2 variants without sacrificing immunity to the ancestral strain. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05289037 .


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Anticorpos Amplamente Neutralizantes
13.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(7): e2323349, 2023 Jul 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37440227

RESUMO

Importance: Current data identifying COVID-19 risk factors lack standardized outcomes and insufficiently control for confounders. Objective: To identify risk factors associated with COVID-19, severe COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary cross-protocol analysis included 4 multicenter, international, randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled, COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials with harmonized protocols established by the COVID-19 Prevention Network. Individual-level data from participants randomized to receive placebo within each trial were combined and analyzed. Enrollment began July 2020 and the last data cutoff was in July 2021. Participants included adults in stable health, at risk for SARS-CoV-2, and assigned to the placebo group within each vaccine trial. Data were analyzed from April 2022 to February 2023. Exposures: Comorbid conditions, demographic factors, and SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk at the time of enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary outcomes were COVID-19 and severe COVID-19. Multivariate Cox proportional regression models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CIs for baseline covariates, accounting for trial, region, and calendar time. Secondary outcomes included severe COVID-19 among people with COVID-19, subclinical SARS-CoV-2 infection, and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: A total of 57 692 participants (median [range] age, 51 [18-95] years; 11 720 participants [20.3%] aged ≥65 years; 31 058 participants [53.8%] assigned male at birth) were included. The analysis population included 3270 American Indian or Alaska Native participants (5.7%), 7849 Black or African American participants (13.6%), 17 678 Hispanic or Latino participants (30.6%), and 40 745 White participants (70.6%). Annualized incidence was 13.9% (95% CI, 13.3%-14.4%) for COVID-19 and 2.0% (95% CI, 1.8%-2.2%) for severe COVID-19. Factors associated with increased rates of COVID-19 included workplace exposure (high vs low: aHR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.16-1.58]; medium vs low: aHR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.21-1.65]; P < .001) and living condition risk (very high vs low risk: aHR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.21-1.66]; medium vs low risk: aHR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.08-1.32]; P < .001). Factors associated with decreased rates of COVID-19 included previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.09-0.19]; P < .001), age 65 years or older (aHR vs age <65 years, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.50-0.64]; P < .001) and Black or African American race (aHR vs White race, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.67-0.91]; P = .002). Factors associated with increased rates of severe COVID-19 included race (American Indian or Alaska Native vs White: aHR, 2.61 [95% CI, 1.85-3.69]; multiracial vs White: aHR, 2.19 [95% CI, 1.50-3.20]; P < .001), diabetes (aHR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.14-2.08]; P = .005) and at least 2 comorbidities (aHR vs none, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.09-1.76]; P = .008). In analyses restricted to participants who contracted COVID-19, increased severe COVID-19 rates were associated with age 65 years or older (aHR vs <65 years, 1.75 [95% CI, 1.32-2.31]; P < .001), race (American Indian or Alaska Native vs White: aHR, 1.98 [95% CI, 1.38-2.83]; Black or African American vs White: aHR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.03-2.14]; multiracial: aHR, 1.81 [95% CI, 1.21-2.69]; overall P = .001), body mass index (aHR per 1-unit increase, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.01-1.04]; P = .001), and diabetes (aHR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.37-2.49]; P < .001). Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with decreased severe COVID-19 rates (aHR, 0.04 [95% CI, 0.01-0.14]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary cross-protocol analysis of 4 randomized clinical trials, exposure and demographic factors had the strongest associations with outcomes; results could inform mitigation strategies for SARS-CoV-2 and viruses with comparable epidemiological characteristics.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Demografia , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais
14.
NPJ Vaccines ; 8(1): 98, 2023 Jul 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37433788

