Safety of a controlled human infection model of tuberculosis with aerosolised, live-attenuated Mycobacterium bovis BCG versus intradermal BCG in BCG-naive adults in the UK: a dose-escalation, randomised, controlled, phase 1 trial.

BACKGROUND: Mycobacterium tuberculosis is the main causative agent of tuberculosis. BCG, the only licensed vaccine, provides inadequate protection against pulmonary tuberculosis. Controlled human infection models are useful tools for vaccine development. We aimed to determine a safe dose of aerosol-inhaled live-attenuated Mycobacterium bovis BCG as a surrogate for M tuberculosis infection, then compare the safety and tolerability of infection models established using aerosol-inhaled and intradermally administered BCG. METHODS: This phase 1 controlled human infection trial was conducted at two clinical research facilities in the UK. Healthy, immunocompetent adults aged 18-50 years, who were both M tuberculosis-naive and BCG-naive and had no history of asthma or other respiratory diseases, were eligible for the trial. Participants were initially enrolled into group 1 (receiving the BCG Danish strain); the trial was subsequently paused because of a worldwide shortage of BCG Danish and, after protocol amendment, was restarted using the BCG Bulgaria strain (group 2). After a dose-escalation study, during which participants were sequentially allocated to receive either 1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105, 1 × 106, or 1 × 107 colony-forming units (CFU) of aerosol BCG, the maximum tolerated dose was selected for the randomised controlled trial. Participants in this trial were randomly assigned (9:12), by variable block randomisation and using sequentially numbered sealed envelopes, to receive aerosol BCG (1 × 107 CFU) and intradermal saline or intradermal BCG (1 × 106 CFU) and aerosol saline. Participants were masked to treatment allocation until day 14. The primary outcome was to compare the safety of a controlled human infection model based on aerosol-inhaled BCG versus one based on intradermally administered BCG, and the secondary outcome was to evaluate BCG recovery in the airways of participants who received aerosol BCG or skin biopsies of participants who received intradermal BCG. BCG was detected by culture and by PCR. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02709278, and is complete. FINDINGS: Participants were assessed for eligibility between April 7, 2016, and Sept 29, 2018. For group 1, 15 participants were screened, of whom 13 were enrolled and ten completed the study; for group 2, 60 were screened and 33 enrolled, all of whom completed the study. Doses up to 1 × 107 CFU aerosol-inhaled BCG were sufficiently well tolerated. No significant difference was observed in the frequency of adverse events between aerosol and intradermal groups (median percentage of solicited adverse events per participant, post-aerosol vs post-intradermal BCG: systemic 7% [IQR 2-11] vs 4% [1-13], p=0·62; respiratory 7% [1-19] vs 4% [1-9], p=0·56). More severe systemic adverse events occurred in the 2 weeks after aerosol BCG (15 [12%] of 122 reported systemic adverse events) than after intradermal BCG (one [1%] of 94; difference 11% [95% CI 5-17]; p=0·0013), but no difference was observed in the severity of respiratory adverse events (two [1%] of 144 vs zero [0%] of 97; 1% [-1 to 3]; p=0·52). All adverse events after aerosol BCG resolved spontaneously. One serious adverse event was reported-a participant in group 2 was admitted to hospital to receive analgesia for a pre-existing ovarian cyst, which was deemed unrelated to BCG infection. On day 14, BCG was cultured from bronchoalveolar lavage samples after aerosol infection and from skin biopsy samples after intradermal infection. INTERPRETATION: This first-in-human aerosol BCG controlled human infection model was sufficiently well tolerated. Further work will evaluate the utility of this model in assessing vaccine efficacy and identifying potential correlates of protection. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley Clinical Research Network, and TBVAC2020.

The impact of targeted fee increases on the pay disparity between female and male general surgeons in British Columbia.

