COVID-19 vaccine efficacy in participants with weakened immune systems from four randomized-controlled trials.

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.

A Phase 2 Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety, Reactogenicity, and Immunogenicity of Different Prime-Boost Vaccination Schedules of 2013 and 2017 A(H7N9) Inactivated Influenza Virus Vaccines Administered With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy US Adults.

INTRODUCTION: A surge of human influenza A(H7N9) cases began in 2016 in China from 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, multicenter phase 2 clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 6 vaccination groups evaluating homologous versus heterologous prime-boost strategies with 2 different boost intervals (21 vs 120 days) and 2 dosages (3.75 or 15 µg of hemagglutinin) administered with or without AS03 adjuvant. Reactogenicity, safety, and immunogenicity measured by hemagglutination inhibition 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 hemagglutination inhibition geometric mean titer (95% confidence interval) observed against the 2017 A(H7N9) strain was 133.4 (83.6-212.6) among participants who received homologous, adjuvanted 3.75 µg + 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. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT03589807.

Delays in Hepatitis A vaccination in people with HIV in Houston, Texas between 2010 and 2018.

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.

Safety and Immunogenicity of a Delayed Heterologous Avian Influenza A(H7N9) Vaccine Boost Following Different Priming Regimens: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

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.

Receipt and duration of buprenorphine treatment during pregnancy and postpartum periods in a national privately-insured cohort.

Background: Research gaps exist on the use of medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) among birthing people. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included people who underwent childbirth deliveries during 2017-2020 and had a diagnosis of OUD identified from a national private insurance claims database. Buprenorphine prescriptions received during the year before childbirth and the year after childbirth were obtained from pharmacy claims. Logistic regressions were used to estimate associations between receipt of buprenorphine and individual and state-level factors. Results: Among a sample of 1,523 birthing people diagnosed with OUD, 540 (35.5 %) received buprenorphine during the pregnancy or postpartum periods. About half (51.5 %) of new recipients of buprenorphine received treatment for at least six months and, of those, one-third experienced a treatment interruption. The buprenorphine receipt rate differed significantly by race and ethnicity: 28.8 % of non-Hispanic Black birthing people with OUD and 22.8 % of Hispanic birthing people with OUD received buprenorphine treatment in contrast to 37.7 % of non-Hispanic white birthing people (aOR 0.53 [95 % CI 0.35-0.81] and 0.59 [95 % CI 0.37-0.96], respectively). The buprenorphine use rate increased over time from 29.7 % in 2017 to 42.9 % in 2020. Birthing people living in states with punitive policies related to substance use in pregnancy had the lowest buprenorphine use rate of 22.7 % as compared to 43.0 % in states with least restrictive policies. Conclusion: In this national sample of privately-insured individuals, by 2020, 42.9 % of birthing people with OUD received buprenorphine treatment. Treatment discontinuation and interruptions were common in the period surrounding childbirth.

Delays in Hepatitis B Immunization Series Completion in People With Human Immunodeficiency Virus.

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.

Comparison of bivalent and monovalent SARS-CoV-2 variant vaccines: the phase 2 randomized open-label COVAIL trial.

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 .

Immunogenicity of a 2-Dose Regimen of Moderna mRNA Beta/Omicron BA.1 Bivalent Variant Vaccine Boost in a Randomized Clinical Trial.

We compared the serologic responses of 1 dose versus 2 doses of a variant vaccine (Moderna mRNA-1273 Beta/Omicron BA.1 bivalent vaccine) in adults. A 2-dose boosting regimen with a variant vaccine did not increase the magnitude or the durability of the serological responses compared to a single variant vaccine boost.