RESUMO

As part of a multicenter study evaluating homologous and heterologous COVID-19 booster vaccines, we assessed the magnitude, breadth, and short-term durability of binding and pseudovirus-neutralizing antibody (PsVNA) responses following a single booster dose of NVX-CoV2373 in adults primed with either Ad26.COV2.S, mRNA-1273, or BNT162b2 vaccines. NVX-CoV2373 as a heterologous booster was immunogenic and associated with no safety concerns through Day 91. Fold-rises in PsVNA titers from baseline (Day 1) to Day 29 were highest for prototypic D614G variant and lowest for more recent Omicron sub-lineages BQ.1.1 and XBB.1. Peak humoral responses against all SARS-CoV-2 variants were lower in those primed with Ad26.COV2.S than with mRNA vaccines. Prior SARS CoV-2 infection was associated with substantially higher baseline PsVNA titers, which remained elevated relative to previously uninfected participants through Day 91. These data support the use of heterologous protein-based booster vaccines as an acceptable alternative to mRNA or adenoviral-based COVID-19 booster vaccines. This trial was conducted under ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04889209.

15.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 10(6): ofad290, 2023 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37383244

RESUMO

Background: Clinical trials initiated during emerging infectious disease outbreaks must quickly enroll participants to identify treatments to reduce morbidity and mortality. This may be at odds with enrolling a representative study population, especially when the population affected is undefined. Methods: We evaluated the utility of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET), the COVID-19 Case Surveillance System (CCSS), and 2020 United States (US) Census data to determine demographic representation in the 4 stages of the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT). We compared the cumulative proportion of participants by sex, race, ethnicity, and age enrolled at US ACTT sites, with respective 95% confidence intervals, to the reference data in forest plots. Results: US ACTT sites enrolled 3509 adults hospitalized with COVID-19. When compared with COVID-NET, ACTT enrolled a similar or higher proportion of Hispanic/Latino and White participants depending on the stage, and a similar proportion of African American participants in all stages. In contrast, ACTT enrolled a higher proportion of these groups when compared with US Census and CCSS. The proportion of participants aged ≥65 years was either similar or lower than COVID-NET and higher than CCSS and the US Census. The proportion of females enrolled in ACTT was lower than the proportion of females in the reference datasets. Conclusions: Although surveillance data of hospitalized cases may not be available early in an outbreak, they are a better comparator than US Census data and surveillance of all cases, which may not reflect the population affected and at higher risk of severe disease.

16.
Pediatr Infect Dis J ; 42(9): 739-744, 2023 09 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37343218

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Infectious disease exposures in early life are increasingly recognized as a risk factor for poor subsequent growth and neurodevelopment. We aimed to evaluate the association between cumulative illness with neurodevelopment and growth outcomes in a birth cohort of Guatemalan infants. METHODS: From June 2017 to July 2018, infants 0-3 months of age living in a resource-limited region of rural southwest Guatemala were enrolled and underwent weekly at-home surveillance for caregiver-reported cough, fever, and vomiting/diarrhea. They also underwent anthropometric assessments and neurodevelopmental testing with the Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL) at enrollment, 6 months, and 1 year. RESULTS: Of 499 enrolled infants, 430 (86.2%) completed all study procedures and were included in the analysis. At 12-15 months of age, 140 (32.6%) infants had stunting (length-for-age Z [LAZ] score < -2 SD) and 72 (16.7%) had microcephaly (occipital-frontal circumference [OFC] < -2 SD). In multivariable analysis, greater cumulative instances of reported cough illness (beta = -0.08/illness-week, P = 0.06) and febrile illness (beta = -0.36/illness-week, P < 0.001) were marginally or significantly associated with lower MSEL Early Learning Composite (ELC) Score at 12-15 months, respectively; there was no association with any illness (cough, fever, and/or vomiting/diarrhea; P = 0.27) or with cumulative instances of diarrheal/vomiting illness alone ( P = 0.66). No association was shown between cumulative instances of illness and stunting or microcephaly at 12-15 months. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the negative cumulative consequences of frequent febrile and respiratory illness on neurodevelopment during infancy. Future studies should explore pathogen-specific illnesses, host response associated with these syndromic illnesses, and their association with neurodevelopment.


