Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of fractional, heterologous primary COVID-19 vaccination schedules with BNT162b2 boosters in 5-11-year-old Thai children: A multicenter, prospective, double-blind, randomized control trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate immunogenicity and safety of heterologous COVID-19 primary vaccination regimens of CoronaVac with fractional and standard BNT162b2 dosages in 5-11-year-old Thai children. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomized control trial divided participants 1:1:1:1 to receive a second dose of either standard (10-µg) or half-dose (5-µg) BNT162b2 vaccines as follows: CoronaVac/10-µg-BNT162b2 (Group 1), CoronaVac/5-µg-BNT162b2 (Group 2), 10-µg-BNT162b2/10-µg-BNT162b2 (Group 3), or 10-µg-BNT162b2/5-µg-BNT162b2 (Group 4). A subset of participants from each arm received 10-µg-BNT162b2 booster (third) doses 16 weeks after their second vaccination. Humoral and cellular immunogenicity were assessed and adverse events (AEs) digitally self-reported. RESULTS: Of 553 enrolled participants, 50 % were male, the median (interquartile range) age was 8.65 (7.00, 10.00) years, and a majority (91 %) had normal weight-for-height. All participants exhibited similarly robust neutralizing antibodies (NAb) against the ancestral Wuhan strain two weeks after the second vaccination, with titers highest in Group 1 (737.60, 95% CI [654.80, 830.88]), followed by Groups 3 (630.42, 95% CI [555.50, 715.45]), 2 (593.98, 95% CI [506.02, 697.23]), and 4 (451.79, 95% CI [388.62, 525.23]), as well as 56.01 % and 49.68 % seroconversion for BA.1 and BA.5, respectively. Half-dose BNT162b2 as a second dose induced significantly lower NAb titers compared to their respective full-dose regimens (p = 0.03 for Groups 1 vs 2 and p < 0.001 for Groups 3 vs 4). 77.71 % of participants developed SARS-CoV-2 ancestral spike protein-specific T-cell responses two weeks after the second vaccination. This was similar across arms. Booster doses generated NAb titers 5.69-11.51-folds higher than the second vaccination against BA.1. AEs were similar across arms, all mild or moderate, and fully resolved 2-3 days thereafter. CONCLUSION: Standard and fractional heterologous regimens of CoronaVac-BNT162b2 induced similar or higher humoral immunity than homologous BNT162b2 and represent alternative vaccine regimens for children. These findings are highly relevant in settings concurrently using both vaccines.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of heterologous COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women.

This open-labeled non-inferiority trial evaluated immunogenicity and reactogenicity of heterologous and homologous COVID-19 vaccination schedules in pregnant Thai women. 18-45-year-old pregnant women with no history of COVID-19 infection or vaccination and a gestational age of ≥12 weeks were randomized 1:1:1 into three two-dose primary series scheduled 4 weeks apart: BNT162b2-BNT162b2 (Group 1), ChAdOx1-BNT162b2 (Group 2), and CoronaVac-BNT162b2 (Group 3). Serum antibody responses, maternal and cord blood antibody levels at delivery, and adverse events (AEs) following vaccination until delivery were assessed. The 124 enrolled participants had a median age of 31 (interquartile range [IQR] 26.0-35.5) years and gestational age of 23.5 (IQR 18.0-30.0) weeks. No significant difference in anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG were observed across arms at 2 weeks after the second dose. Neutralizing antibody geometric mean titers against the ancestral Wuhan strain were highest in Group 3 (258.22, 95% CI [187.53, 355.56]), followed by Groups 1 (187.47, 95% CI [135.15, 260.03]) and 2 (166.63, 95% CI [124.60, 222.84]). Cord blood anti-RBD IgG was correlated with, and equal to or higher than, maternal levels at delivery (r = 0.719, P < .001) and inversely correlated with elapsed time after the second vaccination (r = -0.366, P < .001). No significant difference in cord blood antibody levels between groups were observed. Local and systemic AEs were mild-to-moderate and more frequent in Group 2. Heterologous schedules of CoronaVac-BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1-BNT162b2 induced immunogenicity on-par with BNT162b2-BNT162b2 and may be considered as alternative schedules for primary series in pregnant women in mRNA-limited vaccine settings.