mRNA vaccines against respiratory viruses.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The successes of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines have accelerated the development of mRNA vaccines against other respiratory pathogens. The aim of this review is to highlight COVID-19 mRNA vaccine advances and provide an update on the progress of mRNA vaccine development against other respiratory pathogens. RECENT FINDINGS: The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines demonstrated effectiveness in preventing severe COVID-19 and death. H7N9 and H10N8 avian influenza mRNA vaccines have demonstrated safety and immunogenicity in phase 1 clinical trials. Numerous seasonal influenza mRNA vaccines are in phase 1-3 clinical trials. Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) mRNA vaccines have progressed to phase 2-3 clinical trials in adults and a phase 1 clinical trial in children. A combined human metapneumovirus and parainfluenza-3 mRNA vaccines was found to be well tolerated and immunogenic in a phase 1 trial among adults and trials are being conducted among children. Clinical trials of mRNA vaccines combining antigens from multiple respiratory viruses are underway. SUMMARY: The development of mRNA vaccines against respiratory viruses has progressed rapidly in recent years. Promising vaccine candidates are moving through the clinical development pathway to test their efficacy in preventing disease against respiratory viral pathogens.

Evaluating Demographic Representation in Clinical Trials: Use of the Adaptive Coronavirus Disease 2019 Treatment Trial (ACTT) as a Test Case.

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.

Immunogenicity of a Two Dose Regimen of Moderna mRNA Beta/Omicron BA.1 Bivalent Variant Vaccine Boost in a Randomized Clinical Trial.

In this brief report, we compare the magnitude and durability of the serologic response of one versus two doses (separated by 56 days) of a variant vaccine (Moderna mRNA-1273 Beta/Omicron BA.1 bivalent vaccine) in adults.

Bivalent and Monovalent SARS-CoV-2 Variant Vaccine Boosters Improve coverage of the known Antigenic Landscape: Results of the COVID-19 Variant Immunologic Landscape (COVAIL) Trial.

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.

Immunogenicity of the BA.1 and BA.4/BA.5 SARS-CoV-2 Bivalent Boosts: Preliminary Results from the COVAIL Randomized Clinical Trial.

In a randomized clinical trial, we compare early neutralizing antibody responses after boosting with bivalent SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines based on either BA.1 or BA.4/BA.5 Omicron spike protein combined with wildtype spike. Responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants exhibited the greatest reduction in titers against currently circulating Omicron subvariants for both bivalent vaccines.

Immunogenicity of the BA.1 and BA.4/BA.5 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Bivalent Boosts: Preliminary Results From the COVAIL Randomized Clinical Trial.

In a randomized clinical trial, we compare early neutralizing antibody responses after boosting with bivalent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines based on either BA.1 or BA.4/BA.5 Omicron spike protein combined with wild-type spike. Responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants exhibited the greatest reduction in titers against currently circulating Omicron subvariants for both bivalent vaccines.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic Unmasked the Challenges Faced by Early-Stage Faculty in Infectious Diseases: A Call to Action.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and associated increase in family care responsibilities resulted in unsustainable personal and professional workloads for infectious diseases (ID) faculty on the front lines. This was especially true for early-stage faculty (ESF), many of whom had caregiving responsibilities. In addition, female faculty, underrepresented in medicine and science faculty and particularly ESF, experienced marked declines in research productivity, which significantly impacts career trajectories. When combined with staffing shortages due to an aging workforce and suboptimal recruitment and retention in ID, these work-life imbalances have brought the field to an inflection point. We propose actionable recommendations and call on ID leaders to act to close the gender, racial, and ethnic gaps to improve the recruitment, retention, and advancement of ESF in ID. By investing in systemic change to make the ID workforce more equitable, we can embody the shared ideals of diversity and inclusion and prepare for the next pandemic.

