ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Few data exist on the comparative safety and immunogenicity of different COVID-19 vaccines given as a third (booster) dose. To generate data to optimise selection of booster vaccines, we investigated the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of seven different COVID-19 vaccines as a third dose after two doses of ChAdOx1 nCov-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca; hereafter referred to as ChAd) or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNtech, hearafter referred to as BNT). METHODS: COV-BOOST is a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial of third dose booster vaccination against COVID-19. Participants were aged older than 30 years, and were at least 70 days post two doses of ChAd or at least 84 days post two doses of BNT primary COVID-19 immunisation course, with no history of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. 18 sites were split into three groups (A, B, and C). Within each site group (A, B, or C), participants were randomly assigned to an experimental vaccine or control. Group A received NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax; hereafter referred to as NVX), a half dose of NVX, ChAd, or quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MenACWY)control (1:1:1:1). Group B received BNT, VLA2001 (Valneva; hereafter referred to as VLA), a half dose of VLA, Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen; hereafter referred to as Ad26) or MenACWY (1:1:1:1:1). Group C received mRNA1273 (Moderna; hereafter referred to as m1273), CVnCov (CureVac; hereafter referred to as CVn), a half dose of BNT, or MenACWY (1:1:1:1). Participants and all investigatory staff were blinded to treatment allocation. Coprimary outcomes were safety and reactogenicity and immunogenicity of anti-spike IgG measured by ELISA. The primary analysis for immunogenicity was on a modified intention-to-treat basis; safety and reactogenicity were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary outcomes included assessment of viral neutralisation and cellular responses. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 73765130. FINDINGS: Between June 1 and June 30, 2021, 3498 people were screened. 2878 participants met eligibility criteria and received COVID-19 vaccine or control. The median ages of ChAd/ChAd-primed participants were 53 years (IQR 44-61) in the younger age group and 76 years (73-78) in the older age group. In the BNT/BNT-primed participants, the median ages were 51 years (41-59) in the younger age group and 78 years (75-82) in the older age group. In the ChAd/ChAD-primed group, 676 (46·7%) participants were female and 1380 (95·4%) were White, and in the BNT/BNT-primed group 770 (53·6%) participants were female and 1321 (91·9%) were White. Three vaccines showed overall increased reactogenicity: m1273 after ChAd/ChAd or BNT/BNT; and ChAd and Ad26 after BNT/BNT. For ChAd/ChAd-primed individuals, spike IgG geometric mean ratios (GMRs) between study vaccines and controls ranged from 1·8 (99% CI 1·5-2·3) in the half VLA group to 32·3 (24·8-42·0) in the m1273 group. GMRs for wild-type cellular responses compared with controls ranged from 1·1 (95% CI 0·7-1·6) for ChAd to 3·6 (2·4-5·5) for m1273. For BNT/BNT-primed individuals, spike IgG GMRs ranged from 1·3 (99% CI 1·0-1·5) in the half VLA group to 11·5 (9·4-14·1) in the m1273 group. GMRs for wild-type cellular responses compared with controls ranged from 1·0 (95% CI 0·7-1·6) for half VLA to 4·7 (3·1-7·1) for m1273. The results were similar between those aged 30-69 years and those aged 70 years and older. Fatigue and pain were the most common solicited local and systemic adverse events, experienced more in people aged 30-69 years than those aged 70 years or older. Serious adverse events were uncommon, similar in active vaccine and control groups. In total, there were 24 serious adverse events: five in the control group (two in control group A, three in control group B, and zero in control group C), two in Ad26, five in VLA, one in VLA-half, one in BNT, two in BNT-half, two in ChAd, one in CVn, two in NVX, two in NVX-half, and one in m1273. INTERPRETATION: All study vaccines boosted antibody and neutralising responses after ChAd/ChAd initial course and all except one after BNT/BNT, with no safety concerns. Substantial differences in humoral and cellular responses, and vaccine availability will influence policy choices for booster vaccination. FUNDING: UK Vaccine Taskforce and National Institute for Health Research.
