Considerations for vaccinating children against COVID-19.

COVID-19 vaccines have been introduced in children and adolescents in many countries. However, high levels of community transmission and infection-derived immunity make the decision to introduce COVID-19 vaccination of children in countries yet to do so particularly challenging. For example, other vaccine preventable diseases, including measles and polio, generally have far higher childhood morbidity and mortality in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) than COVID-19, and coverage with these vaccines has declined during the pandemic. Many countries are yet to introduce pneumococcal conjugate and rotavirus vaccines for children, which prevent common causes of childhood death, or human papillomavirus vaccine for adolescents. The Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines that have been widely tested in children and adolescents have a positive risk-benefit profile. However, the benefit is less compared with other life-saving vaccines in this age group, particularly in LMICs and settings with widespread infection-derived immunity. The resources required for rollout may also pose a considerable challenge in LMICs. In this paper, we describe COVID-19 in children, with a focus on LMICs, and summarise the published literature on safety, efficacy and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents. We highlight the complexity of decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccination of children now that most of this low-risk population benefit from infection-derived immunity. We emphasise that at-risk groups should be prioritised for COVID-19 vaccination; and that if COVID-19 vaccines are introduced for children, the opportunity should be taken to improve coverage of routine childhood vaccines and preventative healthcare. Additionally, we highlight the paucity of epidemiological data in LMICs, and that for future epidemics, measures need to be taken to ensure equitable access to safe and efficacious vaccines before exposure to infection.

Neonatal rotavirus vaccine (RV3-BB) immunogenicity and safety in a neonatal and infant administration schedule in Malawi: a randomised, double-blind, four-arm parallel group dose-ranging study.

BACKGROUND: Rotavirus vaccines reduce rotavirus-related deaths and hospitalisations but are less effective in high child mortality countries. The human RV3-BB neonatal G3P[6] rotavirus vaccine administered in a neonatal schedule was efficacious in reducing severe rotavirus gastroenteritis in Indonesia but had not yet been evaluated in African infants. METHODS: We did a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, parallel group dose-ranging study of three doses of oral RV3-BB rotavirus vaccine in infants in three primary health centres in Blantyre, Malawi. Healthy infants less than 6 days of age with a birthweight 2·5 to 4·0 kg were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) into one of four treatment groups: neonatal vaccine group, which included high-titre (1·0 × 107 focus-forming unit [FFU] per mL), mid-titre (3·0 × 106 FFU per mL), or low-titre (1·0 × 106 FFU per mL); and infant vaccine group, which included high-titre (1·0 × 107 FFU per mL) using a computer generated code (block size of four), stratified by birth (singleton vs multiple). Neonates received their three doses at 0-5 days to 10 weeks and infants at 6-14 weeks. Investigators, participant families, and laboratory staff were masked to group allocation. Anti-rotavirus IgA seroconversion and vaccine take (IgA seroconversion and stool shedding) were evaluated. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of vaccine or placebo. The primary outcome was the cumulative IgA seroconversion 4 weeks after three doses of RV3-BB in the neonatal schedule in the high-titre, mid-titre, and low-titre groups in the per protocol population, with its 95% CI. With the high-titre group as the active control group, we did a non-inferiority analysis of the proportion of participants with IgA seroconversion in the mid-titre and low-titre groups, using a non-inferiority margin of less than 20%. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03483116). FINDINGS: Between Sept 17, 2018, and Jan 27, 2020, 711 participants recruited were randomly assigned into four treatment groups (neonatal schedule high titre n=178, mid titre n=179, low titre n=175, or infant schedule high titre n=179). In the neonatal schedule, cumulative IgA seroconversion 4 weeks after three doses of RV3-BB was observed in 79 (57%) of 139 participants in the high-titre group, 80 (57%) of 141 participants in the mid-titre group, and 57 (41%) of 138 participants in the low-titre group and at 18 weeks in 100 (72%) of 139 participants in the high-titre group, 96 (67%) of 143 participants in the mid-titre group, and 86 (62%) of 138 of participants in the low-titre. No difference in cumulative IgA seroconversion 4 weeks after three doses of RV3-BB was observed between high-titre and mid-titre groups in the neonatal schedule (difference in response rate 0·001 [95%CI -0·115 to 0·117]), fulfilling the criteria for non-inferiority. In the infant schedule group 82 (59%) of 139 participants had a cumulative IgA seroconversion 4 weeks after three doses of RV3-BB at 18 weeks. Cumulative vaccine take was detected in 483 (85%) of 565 participants at 18 weeks. Three doses of RV3-BB were well tolerated with no difference in adverse events among treatment groups: 67 (39%) of 170 participants had at least one adverse event in the high titre group, 68 (40%) of 172 participants had at least one adverse event in the mid titre group, and 69 (41%) of 169 participants had at least one adverse event in the low titre group. INTERPRETATION: RV3-BB was well tolerated and immunogenic when co-administered with Expanded Programme on Immunisation vaccines in a neonatal or infant schedule. A lower titre (mid-titre) vaccine generated similar IgA seroconversion to the high-titre vaccine presenting an opportunity to enhance manufacturing capacity and reduce costs. Neonatal administration of the RV3-BB vaccine has the potential to improve protection against rotavirus disease in children in a high-child mortality country in Africa. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Australian Tropical Medicine Commercialisation Grant.