The immunogenicity and reactogenicity of four COVID-19 booster vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 variants following CoronaVac or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 primary series.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate COVID-19 booster vaccine following inactivated or adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccination is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the immunogenicity of four COVID-19 booster vaccines. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled healthy adults who received a two-dose CoronaVac or ChAdOx1 8-12 weeks earlier and allocated them to receive one of the following booster vaccine: inactivated (BBIBP-CorV), ChAdOx1 or mRNA (BNT162b2 at full [30 µg] and half [15 µg] dose) vaccines. We determined the reactogenicity and the humoral (anti-receptor binding domain IgG (anti-RBD-IgG), neutralizing antibodies (nAb) against Delta, Beta and Omicron variants) and cellular immunity measuring by interferon gamma (IFN-γ) responses post-booster. AR patients. RESULTS: Among the 352 participants (179 CoronaVac and 173 ChAdOx1 participants), 285 (81%) were female, and median age was 39 (IQR: 31-47) years. Two weeks post-booster, both 30 µg- and 15 µg- BNT162b2 induced the highest anti-RBD IgG concentration (BAU/mL); Coronavac-prime: 30 µg-BNT162b2, 5152.2 (95%CI 4491.7-5909.8); 15 µg-BNT162b2, 3981.1 (3397.2-4665.4); ChAdOx1, 1358.0 (1141.8-1615.1); BBIBP-CorV, 154.6 (92.11-259.47); ChAdOx1-prime: 30 µg-BNT162b2, 2363.8 (2005.6-2786.1; 15 µg-BNT162b2, 1961.9 (1624.6-2369.1); ChAdOx1, 246.4 (199.6-304.2); BBIBP-CorV, 128.1 (93.5-175.4). Similarly, both 30 µg- and 15 µg- BNT162b2 boosting induced the highest nAb titers against Beta, Delta and Omicron BA.1 variants and highest T-cell response at 2 weeks after boosting. While all BNT162b2 or heterologous ChAdOx1-boosted participants had nAb against Omicron, these were < 50% for BBIBP-CorV and 75% for homologous ChAdOx1-boosted participants. There was significant decrease in nAb ( > 4-fold) at 16-20 weeks post booster for all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Heterologous boosting with BNT162b2 following CoronaVac or ChAdOx1 primary series is most immunogenic. Additional studies are needed to verify the clinical efficacy and persistence of immunity following half-dose BNT162b2.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of licensed dose intranasal corticosteroids for moderate-to-severe allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

No evidence shows that one intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) is better than another for treating moderate-to-severe allergic rhinitis (AR). This network meta-analysis assessed the comparative efficacy and acceptability of licensed dose aqueous INCSs. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched until 31 March 2022. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials comparing INCSs with placebo or other types of INCSs in patients with moderate-to-severe allergic rhinitis. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data following the Preferred Reporting Items in Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guideline. A random-effects model was used for data pooling. Continuous outcomes were expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD). The primary outcomes were the efficacy in improving total nasal symptom score (TNSS) and treatment acceptability (the study dropout). We included 26 studies, 13 with 5,134 seasonal AR patients and 13 with 4,393 perennial AR patients. Most placebo-controlled studies had a moderate quality of evidence. In seasonal AR, mometasone furoate (MF) was ranked the highest efficacy, followed by fluticasone furoate (FF), ciclesonide (CIC), fluticasone propionate and triamcinolone acetonide (TAA) (SMD -0.47, 95% CI: -0.63 to -0.31; -0.46, 95% CI: -0.59 to -0.33; -0.44, 95% CI: -0.75 to -0.13; -0.42, 95% CI: -0.67 to -0.17 and -0.41, 95% CI: -0.81 to -0.00), In perennial AR, budesonide was ranked the highest efficacy, followed by FF, TAA, CIC, and MF (SMD -0.43, 95% CI: -0.75 to -0.11; -0.36, 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.19; -0.32, 95% CI: -0.54 to -0.10; -0.29, 95% CI: -0.48 to -0.11; and -0.28, 95% CI: -0.55 to -0.01). The acceptability of all included INCSs was not inferior to the placebo. According to our indirect comparison, some INCSs have superior efficacy to others with moderate quality of evidence in most placebo-controlled studies for treating moderate-to-severe AR.

Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity of Messenger RNA Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine Booster Administered by Intradermal or Intramuscular Route in Thai Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Intradermal (ID) vaccination may alleviate COVID-19 vaccine shortages and vaccine hesitancy. METHODS: Persons aged ≥65 years who were vaccinated with 2-dose ChAdOx1 12-24 weeks earlier were randomized to receive a booster vaccination by either ID (20 µg mRNA-1273 or 10 µg BNT162b2) or intramuscular (IM) (100 µg mRNA-1273 or 30 µg BNT162b2) route. Anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) immunoglobulin G (IgG), neutralizing antibody (NAb), and interferon gamma (IFN-γ)-producing cells were measured at 2-4 weeks following vaccination. RESULTS: Of 210 participants enrolled, 70.5% were female and median age was 77.5 (interquartile range, 71-84) years. Following booster dose, both ID vaccinations induced 37% lower levels of anti-RBD IgG compared with IM vaccination of the same vaccine. NAb titers against ancestral and Omicron BA.1 were highest following IM mRNA-1273 (geometric mean, 1718 and 617), followed by ID mRNA-1273 (1212 and 318), IM BNT162b2 (713 and 230), and ID BNT162b2 (587 and 148), respectively. Spike-specific IFN-γ responses were similar or higher in the ID groups compared with IM groups. ID route tended to have fewer systemic adverse events (AEs), although more local AEs were reported in the ID mRNA-1273 group. CONCLUSIONS: Fractional ID vaccination induced lower humoral but comparable cellular immunity compared to IM and may be an alternative for older people. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: TCTR20220112002.

Immunogenicity of a fractional or full third dose of AZD1222 vaccine or BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine after two doses of CoronaVac vaccines against the Delta and Omicron variants.

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to compare the immunogenicity and safety of fractional (half) third doses of heterologous COVID-19 vaccines (AZD1222 or BNT162b2) to full doses after the two-dose CoronaVac and when boosting after three different extended intervals. METHODS: At 60-<90, 90-<120, or 120-180 days intervals after the two-dose CoronaVac, participants were randomized to full-dose or half-dose AZD1222 or BNT162b2, followed up at day 28, 60, and 90. Vaccination-induced immune responses to Ancestral, Delta, and Omicron BA.1 strains were evaluated by antispike, pseudovirus, and microneutralization and T cell assays. Descriptive statistics and noninferiority cut-offs were reported as geometric mean concentration or titer and concentration or titer ratios comparing baseline to day 28 and day 90 and different intervals. RESULTS: No safety concerns were detected. All assays and intervals showed noninferior immunogenicity between full doses and half doses. However, full-dose vaccines and/or longer 120-180-day intervals substantially improved the immunogenicity (measured by antispike or measured by pseudotyped virus neutralizing titers 50; P <0.001). Seroconversion rates were over 90% against the SARS-CoV-2 strains by all assays. Immunogenicity waned more quickly with half doses than full doses but remained high against the Ancestral or Delta strains. Against Omicron, the day 28 immunogenicity increased with longer intervals than shorter intervals for full-dose vaccines. CONCLUSION: Immune responses after day 28 when boosting at longer intervals after the two-dose CoronaVac was optimal. Half doses met the noninferiority criteria compared with the full dose by all the immune assays assessed.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of repeated intradermal mRNA COVID-19 vaccines administered as a second booster dose in a Thai geriatric population.