Subject(s)
BNT162 Vaccine/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/administration & dosage , Immunization, Secondary/methods , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , BNT162 Vaccine/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/immunology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Patient Safety , SARS-CoV-2 , United KingdomABSTRACT
AIM: In the United Kingdom, organ donors/recipients are screened for evidence of human T-cell leukaemia virus type-1 and type-2 (HTLV-1/2) infections. Since the United Kingdom is a low prevalence country for HTLV infections, a screening assay with high sensitivity and specificity is required. Samples with repeat reactivity on antibody testing are sent to a reference lab for confirmatory serological and molecular testing. In the case of donor screen, this leads to delays in the release of organs and can result in wastage. We aim to assess whether a signal/cut-off (S/CO) ratio higher than the manufacturer's recommendation of 1.0 in the Abbott Architect antibody assay is a reliable measure of HTLV-1/2 infection. METHODS: We conducted a 5 year retrospective analysis of 7245 patients from which 11 766 samples were tested on the Abbott Architect rHTLV I/II assay. Reactive samples (S/CO >1) were referred for confirmatory serological and molecular detection (Western Blot and proviral DNA) at UK Health Security Agency, (formerly PHE, Colindale), the national reference laboratory. Electronic, protected laboratory and hospital patient databases were employed to collate data. RESULTS: A total of 45 patients had initially reactive samples. 42.2% (n = 19/45) had an S/CO ratio > 20, with HTLV infection confirmed in n = 18/19 and indeterminate confirmatory results in n = 1/19. No samples with an S/CO ratio <4 (48.9%, n = 22/45) or 4-20 (8.9%, n = 4/45) had positive confirmatory results on subsequent confirmatory testing. CONCLUSION: Samples with an S/CO >20 likely represent a true HTLV-1/2 infection. Reactive samples with an S/CO <4 were unlikely to confirm for HTLV infections. Interpretation of these ratios can assist clinicians in the assessment of low reactive samples and reiterates the need for faster access to confirmatory testing.
Subject(s)
Deltaretrovirus Infections , HTLV-I Infections , HTLV-II Infections , Human T-lymphotropic virus 1 , Leukemia, T-Cell , Organ Transplantation , Blood Donors , HTLV-I Infections/diagnosis , HTLV-I Infections/epidemiology , HTLV-II Infections/diagnosis , HTLV-II Infections/epidemiology , Hospitals, Teaching , Human T-lymphotropic virus 1/genetics , Human T-lymphotropic virus 2/genetics , Humans , London , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The scale of the 2022 global mpox (formerly known as monkeypox) outbreak has been unprecedented. In less than 6 months, non-endemic countries have reported more than 67 000 cases of a disease that had previously been rare outside of Africa. Mortality has been reported as rare but hospital admission has been relatively common. We aimed to describe the clinical and laboratory characteristics and outcomes of individuals admitted to hospital with mpox and associated complications, including tecovirimat recipients. METHODS: In this cohort study, we undertook retrospective review of electronic clinical records and pathology data for all individuals admitted between May 6, and Aug 3, 2022, to 16 hospitals from the Specialist and High Consequence Infectious Diseases Network for Monkeypox. The hospitals were located in ten cities in England and Northern Ireland. Inclusion criteria were clinical signs consistent with mpox and MPXV DNA detected from at least one clinical sample by PCR testing. Patients admitted solely for isolation purposes were excluded from the study. Key outcomes included admission indication, complications (including pain, secondary infection, and mortality) and use of antibiotic and anti-viral treatments. Routine biochemistry, haematology, microbiology, and virology data were also collected. Outcomes were assessed in all patients with available data. FINDINGS: 156 individuals were admitted to hospital with complicated mpox during the study period. 153 (98%) were male and three (2%) were female, with a median age of 35 years (IQR 30-44). Gender data were collected from electronic patient records, which encompassed full formal review of clincian notes. The prespecified options for data collection for gender were male, female, trans, non-binary, or unknown. 105 (71%) of 148 participants with available ethnicity data were of White ethnicity and 47 (30%) of 155 were living with HIV with a median CD4 count of 510 cells per mm3 (IQR 349-828). Rectal or perianal pain (including proctitis) was the most common indication for hospital admission (44 [28%] of 156). Severe pain was reported in 89 (57%) of 156, and secondary bacterial infection in 82 (58%) of 142 individuals with available data. Median admission duration was 5 days (IQR 2-9). Ten individuals required surgery and two cases of encephalitis were reported. 38 (24%) of the 156 individuals received tecovirimat with early cessation in four cases (two owing to hepatic transaminitis, one to rapid treatment response, and one to patient choice). No deaths occurred during the study period. INTERPRETATION: Although life-threatening mpox appears rare in hospitalised populations during the current outbreak, severe mpox and associated complications can occur in immunocompetent individuals. Analgesia and management of superimposed bacterial infection are priorities for patients admitted to hospital. FUNDING: None.