BACKGROUND: High-level payment data provided by Doctors of BC showed a 19.7% pay disparity in annual payments between female and male general surgeons in fiscal year 2019/20, and this was previously as high as 30% in 2012/13. This study aimed to examine the impact of targeted fee increases on pay disparity by sex over time. METHODS: The top 35 fees billed by female general surgeons, representing 76.3% of total payments, were retrospectively analyzed. The pay disparity by sex was calculated for each individual fee from 2000/01 to 2019/20. RESULTS: There were notable billing differences between female and male general surgeons. Female surgeons billed breast oncology procedures, malignancy consultations and visits, and peritoneal malignancy surgical procedures in greater proportions than did their male counterparts. Male surgeons billed hemorrhoid banding and rigid proctosigmoidoscopy in greater proportions than their female counterparts. With targeted fee increases, pay disparity by sex worsened for 17 of the top 35 fees but improved for the other 18 from 2010/11 to 2019/20, to varying degrees, resulting in an overall reduction in pay disparity by sex from 23% to 15%. If across-the-board fee increases had been implemented instead of targeted fee increases, the disparity in 2019/20 would have been 19% instead of 15%. CONCLUSION: Targeted fee increases reduced pay disparity between male and female general surgeons compared with theoretical across-the-board fee increases in British Columbia from 2010/11 to 2019/20, but not uniformly; some fee increases resulted in increased disparity. Other physician groups should conduct a similar analysis and allocate future fee changes with the aim of improving rather than worsening disparity.

Safety and immunogenicity of a ChAdOx1 vaccine against Rift Valley fever in UK adults: an open-label, non-randomised, first-in-human phase 1 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Rift Valley fever is a viral epidemic illness prevalent in Africa that can be fatal or result in debilitating sequelae in humans. No vaccines are available for human use. We aimed to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of a non-replicating simian adenovirus-vectored Rift Valley fever (ChAdOx1 RVF) vaccine in humans. METHODS: We conducted a phase 1, first-in-human, open-label, dose-escalation trial in healthy adults aged 18-50 years at the Centre for Clinical Vaccinology and Tropical Medicine, Oxford, UK. Participants were required to have no serious comorbidities or previous history of receiving an adenovirus-based vaccine before enrolment. Participants were non-randomly allocated to receive a single ChAdOx1 RVF dose of either 5 × 109 virus particles (vp), 2·5 × 1010 vp, or 5 × 1010 vp administered intramuscularly into the deltoid of their non-dominant arm; enrolment was sequential and administration was staggered to allow for safety to be assessed before progression to the next dose. Primary outcome measures were assessment of adverse events and secondary outcome measures were Rift Valley fever neutralising antibody titres, Rift Valley fever GnGc-binding antibody titres (ELISA), and cellular response (ELISpot), analysed in all participants who received a vaccine. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04754776). FINDINGS: Between June 11, 2021, and Jan 13, 2022, 15 volunteers received a single dose of either 5 × 109 vp (n=3), 2·5 × 1010 vp (n=6), or 5 × 1010 vp (n=6) ChAdOx1 RVF. Nine participants were female and six were male. 14 (93%) of 15 participants reported solicited local adverse reactions; injection-site pain was the most frequent (13 [87%] of 15). Ten (67%) of 15 participants (from the 2·5 × 1010 vp and 5 × 1010 vp groups only) reported systemic symptoms, which were mostly mild in intensity, the most common being headache (nine [60%] of 15) and fatigue (seven [47%]). All unsolicited adverse events reported within 28 days were either mild or moderate in severity; gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common reaction (at least possibly related to vaccination), occurring in four (27%) of 15 participants. Transient decreases in total white cell, lymphocyte, or neutrophil counts occurred at day 2 in some participants in the intermediate-dose and high-dose groups. Lymphopenia graded as severe occurred in two participants in the 5 × 1010 vp group at a single timepoint, but resolved at the subsequent follow-up visit. No serious adverse events occurred. Rift Valley fever neutralising antibodies were detectable across all dose groups, with all participants in the 5 × 1010 vp dose group having high neutralising antibody titres that peaked at day 28 after vaccination and persisted through the 3-month follow-up. High titres of binding IgG targeting Gc glycoprotein were detected whereas those targeting Gn were comparatively low. IFNγ cellular responses against Rift Valley fever Gn and Gc glycoproteins were observed in all participants except one in the 5 × 1010 vp dose group. These IFNγ responses peaked at 2 weeks after vaccination, were highest in the 5 × 1010 vp dose group, and tended to be more frequent against the Gn glycoprotein. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 RVF was safe, well tolerated, and immunogenic when administered as a single dose in this study population. The data support further clinical development of ChAdOx1 RVF for human use. FUNDING: UK Department of Health and Social Care through the UK Vaccines Network, Oak Foundation, and the Wellcome Trust. TRANSLATION: For the Swahili translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Persistence of the immune response after two doses of ChAdOx1 nCov-19 (AZD1222): 1 year of follow-up of two randomized controlled trials.