Temporal Improvements in COVID-19 Outcomes for Hospitalized Adults: A Post Hoc Observational Study of Remdesivir Group Participants in the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 standard of care (SOC) evolved rapidly during 2020 and 2021, but its cumulative effect over time is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether recovery and mortality improved as SOC evolved, using data from ACTT (Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial). DESIGN: ACTT is a series of phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that evaluated COVID-19 therapeutics from February 2020 through May 2021. ACTT-1 compared remdesivir plus SOC to placebo plus SOC, and in ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, remdesivir plus SOC was the control group. This post hoc analysis compared recovery and mortality between these comparable sequential cohorts of patients who received remdesivir plus SOC, adjusting for baseline characteristics with propensity score weighting. The analysis was repeated for participants in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4 who received remdesivir plus dexamethasone plus SOC. Trends in SOC that could explain outcome improvements were analyzed. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04280705 [ACTT-1], NCT04401579 [ACTT-2], NCT04492475 [ACTT-3], and NCT04640168 [ACTT-4]). SETTING: 94 hospitals in 10 countries (86% U.S. participants). PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19. INTERVENTION: SOC. MEASUREMENTS: 28-day mortality and recovery. RESULTS: Although outcomes were better in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were close to 1 (HR for recovery, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.17]; HR for mortality, 0.90 [CI, 0.56 to 1.40]). Comparable patients were less likely to be intubated in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1 (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.53 to 0.97]), and hydroxychloroquine use decreased. Outcomes improved from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3 (HR for recovery, 1.43 [CI, 1.24 to 1.64]; HR for mortality, 0.45 [CI, 0.21 to 0.97]). Potential explanatory factors (SOC trends, case surges, and variant trends) were similar between ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, except for increased dexamethasone use (11% to 77%). Outcomes were similar in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4. Antibiotic use decreased gradually across all stages. LIMITATION: Unmeasured confounding. CONCLUSION: Changes in patient composition explained improved outcomes from ACTT-1 to ACTT-2 but not from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3, suggesting improved SOC. These results support excluding nonconcurrent controls from analysis of platform trials in rapidly changing therapeutic areas. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

SARS-CoV-2 Variant Vaccine Boosters Trial: Preliminary Analyses.

Background: Protection from SARS-CoV-2 vaccines wanes over time and is compounded by emerging variants including Omicron subvariants. This study evaluated safety and immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 variant vaccines. Methods: This phase 2 open-label, randomized trial enrolled healthy adults previously vaccinated with a SARS-CoV-2 primary series and a single boost. Eligible participants were randomized to one of six Moderna COVID19 mRNA vaccine arms (50µg dose): Prototype (mRNA-1273), Omicron BA.1+Beta (1 or 2 doses), Omicron BA.1+Delta, Omicron BA.1 monovalent, and Omicron BA.1+Prototype. Neutralization antibody titers (ID 50 ) were assessed for D614G, Delta, Beta and Omicron BA.1 variants and Omicron BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 subvariants 15 days after vaccination. Results: From March 30 to May 6, 2022, 597 participants were randomized and vaccinated. Median age was 53 years, and 20% had a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. All vaccines were safe and well-tolerated. Day 15 geometric mean titers (GMT) against D614G were similar across arms and ages, and higher with prior infection. For uninfected participants, Day 15 Omicron BA.1 GMTs were similar across Omicron-containing vaccine arms (3724-4561) and higher than Prototype (1,997 [95%CI:1,482-2,692]). The Omicron BA.1 monovalent and Omicron BA.1+Prototype vaccines induced a geometric mean ratio (GMR) to Prototype for Omicron BA.1 of 2.03 (97.5%CI:1.37-3.00) and 1.56 (97.5%CI:1.06-2.31), respectively. A subset of samples from uninfected participants in four arms were also tested in a different laboratory at Day 15 for neutralizing antibody titers to D614G and Omicron subvariants BA.1, BA.2.12.2 and BA.4/BA.5. Omicron BA.4/BA.5 GMTs were approximately one third BA.1 GMTs (Prototype 517 [95%CI:324-826] vs. 1503 [95%CI:949-2381]; Omicron BA.1+Beta 628 [95%CI:367-1,074] vs. 2125 [95%CI:1139-3965]; Omicron BA.1+Delta 765 [95%CI:443-1,322] vs. 2242 [95%CI:1218-4128] and Omicron BA.1+Prototype 635 [95%CI:447-903] vs. 1972 [95%CI:1337-2907). Conclusions: Higher Omicron BA.1 titers were observed with Omicron-containing vaccines compared to Prototype vaccine and titers against Omicron BA.4/BA.5 were lower than against BA.1 for all candidate vaccines. Clinicaltrialsgov: NCT05289037.