Background: Geriatric populations are at an increased risk of severe presentations, hospitalization, and loss of life from COVID-19. Few studies have explored vaccination regimens in adults >65 years old. Repeated booster vaccination is required for high-risk populations as COVID-19 vaccine efficacy is short-lived. We compared the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of second intradermal (ID) COVID-19 booster vaccination with second intramuscular (IM) vaccination in older adults. Methods: This single-center, open-labeled, prospective, cohort study conducted at Siriraj Hospital enrolled older adults ≥65 years old who previously received a first booster (third dose) mRNA vaccine (mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2) via ID or IM administration. Participants were allocated to receive a second booster of the same vaccine type and route as their first booster 16-17 weeks thereafter. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain IgG and neutralizing antibody titers against Wuhan and Omicron subvariants (BA.1, BA.2, and BA.4/5) were measured 2 weeks after vaccination. Results: Of 91 enrolled participants, 72.5% were women, with a median age of 75 years. Forty-nine participants (53.8%) received a second ID booster, and 42 (46.2%) received a second IM booster. Two weeks after the second booster, all groups generated anamnestic IgG antibody responses that were 5.41- to 10.00-fold higher than at baseline. Overall, higher antibody GMTs against Wuhan and Omicron subvariants were observed in IM compared with ID regimens. ID mRNA-1273 induced similar GMTs to IM BNT162b2 2 weeks after the second booster against Wuhan (486.77 [321.48, 737.05] vs. 472.63 [291.24, 767.01], respectively; p = 0.072). Higher GMTs against Omicron BA.1 (GMR [95% CI], 1.71 [1.39, 2.11]; p = 0.023), BA.2 (1.34 [1.11, 1.62]; p = 0.845), and BA.4/5 (1.10 [0.92, 1.33]; p = 0.531) were seen in all groups at 2 weeks after the second booster compared with 2-4 weeks after the first booster. Both local and systemic AEs were less frequent after the second than after the first booster, regardless of administrative route and vaccine type. Local AEs were significantly more frequent in ID mRNA-1273 arms than their respective BNT162b2 arms 2 weeks after the second booster (ID-mRNA-1273 vs. ID-BNT162b2: p ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: Repeated fractional ID vaccination may be an alternative booster vaccination strategy for geriatric populations.

Safety and immunogenicity of intradermal administration of fractional dose CoronaVac®, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 as primary series vaccination.

There is a limited supply of COVID-19 vaccines, with less than 20% of eligible populations in low-income countries having received one dose. Intradermal delivery of fractional dose vaccines is one way to improve global vaccine access, but no studies have reported data on intradermal delivery of COVID-19 primary series vaccination. We conducted a pilot study to examine the safety and immunogenicity of three intradermal primary series regimens - heterologous regimen of CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 (CoronaVac-ChAdOx1), homologous regimen of ChAdOx1 (ChAdOx1-ChAdOx1), and homologous regimen of BNT162b2 (BNT162b2-BNT162b2). Each dose was 1/5th or 1/6th of the standard dose. Two additional exploratory arms of intradermal vaccination for the second dose following an intramuscular first dose of ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 were included. Intradermal vaccination was found to be immunogenic and safe. The antibody responses generated by the intradermal primary series were highest in the BNT162b2 arms. The anti-receptor binding domain (anti-RBD) IgG concentration following fractional dose intradermal vaccination was similar to that of standard dose intramuscular vaccination of the same regimen for all study arms except for BNT162b2. The BNT162b2 intradermal series generated a lower antibody concentration than the reference intramuscular series, despite generating the highest antibody concentration of all three intradermal primary series regimens. Neutralizing antibody responses against the SARS-CoV-2 ancestral strain were consistent with what was observed for anti-RBD IgG, with lower titers for SARS-CoV-2 variants. Neutralizing titers were lowest against the omicron variant, being undetectable in about a quarter of study participants. T-cell responses against spike- and nucleocapsid-membrane-open reading frame proteins were also detected following intradermal vaccination. Adverse effects following intradermal vaccination were generally comparable with post-intramuscular vaccination effects. Taken together, our data suggest that intradermal vaccination using 1/5th or 1/6th of standard COVID-19 intramuscular vaccination dosing were immunogenic with tendency of lower systemic adverse reactions than intramuscular vaccination. Our findings have implications in settings where COVID-19 vaccines are in shortage.

Evaluation of the Safety and Immunogenicity of Fractional Intradermal COVID-19 Vaccines as a Booster: A Pilot Study.

Intradermal vaccination using fractional dosages of the standard vaccine dose is one strategy to improve access to COVID-19 immunization. We conducted a pilot study in healthy adults in Thailand to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of intradermal administration of fractional doses of ChAdOx1 (1/5th of standard dosage) or BNT162b2 (1/6th of standard dosage) to individuals previously vaccinated (prime) with two-dose intramuscular CoronaVac, ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2. Following an initial immunogenicity exploratory phase for each vaccine combination group (n = 10), a total of 135 participants (n = 45 per group) were recruited to 3 groups (CoronaVac prime-intradermal BNT162b2 boost, CoronaVac prime-intradermal ChAdOx1 boost and ChAdOx1 prime-intradermal BNT162b2 boost) and their immunogenicity data were compared to a previous cohort who received the same vaccine intramuscularly. Two weeks following booster vaccination, neutralizing antibodies against the delta variant were similar between the participants who received intradermal and intramuscular vaccination. However, neutralizing antibodies against the omicron variant in the intradermal BNT162b2 boost groups were ~6-fold lower, while the levels in the ChAdOx1 boost group were similar compared to their respective vaccine regimen given intramuscularly. The intradermal booster significantly increased spike-specific T cell responses in all three groups from pre-booster levels. Local and systemic adverse reactions were milder in intradermal compared to intramuscular injections. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical relevance of these findings and the feasibility of administration of intradermal COVID-19 vaccines.

Early treatment of Favipiravir in COVID-19 patients without pneumonia: a multicentre, open-labelled, randomized control study.

We investigated Favipiravir (FPV) efficacy in mild cases of COVID-19 without pneumonia and its effects towards viral clearance, clinical condition, and risk of COVID-19 pneumonia development. PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected patients without pneumonia were enrolled (2:1) within 10 days of symptomatic onset into FPV and control arms. The former received 1800 mg FPV twice-daily (BID) on Day 1 and 800 mg BID 5-14 days thereafter until negative viral detection, while the latter received only supportive care. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement, defined by a National Early Warning Score (NEWS) of ≤1. 62 patients (41 female) comprised the FPV arm (median age: 32 years, median BMI: 22 kg/m²) and 31 patients (19 female) comprised the control arm (median age: 28 years, median BMI: 22 kg/m²). The median time to sustained clinical improvement, by NEWS, was 2 and 14 days for FPV and control arms, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 2.77, 95% CI 1.57-4.88, P < .001). The FPV arm also had significantly higher likelihoods of clinical improvement within 14 days after enrolment by NEWS (79% vs. 32% respectively, P < .001). 8 (12.9%) and 7 (22.6%) patients in FPV and control arms developed mild pneumonia at a median (range) of 6.5 (1-13) and 7 (1-13) days after treatment, respectively (P = .316). All recovered well without complications. We can conclude that early treatment of FPV in symptomatic COVID-19 patients without pneumonia was associated with faster clinical improvement.Trial registration: Thai Clinical Trials Registry identifier: TCTR20200514001.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity against the SARS-CoV-2 variants following heterologous primary series involving CoronaVac, ChAdox1 nCov-19 and BNT162b2 plus BNT162b2 booster vaccination: An open-label randomized study in healthy Thai adults.

We evaluated the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of heterologous COVID-19 primary schedules involving BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca) and CoronaVac (Sinovac) in healthy adults, as well as booster response to BNT162b2 following heterologous CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 regimens. Participants were randomized to one of seven groups that received two-dose homologous BNT162b2 or heterologous combinations of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2, with 4 weeks interval. A total of 210 participants were enrolled, 30 in each group. Median age of participants was 38 (19-60) years, and 108/210 (51.43%) were female. Overall adverse events after the second dose were mild to moderate. We found that groups that received BNT162b2 as second dose induced the highest anti-receptor binding domain IgG response against the ancestral strain [BNT162b2: geometric mean concentration (GMC) 2133-2249 BAU/mL; ChAdOx1 nCoV-19: 851-1201; CoronaVac: 137-225 BAU/mL], neutralizing antibodies (NAb) against Beta and Delta, and interferon gamma response. All groups induced low to negligible NAb against Omicron after second dose. A BNT162b2 booster (third dose) following heterologous CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 regimens induced >140-fold increase in NAb titers against Omicron. Our findings indicate that heterologous regimens using BNT162b2 as the second dose may be an alternative schedule to maximize immune response. While heterologous two-dose schedules induced low NAb against Omicron, the use of an mRNA vaccine booster dose substantially increased the Omicron response. These findings are relevant for low-income countries considering heterologous primary and booster COVID-19 vaccine schedules.

Comparison of safety and immunogenicity of CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 against the SARS-CoV-2 circulating variants of concern (Alpha, Delta, Beta) in Thai healthcare workers.

Background: Inactivated vaccine (CoronaVac) and chimpanzee adenovirus-vector vaccine (ChAdOx1) have been widely used in resource-limited settings. However, the information on the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of these two vaccines in the same setting are limited. Methods: Healthy health care workers (HCWs) aged 18 years or older were randomly assigned to receive either two doses of CoronaVac at 4 weeks interval or two doses of ChAdOx1 at 10 weeks interval. Self-reported adverse events (AEs) were collected for 7 days following each vaccination. Immunogenicity was determined by IgG antibodies levels against receptor binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S1 subunit) and the 50% plaque reduction neutralization titers against various strains. Results: Of the 360 HCWs, 180 in each vaccine group, the median (interquartile range: IQR) age was 35 (29-44) years old and 84.2% were female. Participants who received ChAdOx1 reported higher frequency of AEs than those received CoronaVac after both the first dose (84.4% vs. 66.1%, P < 0.001) and second dose (75.6% vs. 60.6%, P = 0.002), with more AEs in those younger than 30 years of age for both vaccines. The seroconversion rates were 75.6% and 100% following the first dose of CoronaVac and ChAdOx1, respectively. All participants were seropositive at 2 weeks after the second dose. The anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD IgG levels induced by CoronaVac was lower than ChAdOX1 with geometric means of 164.4 and 278.5 BAU/mL, respectively (P = 0.0066). Both vaccines induced similar levels of neutralizing antibodies against the Wuhan strain, with the titers of 337.4 and 331.2; however, CoronaVac induced significantly lower GMT against Alpha (23.1 vs. 92.5), Delta (21.2 vs. 69.7), and Beta (10.2 vs. 43.6) variants, respectively. Conclusion: CoronaVac induces lower measurable antibodies against circulating variants but with lower frequency of AEs than ChAdOx1. An earlier boosting to prevent breakthrough infections may be needed.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of accelerated regimens of fractional intradermal COVID-19 vaccinations.

Introduction: This phase I study explored the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of accelerated, Q7 fractional, intradermal vaccination regimens for COVID-19. Methods: Participants (n = 60) aged 18-60 years, naïve to SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination, were randomly allocated into one of four homologous or heterologous accelerated two-dose, two-injection intradermal regimens seven days apart:(1) BNT162b2-BNT162b2(n= 20),(2) ChAdOx1- BNT162b2 (n = 20), (3) CoronaVac-ChAdOx1 (n = 10), and (4) ChAdOx1-ChAdOx1 (n = 10). CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 were 20%, and BNT162b2 17%, of their standard intramuscular doses (0.1 mL and 0.05 mL per injection, respectively). Humoral immune responses were measured through IgG response towards receptor binding domains (RBD-IgG) of ancestral SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and pseudovirus neutralization tests (PVNT50). Cellular immune responses were measured using ELISpot for ancestral protein pools. Results: Immunogenicity was highest in regimen (2), followed by (1), (4), and (3) 2 weeks after the second dose (P < 0.001 for anti-RBD-IgG and P= 0.01 for PVNT50). Each group had significantly lower anti-RBD IgG (by factors of 5.4, 3.6, 11.6, and 2.0 for regimens (1) to (4), respectively) compared to their respective standard intramuscular regimens (P < 0.001 for each). Seroconversion rates for PVNT50 against the ancestral strain were 75%, 90%, 57% and 37% for regimens (1) to (4), respectively. All participants elicited ELISpot response to S-protein after vaccination. Adverse events were reportedly mild or moderate across cohorts. Discussion: We concluded that accelerated, fractional, heterologous or homologous intradermal vaccination regimens of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 were well tolerated, provided rapid immune priming against SARS-CoV-2, and may prove useful for containing future outbreaks.

Bioequivalence Study of 100-mg Cilostazol Tablets in Healthy Thai Adult Volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Cilostazol is a vasodilator with anticoagulant effect for treatment of peripheral vascular disease. Cilostazol 100-mg tablet was shown to increase walking distance in this patient population. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the pharmacokinetic profiles and safety of Bestazol 100-mg tablet (Berlin Pharmaceutical Industry Co Ltd, Bangkok, Thailand), which is a generic formulation of cilostazol, with the original brand Pletaal 100-mg tablet (Korea Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co Ltd, Seoul, South Korea) in healthy Thai adult volunteers. METHODS: The pharmacokinetic profiles of Bestazol (test) and Pletaal (reference) 100-mg tablets were compared in a single-dose, open-label, 2-treatment, 2-period, 2-sequence, randomized crossover study in healthy Thai adult volunteers. This study was conducted at the Siriraj Clinical Research Center, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. Each volunteer was initially treated according to either the test-reference or the reference-test sequence, after which each volunteer was switched to the other study sequence after a 2-week washout period. Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using log-transformed ratios for Cmax, AUC0-last, AUC0-∞, Tmax, t1/2, and λZ for both cilostazol and 3,4-dehydro-cilostazol (its active metabolite) with 90% CI. Physical examination, clinical laboratory data, vital signs, and adverse events were assessed in all participants. FINDINGS: A total of 28 volunteers were included in the final analysis. The ratios of the geometric mean and the 90% CI compared test to reference of cilostazol formulations and were 101.86% (90% CI, 91.88%-112.92%), 107.78% (90% CI, 99.67%-116.56%), and 110.46% (90% CI, 102.68%-118.82%) for Cmax, AUC0-last, and AUC0-∞, respectively. The ratios of the geometric mean and the 90% CI compared test to reference of 3,4-dehydro-cilostazol and were 106.72% (95% CI, 95.31%-119.50%), 110.54% (95% CI, 101.92%-119.89%), and 107.37% (95% CI, 96.74%-119.16%) for Cmax, AUC0-last, and AUC0-∞, respectively. No significant difference was observed between formulations for Tmax. The most common adverse event was headache (51.85%), with no significant difference in incidence between the test and reference groups. No serious adverse events related to the studied drugs were reported. The findings of this study indicate these 2 cilostazol tablet formulations to be bioequivalent. CONCLUSIONS: Bestazol 100-mg tablet was bioequivalent to Pletaal 100-mg tablet. Thus, the formulations can be used interchangeably in clinical practice.

Tumor mutational profile of triple negative breast cancer patients in Thailand revealed distinctive genetic alteration in chromatin remodeling gene.

BACKGROUND: Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a breast cancer subtype characterized by absence of both hormonal receptors and human epithelial growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). TNBC accounts for 15-20% of breast cancer. TNBC is associated with more aggressive disease and worse clinical outcome. Though the underlying mechanism of TNBC is currently unclear, the heterogeneity of clinical characteristics in various population may relate to the difference in tumor mutational profile. There were studies on TNBC gene mutations in various ethnic groups but the tumor genome data on Thai TNBC patients is currently unknown. This study aims to investigate mutational profile of Thai TNBC. METHODS: The patients were Thai individuals who were diagnosed with primary breast carcinoma between 2014 and 2017. All surgically removed primary tumor tissues were carefully examined by pathologists and archived as formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor. TNBC was defined by absence of hormonal receptors and HER2 by immunohistochemistry. Genomic DNA was extracted, enriched and sequenced of all exomes on the Illumina HiSeq. Genomic data were then processed through bioinformatics platform to identify genomic alterations and tumor mutational burden. RESULTS: A total of 116 TNBC patients were recruited. Genomic analysis of TNBC samples identified 81,460 variants, of which 5,906 variants were in cancer-associated genes. The result showed that Thai TNBC has higher tumor mutation burden than previously reported data. The most frequently mutated cancer-associated gene was TP53 similar to other TNBC cohorts. Meanwhile KMT2C was found to be more commonly mutated in Thai TNBC than previous studies. Mutational profile of Thai TNBC patients also revealed difference in many frequently mutated genes when compared to other Western TNBC cohorts. CONCLUSION: This result supported that TNBC breast cancer patients from various ethnic background showed diverse genome alteration pattern. Although TP53 is the most commonly mutated gene across all cohorts, Thai TNBC showed different gene mutation frequencies, especially in KMT2C. In particular, the cancer gene mutations are more prevalent in Thai TNBC patients. This result provides important insight on diverse underlying genetic and epigenetic mechanisms of TNBC that could translate to a new treatment strategy for patients with this disease.

Utilisation trends of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone in Australia before and after safety warnings.

BACKGROUND: A see on cardiovascular diseases and bladder cancer. The changes to the patterns of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone utilisation in Australia following the timing of these various health authority warnings such as the Australian Therapeutic Good Administration (TGA), European Medicines Agency (EMA) press releases or U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is unknown. This study investigated the utilisation patterns of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone in Australia before and after warnings of major drug authorities. METHODS: We evaluated rosiglitazone and pioglitazone dispensing using the Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme (PBS) subsidised drug dispensing data for the Australian population from February 2004 to July 2012. The World Health Organisation Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical (ATC)/Defined Daily Dose (DDD) system was used to compare the drug utilisation patterns following the announcements of EMA, FDA, and TGA safety warnings, which first occurred in May 2007. The DDD/1000 population/day were examined in a series of time-series regression analysis with the drug safety warnings specified as interventions. RESULTS: Rosiglitazone utilisation increased steadily from 2004 until reaching a peak at 1.96/1000 population/day in January 2007. Then rosiglitazone use decreased significantly after the initial EMA press release and FDA warning on cardiovascular risk in May 2007 (with a 15.04% average monthly decline, p-value <0.001), however use did not significantly decrease after the TGA warning or subsequent EMA and FDA warnings. Pioglitazone utilisation proceeded rosiglitazone in September 2008 and remained above 1.5/1000/day during 2009-2010. However, pioglitazone utilisation has slightly declined after the FDA, EMA, and TGA warnings related to bladder cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Drug safety warnings were associated with a decrease in rosiglitazone and pioglitazone utilisation in Australia. Rosiglitazone began to decline prior to TGA warnings in December 2007, which suggests that Australian prescribers may have acted in response to scientific evidence or international safety warnings (EMA, FDA), prior to the response of the TGA. Minor effects were observed after bladder cancer warnings on pioglitazone utilisation.

Bioequivalence study of 50 mg sertraline tablets in healthy Thai volunteers.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the bioavailability of 50 mg sertraline tablets between the test product (Zotaline, M&H Manufacturing Co., Ltd, Thailand) and the reference product (Zoloft, Pfizer Australia Pty Ltd, Australia). MATERIAL AND METHOD: An open-labeled, single dose, 2-treatment, 2-period, 2-sequence, randomized crossover study under fasting conditions with 14 days washout period was conducted in 24 healthy Thai volunteers. Blood samples were collected before dosing and at frequent intervals for up to 96 h post dose. Analysis of sertraline concentrations was performed using a validated liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method. RESULTS: Twenty-four volunteers completed both treatment periods. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined using the non-compartment model. The 90 percent confidence intervals of the geometric mean ratios (test/reference) of C(max) 104.47% (96.64%-112.93%), AUC(0-96) 108.06% (100.71%-115.94%) and AUC(0-infinity) 108.39% (100.93%-116.40%) fell within the equivalence range (80%-125%). There was no significant difference of the T(max) parameter between the two formulations (p > 0.05). No serious adverse events related to the study drugs were found. CONCLUSION: The two formulations of sertraline tablets were bio-equivalent in Thai healthy volunteers.