The trajectory of immune responses following the primary dose series determines the decline in vaccine effectiveness over time. Here we report on maintenance of immune responses during the year following a two-dose schedule of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/AZD1222, in the absence of infection, and also explore the decay of antibody after infection. Total spike-specific IgG antibody titres were lower with two low doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines (two low doses) (P = 0.0006) than with 2 standard doses (the approved dose) or low dose followed by standard dose vaccines regimens. Longer intervals between first and second doses resulted in higher antibody titres (P < 0.0001); however, there was no evidence that the trajectory of antibody decay differed by interval or by vaccine dose, and the decay of IgG antibody titres followed a similar trajectory after a third dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Trends in post-infection samples were similar with an initial rapid decay in responses but good persistence of measurable responses thereafter. Extrapolation of antibody data, following two doses of ChAdOx1 nCov-19, demonstrates a slow rate of antibody decay with modelling, suggesting that antibody titres are well maintained for at least 2 years. These data suggest a persistent immune response after two doses of ChAdOx1 nCov-19 which will likely have a positive impact against serious disease and hospitalization.

Tolerability and immunogenicity of an intranasally-administered adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccine: An open-label partially-randomised ascending dose phase I trial.

BACKGROUND: Intranasal vaccination may induce protective local and systemic immune responses against respiratory pathogens. A number of intranasal SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates have achieved protection in pre-clinical challenge models, including ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222, University of Oxford / AstraZeneca). METHODS: We performed a single-centre open-label Phase I clinical trial of intranasal vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in healthy adults, using the existing formulation produced for intramuscular administration. Thirty SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-naïve participants were allocated to receive 5 × 109 viral particles (VP, n=6), 2 × 1010 VP (n=12), or 5 × 1010 VP (n=12). Fourteen received second intranasal doses 28 days later. A further 12 received non-study intramuscular mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination between study days 22 and 46. To investigate intranasal ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 as a booster, six participants who had previously received two intramuscular doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and six who had received two intramuscular doses of BNT162b2 (Pfizer / BioNTech) were given a single intranasal dose of 5 × 1010 VP of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Objectives were to assess safety (primary) and mucosal antibody responses (secondary). FINDINGS: Reactogenicity was mild or moderate. Antigen-specific mucosal antibody responses to intranasal vaccination were detectable in a minority of participants, rarely exceeding levels seen after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Systemic responses to intranasal vaccination were typically weaker than after intramuscular vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Antigen-specific mucosal antibody was detectable in participants who received an intramuscular mRNA vaccine after intranasal vaccination. Seven participants developed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. INTERPRETATION: This formulation of intranasal ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 showed an acceptable tolerability profile but induced neither a consistent mucosal antibody response nor a strong systemic response. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Safety and immunogenicity of a simian-adenovirus-vectored rabies vaccine: an open-label, non-randomised, dose-escalation, first-in-human, single-centre, phase 1 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Rabies kills around 60 000 people each year. ChAdOx2 RabG, a simian adenovirus-vectored rabies vaccine candidate, might have potential to provide low-cost single-dose pre-exposure rabies prophylaxis. This first-in-human study aimed to evaluate its safety and immunogenicity in healthy adults. METHODS: We did a single-centre phase 1 study of ChAdOx2 RabG, administered as a single intramuscular dose, with non-randomised open-label dose escalation at the Centre for Clinical Vaccinology and Tropical Medicine, Oxford, UK. Healthy adults were sequentially allocated to groups receiving low (5 × 109 viral particles), middle (2·5 × 1010 viral particles), and high doses (5 x 1010 viral particles) of ChAdOx2 RabG and were followed up to day 56 after vaccination. The primary objective was to assess safety. The secondary objective was to assess immunogenicity with the internationally standardised rabies virus neutralising antibody assay. In an optional follow-up phase 1 year after enrolment, we measured antibody maintenance then administered a licensed rabies vaccine (to simulate post-exposure prophylaxis) and measured recall responses. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04162600, and is now closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Jan 2 and Oct 28, 2020, 12 adults received low (n=3), middle (n=3), and high doses (n=6) of ChAdOx2 RabG. Participants reported predominantly mild-to-moderate reactogenicity. There were no serious adverse events. Virus neutralising antibody concentrations exceeded the recognised correlate of protection (0·5 IU/mL) in three middle-dose recipients and six high-dose recipients within 56 days of vaccination (median 18·0 IU/mL). The median peak virus neutralising antibody concentrations within 56 days were 0·7 IU/mL (range 0·0-54·0 IU/mL) for the low-dose group, 18·0 IU/mL (0·7-18·0 IU/mL) for the middle-dose group, and 18·0 IU/mL (6·0-486·0 IU/mL) for the high-dose group. Nine participants returned for the additional follow-up after 1 year. Of these nine participants, virus neutralising antibody titres of more than 0·5 IU/mL were maintained in six of seven who had received middle-dose or high-dose ChAdOx2 RabG. Within 7 days of administration of the first dose of a licensed rabies vaccine, nine participants had virus neutralising antibody titres of more than 0·5 IU/mL. INTERPRETATION: In this study, ChAdOx2 RabG showed an acceptable safety and tolerability profile and encouraging immunogenicity, supporting further clinical evaluation. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council and Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.