Humoral and cellular immune responses to recombinant herpes zoster vaccine in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and monoclonal B cell lymphocytosis.

Monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis (MBL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are clonal B-cell disorders associated with an increased risk of infections and impaired vaccination responses. We investigated the immunogenicity of recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) in these patients. Individuals with MBL/untreated CLL and Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi)-treated CLL patients were given two doses of RZV separated by 2 months. Responses assessed at 3 and 12 months from the first dose of RZV by an anti-glycoprotein E ELISA antibody assay and by dual-color Interferon-γ and Interleukin-2FLUOROSPOT assays were compared to historic controls matched by age and sex. About 62 patients (37 MBL/untreated CLL and 25 BTKi-treated CLL) were enrolled with a median age of 68 years at vaccination. An antibody response at 3 months was seen in 45% of participants, which was significantly lower compared to historic controls (63%, p = .03). The antibody response did not significantly differ between MBL/untreated CLL and BTKi-treated CLL (51% vs. 36%, respectively, p = .23). The CD4+ T-cell response to vaccination was significantly lower in study participants compared to controls (54% vs. 96%, p < .001), mainly due to lower responses among BTKi-treated patients compared to untreated MBL/CLL (32% vs. 73%, p = .008). Overall, only 29% of participants achieved combined antibody and cellular responses to RZV. Among participants with response assessment at 12 months (n = 47), 24% had antibody titers below the response threshold. Hypogammaglobulinemia and BTKi therapy were associated with reduced T-cell responses in a univariate analysis. Strategies to improve vaccine response to RZV among MBL/CLL patients are needed.

Single center, open label dose escalating trial evaluating once weekly oral ixazomib in ART-suppressed, HIV positive adults and effects on HIV reservoir size in vivo.

BACKGROUND: Achieving a functional or sterilizing cure for HIV will require identification of therapeutic interventions that reduce HIV reservoir size in infected individuals. Proteasome inhibitors, such as ixazomib, impact multiple aspects of HIV biology including latency, transcription initiation, viral replication, and infected cell killing through the HIV protease - Casp8p41 pathway, resulting in latency reversal and reduced measures of HIV reservoir size ex vivo. METHODS: We conducted a phase 1b/2a dose escalating, open label trial of weekly oral ixazomib for 24 weeks in antiretroviral (ART)-suppressed, HIV positive adults (NCT02946047). The study was conducted from March 2017 to August 2019 at two tertiary referral centers in the United States. The primary outcomes were safety and tolerability of oral ixazomib. Secondary outcomes included changes in immunologic markers and estimates of HIV reservoir size after ixazomib treatment. FINDINGS: Sixteen participants completed the study. Ixazomib up to 4mg weekly was safe and well-tolerated, yielding no treatment-emergent events above grade 1. In exploratory analyses, ixazomib treatment was associated with detectable viremia that was below the lower limit of quantification (LLQ) in 9 participants, and viremia that was above LLQ in 4 of 16 participants. While treatment was associated with reduced CD4 counts [baseline 783 cells/ mm3 vs. week-24 724 cells/ mm3 p=0.003], there were no changes in markers of cellular activation, exhaustion or inflammation. Total HIV DNA and proviral sequencing were not altered by ixazomib treatment. Intact proviral DNA assay (IPDA) identified intact proviruses in 14 patients pre-treatment, and in 10/14 of those subjects post treatment values were reduced (P=0.068), allowing a calculated intact proviral half life of 0.6 years (95% CI 0.3, 2.5), compared to 7.1 years (95% CI 3.9, 18, p=0.004) in historical controls. Differentiation Quantitative Viral Outgrowth Assays (dQVOA) identified measurable proviruses in 15 subjects pre-treatment; post-treatment values were numerically reduced in 9, but overall differences were not significantly different. INTERPRETATION: Our study successfully met its primary endpoint of demonstrating the safety of ixazomib for 24 weeks in HIV infected persons. Exploratory analyses suggest that the effects observed ex vivo of latency reversal and reductions in HIV reservoir size, also occur in vivo. Future controlled studies of ixazomib are warranted. FUNDING: This study was funded by Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc..; the Mayo Clinic Foundation; the National Institutes of Health, including the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Division of AIDS, the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, and the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Mayo Clinic also acknowledges generous funding support from Mr. Joseph T. and Mrs. Michele P. Betten.

