RESUMO
Background: COVID-19 vaccine booster doses restore vaccine effectiveness lost from waning immunity and emerging variants. Fractional dosing may improve COVID-19 booster acceptability and uptake and will reduce the per-dose cost of COVID-19 booster programmes. We sought to quantify the immunogenicity, reactogenicity, and safety of a half-dose BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) booster relative to the standard formulation. Methods: This randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial recruited adults in Mongolia primed with a two-dose homologous ChAdOx1 nCov-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca, n = 129 participants), BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm (Beijing), n = 399), or Gam-COVID-Vac (Gamaleya, n = 70) schedule. Participants were randomised (1:1) to receive a 15 µg (half-dose) or 30 µg (full-dose) BNT162b2 booster. Participants and study staff assessing reactogenicity were blinded up to day 28. Co-primary endpoints were Wuhan-Hu-1 anti-spike S1 IgG seroresponse 28 days post-boosting and reactogenicity within 7 days of boosting. The non-inferiority margin for the absolute difference in seroresponse was -10%. Differences in seroresponse were estimated from logistic regression with marginal standardisation. Geometric mean ratios of IgG were also estimated. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05265065. Findings: Between May 27th and September 30th, 2022, 601 participants were randomized to full-dose BNT162b2 (n = 300) or half-dose (n = 301). 598 were included in safety analyses, and 587 in immunological analyses. The frequency of grade 3-4 reactions was similar between arms (half-dose: 4/299 [1.3%]; full-dose: 6/299 [2.0%]). Across all severity grades, half-dose recipients reported fewer local and systemic reactions (60% versus 72% and 25% versus 32%, respectively). Seroresponse was 84.7% (250/295) and 86.6% (253/292) in the half-dose and full-dose arms, respectively (Difference: -2.8%; 95% CI -7.7, 2.1). Geometric mean IgG titres were similar in those receiving full and half-dose boosters for the ChAdOx1 and BBIBP-CorV primed groups, but lower in the half-dose arm in Gam-COVID-Vac-primed participants (GMR: 0.71; 95% CI 0.54, 0.93). Interpretation: Half-dose BNT162b2 boosting elicited an immune response that was non-inferior to a full-dose, with fewer reactions, in adults primed with ChAdOx1 nCov-19 or BBIBP-CorV. Half-dose boosting may not be suitable in adults primed with Gam-COVID-Vac. Half-dose BNT162b2 boosting may be considered in populations primed with ChAdOx1 nCov-19 or BBIBP-CorV. Funding: Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).
RESUMO
Early diagnosis of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections is pivotal for optimal disease management. Sensitivity and specificity of 19 rapid diagnostic test (RDT) kits by different manufacturers (ABON, CTK Biotech, Cypress Diagnostics, Green Gross, Human Diagnostic, Humasis, InTec, OraSure, SD Bioline, Wondfo) were assessed on serum samples of 270 Mongolians (90 seropositive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), 90 seropositive for hepatitis C antibody (HCV-Ab), 90 healthy subjects). All tested RDTs for detection of HBsAg performed with average sensitivities and specificities of 100% and 99%, respectively. Albeit, overall sensitivity and specificity of RDTs for detection of HCV-Ab was somewhat lower compared to that of HBsAg RDTs (average sensitivity 98.9%, average specificity 96.7%). Specificity of RDTs for detection of HCV-Ab was dramatically lower among HBsAg positive individuals, who were 10.2 times more likely to show false positive test results. The results of our prospective study demonstrate that inexpensive, easy to handle RDTs are a promising tool in effective HBV- and HCV-screening especially in resource-limited settings.