An exploratory analysis of the response to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in males and females.

BACKGROUND: There are known differences in vaccine reactogenicity and immunogenicity by sex. Females have been shown to report greater reactogenicity and generate higher humoral and cellular immune responses than males following vaccination with several different vaccines. Whether this is also the case for COVID-19 vaccines is currently unknown, as COVID-19 vaccine study data disaggregated by sex are not routinely reported. Therefore, we have assessed the influence of sex on reactogenicity, immunogenicity and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. METHODS: Vaccine efficacy was assessed in 15169 volunteers enrolled into single-blind randomised controlled trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in Brazil and the UK, with the primary endpoint defined as nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. All participants were electronically randomised to receive two standard doses of vaccine or the control product. Logistic regression models were fitted to explore the effect of age and sex on reactogenicity, and linear models fitted to log-transformed values for immunogenicity data. Reactogenicity data were taken from self-reported diaries of 788 trial participants. Pseudovirus neutralisation assay data were available from 748 participants and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG assay data from 1543 participants. FINDINGS: 7619 participants received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 7550 received the control. Vaccine efficacy in participants after two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (4243 females and 3376 males) was 66.1% (95% CI 55.9-73.9%) in males and 59.9% (95% CI 49.8-67.9%) in females; with no evidence of a difference in efficacy between the sexes (vaccine by sex interaction term P=0.3359). A small, statistically significant difference in anti-spike IgG was observed (adjusted GMR 1.14; 95% CI 1.04-1.26), with higher titres in females than males, but there were no statistically significant differences in other immunological endpoints. Whilst the majority of individuals reported at least one systemic reaction following a first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, females were twice as likely as males to report any systemic reaction after a first dose (OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.37-2.77). Measured fever of 38°C or above was reported in 5% of females and 1% of males following first doses. Headache and fatigue were the most commonly reported reactions in both sexes. INTERPRETATION: Our results show that there is no evidence of difference in efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in males and females. Greater reactogenicity in females was not associated with any difference in vaccine efficacy. FUNDING: Studies were registered with ISRCTN 90906759 (COV002) and ISRCTN 89951424 (COV003) and follow-up is ongoing. Funding was received from the UK Research and Innovation, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Science, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, the Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior, Brazil, and AstraZeneca.

Vaccines based on the replication-deficient simian adenoviral vector ChAdOx1: Standardized template with key considerations for a risk/benefit assessment.