Efficacy of interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir compared with remdesivir alone in hospitalised adults with COVID-19: a double-bind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Functional impairment of interferon, a natural antiviral component of the immune system, is associated with the pathogenesis and severity of COVID-19. We aimed to compare the efficacy of interferon beta-1a in combination with remdesivir compared with remdesivir alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial at 63 hospitals across five countries (Japan, Mexico, Singapore, South Korea, and the USA). Eligible patients were hospitalised adults (aged ≥18 years) with SARS-CoV-2 infection, as confirmed by a positive RT-PCR test, and who met one of the following criteria suggestive of lower respiratory tract infection: the presence of radiographic infiltrates on imaging, a peripheral oxygen saturation on room air of 94% or less, or requiring supplemental oxygen. Patients were excluded if they had either an alanine aminotransferase or an aspartate aminotransferase concentration more than five times the upper limit of normal; had impaired renal function; were allergic to the study product; were pregnant or breast feeding; were already on mechanical ventilation; or were anticipating discharge from the hospital or transfer to another hospital within 72 h of enrolment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous remdesivir as a 200 mg loading dose on day 1 followed by a 100 mg maintenance dose administered daily for up to 9 days and up to four doses of either 44 µg interferon beta-1a (interferon beta-1a group plus remdesivir group) or placebo (placebo plus remdesivir group) administered subcutaneously every other day. Randomisation was stratified by study site and disease severity at enrolment. Patients, investigators, and site staff were masked to interferon beta-1a and placebo treatment; remdesivir treatment was given to all patients without masking. The primary outcome was time to recovery, defined as the first day that a patient attained a category 1, 2, or 3 score on the eight-category ordinal scale within 28 days, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all randomised patients who were classified according to actual clinical severity. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of the assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04492475. FINDINGS: Between Aug 5, 2020, and Nov 11, 2020, 969 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group (n=487) or to the placebo plus remdesivir group (n=482). The mean duration of symptoms before enrolment was 8·7 days (SD 4·4) in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group and 8·5 days (SD 4·3) days in the placebo plus remdesivir group. Patients in both groups had a time to recovery of 5 days (95% CI not estimable) (rate ratio of interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group vs placebo plus remdesivir 0·99 [95% CI 0·87-1·13]; p=0·88). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of mortality at 28 days was 5% (95% CI 3-7%) in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group and 3% (2-6%) in the placebo plus remdesivir group (hazard ratio 1·33 [95% CI 0·69-2·55]; p=0·39). Patients who did not require high-flow oxygen at baseline were more likely to have at least one related adverse event in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group (33 [7%] of 442 patients) than in the placebo plus remdesivir group (15 [3%] of 435). In patients who required high-flow oxygen at baseline, 24 (69%) of 35 had an adverse event and 21 (60%) had a serious adverse event in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group compared with 13 (39%) of 33 who had an adverse event and eight (24%) who had a serious adverse event in the placebo plus remdesivir group. INTERPRETATION: Interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir was not superior to remdesivir alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients who required high-flow oxygen at baseline had worse outcomes after treatment with interferon beta-1a compared with those given placebo. FUNDING: The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (USA).