Qualitative exploration of intentions, concerns and information needs of vaccine-hesitant adults initially prioritised to receive COVID-19 vaccines in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: Tailored communication is necessary to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and increase uptake. We aimed to understand the information needs, perceived benefits and barriers to COVID-19 vaccination of people prioritised, but hesitant to receive the vaccine. METHOD: In this qualitative study in Victoria, Australia (February-May 2021), we purposively sampled hesitant adults who were health or aged/disability care workers (n=20), or adults aged 18-69 with comorbidities or aged ≥70 years ('prioritised adults'; n=19). We thematically analysed interviews inductively, then deductively organised themes within the World Health Organization Behavioural and Social Drivers of vaccination model. Two stakeholder workshops (n=12) explored understanding and preferences for communicating risks and benefits. We subsequently formed communication recommendations. RESULTS: Prioritised adults and health and aged care workers had short- and long-term safety concerns specific to personal circumstances, and felt like "guinea pigs". They saw vaccination as beneficial for individual and community protection and travel. Some health and aged care workers felt insufficiently informed to recommend vaccines, or viewed this as outside their scope of practice. Workshop participants requested interactive materials and transparency from spokespeople about uncertainty. Conclusions and public health implications: Eleven recommendations address communication content, delivery and context to increase uptake and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines.

Factors Influencing Australian Healthcare Workers' COVID-19 Vaccine Intentions across Settings: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

Healthcare workers' COVID-19 vaccination coverage is important for staff and patient safety, workforce capacity and patient uptake. We aimed to identify COVID-19 vaccine intentions, factors associated with uptake and information needs for healthcare workers in Victoria, Australia. We administered a cross-sectional online survey to healthcare workers in hospitals, primary care and aged or disability care settings (12 February-26 March 2021). The World Health Organization Behavioural and Social Drivers of COVID-19 vaccination framework informed survey design and framing of results. Binary regression results adjusted for demographics provide risk differences between those intending and not intending to accept a COVID-19 vaccine. In total, 3074 healthcare workers completed the survey. Primary care healthcare workers reported the highest intention to accept a COVID-19 vaccine (84%, 755/898), followed by hospital-based (77%, 1396/1811) and aged care workers (67%, 243/365). A higher proportion of aged care workers were concerned about passing COVID-19 to their patients compared to those working in primary care or hospitals. Only 25% felt they had sufficient information across five vaccine topics, but those with sufficient information had higher vaccine intentions. Approximately half thought vaccines should be mandated. Despite current high vaccine rates, our results remain relevant for booster programs and future vaccination rollouts.

An Improved and High Throughput Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) Micro-neutralization Assay.

Respiratory syncytial virus-specific neutralizing antibodies (RSV NAbs) are an important marker of protection against RSV. A number of different assay formats are currently in use worldwide so there is a need for an accurate and high-throughput method for measuring RSV NAbs. We describe here an imaging-based micro-neutralization assay that has been tested on RSV subgroup A and can also be adapted for RSV subgroup B and different sample types. This method is highly reproducible, with inter-assay variations for the reference antiserum being less than 10%. We believe this assay can be readily established in many laboratories worldwide at relatively low cost. Development of an improved, high-throughput assay that measures RSV NAbs represents a significant step forward for the standardization of this method internationally as well as being critical for the evaluation of novel RSV vaccine candidates in the future.