Replication-deficient adenoviral vectors have been under investigation as a platform technology for vaccine development for several years and have recently been successfully deployed as an effective COVID-19 counter measure. A replication-deficient adenoviral vector based on the simian adenovirus type Y25 and named ChAdOx1 has been evaluated in several clinical trials since 2012. The Brighton Collaboration Benefit-Risk Assessment of VAccines by TechnolOgy (BRAVATO) was formed to evaluate the safety and other key features of new platform technology vaccines. This manuscript reviews key features of the ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines. The simian adenovirus Y25 was chosen as a strategy to circumvent pre-existing immunity to common human adenovirus serotypes which could impair immune responses induced by adenoviral vectored vaccines. Deletion of the E1 gene renders the ChAdOx1 vector replication incompetent and further genetic engineering of the E3 and E4 genes allows for increased insertional capability and optimizes vaccine manufacturing processes. ChAdOx1 vectored vaccines can be manufactured in E1 complementing cell lines at scale and are thermostable. The first ChAdOx1 vectored vaccines approved for human use, against SARS-CoV-2, received emergency use authorization in the UK on 30th December 2020, and is now approved in more than 180 countries. Safety data were compiled from phase I-III clinical trials of ChAdOx1 vectored vaccines expressing different antigens (influenza, tuberculosis, malaria, meningococcal B, prostate cancer, MERS-CoV, Chikungunya, Zika and SARS-CoV-2), conducted by the University of Oxford, as well as post marketing surveillance data for the COVID-19 Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. Overall, ChAdOx1 vectored vaccines have been well tolerated. Very rarely, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS), capillary leak syndrome (CLS), immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), and Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) have been reported following mass administration of the COVID-19 Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. The benefits of this COVID-19 vaccination have outweighed the risks of serious adverse events in most settings, especially with mitigation of risks when possible. Extensive immunogenicity clinical evaluation of ChAdOx1 vectored vaccines reveal strong, durable humoral and cellular immune responses to date; studies to refine the COVID-19 protection (e.g., via homologous/heterologous booster, fractional dose) are also underway. New prophylactic and therapeutic vaccines based on the ChAdOx1 vector are currently undergoing pre-clinical and clinical assessment, including vaccines against viral hemorrhagic fevers, Nipah virus, HIV, Hepatitis B, amongst others.

Deep Immune Phenotyping and Single-Cell Transcriptomics Allow Identification of Circulating TRM-Like Cells Which Correlate With Liver-Stage Immunity and Vaccine-Induced Protection From Malaria.

Protection from liver-stage malaria requires high numbers of CD8+ T cells to find and kill Plasmodium-infected cells. A new malaria vaccine strategy, prime-target vaccination, involves sequential viral-vectored vaccination by intramuscular and intravenous routes to target cellular immunity to the liver. Liver tissue-resident memory (TRM) CD8+ T cells have been shown to be necessary and sufficient for protection against rodent malaria by this vaccine regimen. Ultimately, to most faithfully assess immunotherapeutic responses by these local, specialised, hepatic T cells, periodic liver sampling is necessary, however this is not feasible at large scales in human trials. Here, as part of a phase I/II P. falciparum challenge study of prime-target vaccination, we performed deep immune phenotyping, single-cell RNA-sequencing and kinetics of hepatic fine needle aspirates and peripheral blood samples to study liver CD8+ TRM cells and circulating counterparts. We found that while these peripheral 'TRM-like' cells differed to TRM cells in terms of previously described characteristics, they are similar phenotypically and indistinguishable in terms of key T cell residency transcriptional signatures. By exploring the heterogeneity among liver CD8+ TRM cells at single cell resolution we found two main subpopulations that each share expression profiles with blood T cells. Lastly, our work points towards the potential for using TRM-like cells as a correlate of protection by liver-stage malaria vaccines and, in particular, those adopting a prime-target approach. A simple and reproducible correlate of protection would be particularly valuable in trials of liver-stage malaria vaccines as they progress to phase III, large-scale testing in African infants. We provide a blueprint for understanding and monitoring liver TRM cells induced by a prime-target malaria vaccine approach.

Durability of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination in people living with HIV.

Duration of protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection in people living with HIV (PWH) following vaccination is unclear. In a substudy of the phase II/III the COV002 trial (NCT04400838), 54 HIV+ male participants on antiretroviral therapy (undetectable viral loads, CD4+ T cells > 350 cells/µL) received 2 doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) 4-6 weeks apart and were followed for 6 months. Responses to vaccination were determined by serology (IgG ELISA and Meso Scale Discovery [MSD]), neutralization, ACE-2 inhibition, IFN-γ ELISpot, activation-induced marker (AIM) assay and T cell proliferation. We show that, 6 months after vaccination, the majority of measurable immune responses were greater than prevaccination baseline but with evidence of a decline in both humoral and cell-mediated immunity. There was, however, no significant difference compared with a cohort of HIV-uninfected individuals vaccinated with the same regimen. Responses to the variants of concern were detectable, although they were lower than WT. Preexisting cross-reactive T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike were associated with greater postvaccine immunity and correlated with prior exposure to beta coronaviruses. These data support the ongoing policy to vaccinate PWH against SARS-CoV-2, and they underpin the need for long-term monitoring of responses after vaccination.

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron-B.1.1.529 leads to widespread escape from neutralizing antibody responses.

On 24th November 2021, the sequence of a new SARS-CoV-2 viral isolate Omicron-B.1.1.529 was announced, containing far more mutations in Spike (S) than previously reported variants. Neutralization titers of Omicron by sera from vaccinees and convalescent subjects infected with early pandemic Alpha, Beta, Gamma, or Delta are substantially reduced, or the sera failed to neutralize. Titers against Omicron are boosted by third vaccine doses and are high in both vaccinated individuals and those infected by Delta. Mutations in Omicron knock out or substantially reduce neutralization by most of the large panel of potent monoclonal antibodies and antibodies under commercial development. Omicron S has structural changes from earlier viruses and uses mutations that confer tight binding to ACE2 to unleash evolution driven by immune escape. This leads to a large number of mutations in the ACE2 binding site and rebalances receptor affinity to that of earlier pandemic viruses.

Efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 lineages circulating in Brazil.

Several COVID-19 vaccines have shown good efficacy in clinical trials, but there remains uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccines against different variants. Here, we investigate the efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) against symptomatic COVID-19 in a post-hoc exploratory analysis of a Phase 3 randomised trial in Brazil (trial registration ISRCTN89951424). Nose and throat swabs were tested by PCR in symptomatic participants. Sequencing and genotyping of swabs were performed to determine the lineages of SARS-CoV-2 circulating during the study. Protection against any symptomatic COVID-19 caused by the Zeta (P.2) variant was assessed in 153 cases with vaccine efficacy (VE) of 69% (95% CI 55, 78). 49 cases of B.1.1.28 occurred and VE was 73% (46, 86). The Gamma (P.1) variant arose later in the trial and fewer cases (N = 18) were available for analysis. VE was 64% (-2, 87). ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 provided 95% protection (95% CI 61%, 99%) against hospitalisation due to COVID-19. In summary, we report that ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 protects against emerging variants in Brazil despite the presence of the spike protein mutation E484K.

Reactogenicity and immunogenicity after a late second dose or a third dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in the UK: a substudy of two randomised controlled trials (COV001 and COV002).

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccine supply shortages are causing concerns about compromised immunity in some countries as the interval between the first and second dose becomes longer. Conversely, countries with no supply constraints are considering administering a third dose. We assessed the persistence of immunogenicity after a single dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), immunity after an extended interval (44-45 weeks) between the first and second dose, and response to a third dose as a booster given 28-38 weeks after the second dose. METHODS: In this substudy, volunteers aged 18-55 years who were enrolled in the phase 1/2 (COV001) controlled trial in the UK and had received either a single dose or two doses of 5 × 1010 viral particles were invited back for vaccination. Here we report the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of a delayed second dose (44-45 weeks after first dose) or a third dose of the vaccine (28-38 weeks after second dose). Data from volunteers aged 18-55 years who were enrolled in either the phase 1/2 (COV001) or phase 2/3 (COV002), single-blinded, randomised controlled trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and who had previously received a single dose or two doses of 5 × 1010 viral particles are used for comparison purposes. COV001 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, and ISRCTN, 15281137, and COV002 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137, and both are continuing but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between March 11 and 21, 2021, 90 participants were enrolled in the third-dose boost substudy, of whom 80 (89%) were assessable for reactogenicity, 75 (83%) were assessable for evaluation of antibodies, and 15 (17%) were assessable for T-cells responses. The two-dose cohort comprised 321 participants who had reactogenicity data (with prime-boost interval of 8-12 weeks: 267 [83%] of 321; 15-25 weeks: 24 [7%]; or 44-45 weeks: 30 [9%]) and 261 who had immunogenicity data (interval of 8-12 weeks: 115 [44%] of 261; 15-25 weeks: 116 [44%]; and 44-45 weeks: 30 [11%]). 480 participants from the single-dose cohort were assessable for immunogenicity up to 44-45 weeks after vaccination. Antibody titres after a single dose measured approximately 320 days after vaccination remained higher than the titres measured at baseline (geometric mean titre of 66·00 ELISA units [EUs; 95% CI 47·83-91·08] vs 1·75 EUs [1·60-1·93]). 32 participants received a late second dose of vaccine 44-45 weeks after the first dose, of whom 30 were included in immunogenicity and reactogenicity analyses. Antibody titres were higher 28 days after vaccination in those with a longer interval between first and second dose than for those with a short interval (median total IgG titre: 923 EUs [IQR 525-1764] with an 8-12 week interval; 1860 EUs [917-4934] with a 15-25 week interval; and 3738 EUs [1824-6625] with a 44-45 week interval). Among participants who received a third dose of vaccine, antibody titres (measured in 73 [81%] participants for whom samples were available) were significantly higher 28 days after a third dose (median total IgG titre: 3746 EUs [IQR 2047-6420]) than 28 days after a second dose (median 1792 EUs [IQR 899-4634]; Wilcoxon signed rank test p=0·0043). T-cell responses were also boosted after a third dose (median response increased from 200 spot forming units [SFUs] per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells [PBMCs; IQR 127-389] immediately before the third dose to 399 SFUs per milion PBMCs [314-662] by day 28 after the third dose; Wilcoxon signed rank test p=0·012). Reactogenicity after a late second dose or a third dose was lower than reactogenicity after a first dose. INTERPRETATION: An extended interval before the second dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 leads to increased antibody titres. A third dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 induces antibodies to a level that correlates with high efficacy after second dose and boosts T-cell responses. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Science, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, AstraZeneca, and Wellcome.

A single dose of ChAdOx1 Chik vaccine induces neutralizing antibodies against four chikungunya virus lineages in a phase 1 clinical trial.

Chikungunya virus (CHIKV) is a reemerging mosquito-borne virus that causes swift outbreaks. Major concerns are the persistent and disabling polyarthralgia in infected individuals. Here we present the results from a first-in-human trial of the candidate simian adenovirus vectored vaccine ChAdOx1 Chik, expressing the CHIKV full-length structural polyprotein (Capsid, E3, E2, 6k and E1). 24 adult healthy volunteers aged 18-50 years, were recruited in a dose escalation, open-label, nonrandomized and uncontrolled phase 1 trial (registry NCT03590392). Participants received a single intramuscular injection of ChAdOx1 Chik at one of the three preestablished dosages and were followed-up for 6 months. The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability of ChAdOx1 Chik. The secondary objective was to assess the humoral and cellular immunogenicity. ChAdOx1 Chik was safe at all doses tested with no serious adverse reactions reported. The vast majority of solicited adverse events were mild or moderate, and self-limiting in nature. A single dose induced IgG and T-cell responses against the CHIKV structural antigens. Broadly neutralizing antibodies against the four CHIKV lineages were found in all participants and as early as 2 weeks after vaccination. In summary, ChAdOx1 Chik showed excellent safety, tolerability and 100% PRNT50 seroconversion after a single dose.

Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in HIV infection: a single-arm substudy of a phase 2/3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Data on vaccine immunogenicity against SARS-CoV-2 are needed for the 40 million people globally living with HIV who might have less functional immunity and more associated comorbidities than the general population. We aimed to explore safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in people with HIV. METHODS: In this single-arm open-label vaccination substudy within the protocol of the larger phase 2/3 trial COV002, adults aged 18-55 years with HIV were enrolled at two HIV clinics in London, UK. Eligible participants were required to be on antiretroviral therapy (ART), with undetectable plasma HIV viral loads (<50 copies per mL), and CD4 counts of more than 350 cells per µL. A prime-boost regimen of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, with two doses was given 4-6 weeks apart. The primary outcomes for this substudy were safety and reactogenicity of the vaccine, as determined by serious adverse events and solicited local and systemic reactions. Humoral responses were measured by anti-spike IgG ELISA and antibody-mediated live virus neutralisation. Cell-mediated immune responses were measured by ex-vivo IFN-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay (ELISpot) and T-cell proliferation. All outcomes were compared with an HIV-uninfected group from the main COV002 study within the same age group and dosing strategy and are reported until day 56 after prime vaccination. Outcomes were analysed in all participants who received both doses and with available samples. The COV002 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Nov 5 and Nov 24, 2020, 54 participants with HIV (all male, median age 42·5 years [IQR 37·2-49·8]) were enrolled and received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Median CD4 count at enrolment was 694·0 cells per µL (IQR 573·5-859·5). No serious adverse events occurred. Local and systemic reactions occurring during the first 7 days after prime vaccination included pain at the injection site (26 [49%] of 53 participants with available data), fatigue (25 [47%]), headache (25 [47%]), malaise (18 [34%]), chills (12 [23%]), muscle ache (19 [36%]), joint pain (five [9%]), and nausea (four [8%]), the frequencies of which were similar to the HIV-negative participants. Anti-spike IgG responses by ELISA peaked at day 42 (median 1440 ELISA units [EUs; IQR 704-2728]; n=50) and were sustained until day 56 (median 941 EUs [531-1445]; n=49). We found no correlation between the magnitude of the anti-spike IgG response at day 56 and CD4 cell count (p=0·93) or age (p=0·48). ELISpot and T-cell proliferative responses peaked at day 14 and 28 after prime dose and were sustained to day 56. Compared with participants without HIV, we found no difference in magnitude or persistence of SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific humoral or cellular responses (p>0·05 for all analyses). INTERPRETATION: In this study of people with HIV, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 was safe and immunogenic, supporting vaccination for those well controlled on ART. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.

Efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern 202012/01 (B.1.1.7): an exploratory analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A new variant of SARS-CoV-2, B.1.1.7, emerged as the dominant cause of COVID-19 disease in the UK from November, 2020. We report a post-hoc analysis of the efficacy of the adenoviral vector vaccine, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), against this variant. METHODS: Volunteers (aged ≥18 years) who were enrolled in phase 2/3 vaccine efficacy studies in the UK, and who were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or a meningococcal conjugate control (MenACWY) vaccine, provided upper airway swabs on a weekly basis and also if they developed symptoms of COVID-19 disease (a cough, a fever of 37·8°C or higher, shortness of breath, anosmia, or ageusia). Swabs were tested by nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for SARS-CoV-2 and positive samples were sequenced through the COVID-19 Genomics UK consortium. Neutralising antibody responses were measured using a live-virus microneutralisation assay against the B.1.1.7 lineage and a canonical non-B.1.1.7 lineage (Victoria). The efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a NAAT positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to vaccine received. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vs MenACWY groups) derived from a robust Poisson regression model. This study is continuing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137. FINDINGS: Participants in efficacy cohorts were recruited between May 31 and Nov 13, 2020, and received booster doses between Aug 3 and Dec 30, 2020. Of 8534 participants in the primary efficacy cohort, 6636 (78%) were aged 18-55 years and 5065 (59%) were female. Between Oct 1, 2020, and Jan 14, 2021, 520 participants developed SARS-CoV-2 infection. 1466 NAAT positive nose and throat swabs were collected from these participants during the trial. Of these, 401 swabs from 311 participants were successfully sequenced. Laboratory virus neutralisation activity by vaccine-induced antibodies was lower against the B.1.1.7 variant than against the Victoria lineage (geometric mean ratio 8·9, 95% CI 7·2-11·0). Clinical vaccine efficacy against symptomatic NAAT positive infection was 70·4% (95% CI 43·6-84·5) for B.1.1.7 and 81·5% (67·9-89·4) for non-B.1.1.7 lineages. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 showed reduced neutralisation activity against the B.1.1.7 variant compared with a non-B.1.1.7 variant in vitro, but the vaccine showed efficacy against the B.1.1.7 variant of SARS-CoV-2. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.

Safety and Immunogenicity of Adenovirus and Poxvirus Vectored Vaccines against a Mycobacterium Avium Complex Subspecies.

Heterologous prime-boost strategies are known to substantially increase immune responses in viral vectored vaccines. Here we report on safety and immunogenicity of the poxvirus Modified Vaccinia Ankara (MVA) vectored vaccine expressing four Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis antigens as a single dose or as a booster vaccine following a simian adenovirus (ChAdOx2) prime. We demonstrate that a heterologous prime-boost schedule is well tolerated and induced T-cell immune responses.

Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine: a pooled analysis of four randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. METHODS: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 1010 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 1010 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68]). INTERPRETATION: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.