Assuntos
Microcefalia , Humanos , Lactente , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Guatemala/epidemiologia , Tosse , Diarreia/epidemiologia , Transtornos do Crescimento/epidemiologia , Vômito
17.
Nat Commun ; 14(1): 3605, 2023 06 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37330602

RESUMO

While new vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 are authorized based on neutralizing antibody (nAb) titer against emerging variants of concern, an analogous pathway does not exist for preventative monoclonal antibodies. In this work, nAb titers were assessed as correlates of protection against COVID-19 in the casirivimab + imdevimab monoclonal antibody (mAb) prevention trial (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT4452318) and in the mRNA-1273 vaccine trial (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT04470427). In the mAb trial, protective efficacy of 92% (95% confidence interval (CI): 84%, 98%) is associated with a nAb titer of 1000 IU50/ml, with lower efficacy at lower nAb titers. In the vaccine trial, protective efficacies of 93% [95% CI: 91%, 95%] and 97% (95% CI: 95%, 98%) are associated with nAb titers of 100 and 1000 IU50/ml, respectively. These data quantitate a nAb titer correlate of protection for mAbs benchmarked alongside vaccine induced nAb titers and support nAb titer as a surrogate endpoint for authorizing new mAbs.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais , COVID-19 , Humanos , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Anticorpos Neutralizantes , Anticorpos Antivirais , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinação
18.
Vaccine ; 41(33): 4899-4906, 2023 07 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37385888

RESUMO

Questions remain regarding the effect of baseline host and exposure factors on vaccine efficacy (VE) across pathogens and vaccine platforms. We report placebo-controlled data from four Phase 3 COVID-19 trials during the early period of the pandemic. This was a cross-protocol analysis of four randomized, placebo-controlled efficacy trials (Moderna/mRNA1273, AstraZeneca/AZD1222, Janssen/Ad26.COV2.S, and Novavax/NVX-CoV2373) using a harmonized design. Trials were conducted in the United States and international sites in adults ≥ 18 years of age. VE was assessed for symptomatic and severe COVID-19. We analyzed 114,480 participants from both placebo and vaccine arms, enrolled July 2020 to February 2021, with follow up through July 2021. VE against symptomatic COVID-19 showed little heterogeneity across baseline socio-demographic, clinical or exposure characteristics, in either univariate or multivariate analysis, regardless of vaccine platform. Similarly, VE against severe COVID-19 in the single trial (Janssen) with sufficient endpoints for analysis showed little evidence of heterogeneity. COVID-19 VE is not influenced by baseline host or exposure characteristics across efficacy trials of different vaccine platforms and countries when well matched to circulating virus strains. This supports use of these vaccines, regardless of platform type, as effective tools in the near term for reducing symptomatic and severe COVID-19, particularly for older individuals and those with common co-morbidities during major variant shifts. Clinical trial registration numbers: NCT04470427, NCT04516746, NCT04505722, and NCT04611802.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Ad26COVS1 , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV
19.
Res Sq ; 2023 May 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37205592

RESUMO

Vaccine protection against COVID-19 wanes over time and has been impacted by the emergence of new variants with increasing escape of neutralization. The COVID-19 Variant Immunologic Landscape (COVAIL) randomized clinical trial (clinicaltrials.gov NCT05289037) compares the breadth, magnitude and durability of antibody responses induced by a second COVID-19 vaccine boost with mRNA (Moderna mRNA-1273 and Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2), or adjuvanted recombinant protein (Sanofi CoV2 preS DTM-AS03) monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates targeting ancestral and variant SARS-CoV-2 spike antigens (Beta, Delta and Omicron BA.1). We found that boosting with a variant strain is not associated with loss in neutralization against the ancestral strain. However, while variant vaccines compared to the prototype/wildtype vaccines demonstrated higher neutralizing activity against Omicron BA.1 and BA.4/5 subvariants for up to 3 months after vaccination, neutralizing activity was lower for more recent Omicron subvariants. Our study, incorporating both antigenic distances and serologic landscapes, can provide a framework for objectively guiding decisions for future vaccine updates.

20.
Sci Transl Med ; 15(692): eade9078, 2023 04 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37075127

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , COVID-19 , Humanos , Eficácia de Vacinas , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Anticorpos Neutralizantes , Imunoglobulina G , Anticorpos Antivirais
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA