Comparison of the immunogenicity and safety of Euvichol-Plus with Shanchol in healthy Indian adults and children: an open-label, randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority, parallel-group, phase 3 trial.

Background: Considering the cholera menace in India and to seek licensure of the oral cholera vaccine (OCV), Euvichol-Plus, we conducted a clinical trial to compare the immunogenicity and safety of Euvichol-Plus with Shanchol in healthy Indian adults and children. Methods: This phase 3, open-label, multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority, parallel-group, comparative study was conducted at seven sites across India involving 416 healthy adults (aged ≥18-60 years) and children (aged ≥1 to <18 years). Healthy individuals who agreed to participate through a voluntary written informed consent form along with oral or written assent (for children aged 7-18 years) were included. No assent was required for those <7 years, as consent was given by the legally acceptable representatives (LAR). Participants were randomised 1:1 to receive two doses of either Euvichol-Plus or Shanchol orally, 14 days apart. The first dose (1.5 ml) was administered on visit 1, and the second dose at 2 weeks after the first dose during visit 2. Participants were followed up telephonically for 3 consecutive days after each visit and returned for final assessment at 2 weeks after the second dose (visit 3). Blood samples were collected for immunogenicity assessment, and safety analyses were done during all the visits. The primary immunogenicity endpoint was the percentage of participants with ≥4-fold increase in anti-Vibrio cholerae (V. cholerae) O1 Ogawa and O1 Inaba (vibriocidal) antibody titres at 2 weeks after the second dose as compared to baseline titres prior to dosing. The secondary immunogenicity endpoints included the percentage of participants with ≥4-fold increase in anti-V. cholerae O139 antibody titres at 2 weeks after the second dose as compared to baseline titres, and geometric mean titres (GMT) and geometric mean ratios (GMR) as measured by anti-V. cholerae O1 Ogawa, O1 Inaba, and O139 antibody titres at 2 weeks after the second dose as compared to baseline titres. The safety endpoints included assessment of solicited, unsolicited adverse events (AEs), and serious adverse events (SAEs). The clinical trial was registered with the Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI/2021/08/035344). Findings: The study was performed in two age cohorts: cohort 1 (aged ≥18-60 years, 208 participants [104 in Euvichol-Plus group and 104 in Shanchol group]), and cohort 2 (aged ≥1 to <18 years, 208 participants [104 in Euvichol-Plus group and 104 in Shanchol group]). A total of 414 participants (Euvichol-Plus: 206 and Shanchol: 208) who completed the study (intention-to-treat and per-protocol set) were analysed to compare the vibriocidal titre as an index for immunogenicity. At 2 weeks after the second dose, the percentage of participants in the Euvichol-Plus group who reported a ≥4-fold increase in anti-V. cholerae antibody titres were 68.93% (O1 Ogawa) [95% CI 62.13%-75.18%], 66.02% (O1 Inaba) [95% CI 59.11%-72.46%], and 59.71% (O139) [95% CI 52.67%-66.47%] as compared to 63.94% (O1 Ogawa) [95% CI 57.01%-70.47%], 65.87% (O1 Inaba) [95% CI 58.99%-72.28%], and 56.25% (O139) [95% CI 49.22%-63.10%] in the Shanchol group. The lower limit of 95% CI for treatment difference for all the antibody titres was ≥10% (non-inferiority margin), demonstrating that Euvichol-Plus was non-inferior to Shanchol. The post-vaccination GMT (Day 14 and 28) were more than the pre-vaccination GMT for all three serotypes in both groups. The GMR obtained for Euvichol-Plus over Shanchol for O1 Ogawa, O1 Inaba, and O139 serotypes was >1, indicating non-inferiority of Euvichol-Plus to Shanchol. The safety cohort included 416 participants. Headache was the most common solicited AE, whereas cold and cough were the most common unsolicited AEs in both groups. Interpretation: Euvichol-Plus appears to be non-inferior to Shanchol in terms of immunogenicity and safety in healthy Indian adults and children. Funding: Techinvention Lifecare Private Limited, Mumbai, India.

COVID-19 management landscape: A need for an affordable platform to manufacture safe and efficacious biotherapeutics and prophylactics for the developing countries.

To gain world-wide control over COVID-19 pandemic, it is necessary to have affordable and accessible vaccine and monoclonal antibody technologies across the globe. In comparison to the western countries, Asian and African countries have less percentage of vaccination done which warrants urgent attention. Global manufacturer production capacities, dependency on advanced nations for the supply of vaccines or the raw material, national economy, limited research facilities, and logistics could be the factors. This review article elaborates the existing therapeutic and prophylactic strategies available for COVID-19, currently adopted vaccine and monoclonal antibody platforms for SARS-CoV-2 along with the approaches to bridge the gap prevailing in the challenges faced by low- and middle-income countries. We believe adoption of yeast-derived P. pastoris technology can help in developing safe, proven, easy to scale-up, and affordable recombinant vaccine or monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. This platform has the advantage of not requiring a dedicated or specialized facility making it an affordable option using existing manufacturing facilities, without significant additional capital investments. Besides, the technology platform of multiantigen vaccine approach and monoclonal antibody cocktail will serve as effective weapons to combat the threat posed by the SARS-CoV-2 variants. Successful development of vaccines and monoclonal antibodies using such a technology will lead to self-sufficiency of these nations in terms of availability of vaccines and monoclonal antibodies.

Capacity Building for Vaccine Manufacturing Across Developing Countries: The Way Forward.

Approved vaccines prevent 2 to 3 million deaths per year. There is a lack of equitable access to vaccines in the low- and middle-income developing nations. Challenges in the life cycle of vaccine production include process development, lead time, intellectual property, and local vaccine production. A robust and stable manufacturing process and constant raw material supplies over decades is critical. In a continuously evolving vaccine landscape, the need of the hour for developing nations is to manufacture their own vaccines besides having supply security, control over production scheduling and sustainability, control of costs, socio-economic development, and rapid response to local epidemics. There is a need for capacity building of workforce development, technology transfer, and financial support. Technology transfer has improved vaccine access and reduced prices of vaccines. Capacity building for the manufacturing of vaccines in developing countries has always been an area of paramount importance and more so in a pandemic situation.