Subject(s)
Mpox (monkeypox) , Humans , Female , Male , Adult , Retrospective Studies , Cohort Studies , Hospitals , Pain , Benzamides , United Kingdom/epidemiologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the persistence of immunogenicity three months after third dose boosters. METHODS: COV-BOOST is a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial of seven COVID-19 vaccines used as a third booster dose. The analysis was conducted using all randomised participants who were SARS-CoV-2 naïve during the study. RESULTS: Amongst the 2883 participants randomised, there were 2422 SARS-CoV-2 naïve participants until D84 visit included in the analysis with median age of 70 (IQR: 30-94) years. In the participants who had two initial doses of ChAdOx1 nCov-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca; hereafter referred to as ChAd), schedules using mRNA vaccines as third dose have the highest anti-spike IgG at D84 (e.g. geometric mean concentration of 8674 ELU/ml (95% CI: 7461-10,085) following ChAd/ChAd/BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNtech, hearafter referred to as BNT)). However, in people who had two initial doses of BNT there was no significant difference at D84 in people given ChAd versus BNT (geometric mean ratio (GMR) of 0.95 (95%CI: 0.78, 1.15). Also, people given Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen; hereafter referred to as Ad26) as a third dose had significantly higher anti-spike IgG at D84 than BNT (GMR of 1.20, 95%CI: 1.01,1.43). Responses at D84 between people who received BNT (15 µg) or BNT (30 µg) after ChAd/ChAd or BNT/BNT were similar, with anti-spike IgG GMRs of half-BNT (15 µg) versus BNT (30 µg) ranging between 0.74-0.86. The decay rate of cellular responses were similar between all the vaccine schedules and doses. CONCLUSIONS: 84 days after a third dose of COVID-19 vaccine the decay rates of humoral response were different between vaccines. Adenoviral vector vaccine anti-spike IgG concentrations at D84 following BNT/BNT initial doses were similar to or even higher than for a three dose (BNT/BNT/BNT) schedule. Half dose BNT immune responses were similar to full dose responses. While high antibody tires are desirable in situations of high transmission of new variants of concern, the maintenance of immune responses that confer long-lasting protection against severe disease or death is also of critical importance. Policymakers may also consider adenoviral vector, fractional dose of mRNA, or other non-mRNA vaccines as third doses.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Viral Vaccines , Ad26COVS1 , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Humans , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Immunoglobulin G , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom , mRNA VaccinesSubject(s)
Choriocarcinoma/diagnosis , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Uterine Neoplasms/diagnosis , Adult , Choriocarcinoma/complications , Diagnosis, Differential , Dyspnea/etiology , Female , Humans , Postpartum Period , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Uterine Neoplasms/complicationsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is an increasing challenge to health services globally. Although new drugs are in development, current guidelines still recommend prolonged use of injectable antimicrobials (usually amikacin, kanamycin or capreomycin). The evidence base to inform treatment and monitoring strategies is very limited. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients initiating injectable antimicrobials for MDR-TB treatment in five UK centres between January 2004 and December 2009. (i) Current treatment and monitoring strategies were reviewed. (ii) The incidence of ototoxicity (defined both clinically and on audiological testing) and factors associated with ototoxicity were investigated using logistic regression. RESULTS: (i) The choice of injectable antimicrobial varied. Of 50 MDR-TB patients, 29/50 (58%) received amikacin, 11/50 (22%) received capreomycin and 10/50 (20%) received streptomycin or a combination; reflecting a difference in policy between centres. Only 21/50 (42%) patients received baseline screening by audiogram within 2 weeks of starting treatment and 16/50 (32%) then had monthly audiograms, with the majority screened more infrequently and 12/50 (24%) receiving no screening. (ii) Of the 50 patients, 14 (28%) experienced ototoxicity, with 9/50 (18%) left with long-term hearing loss. Increased age (P = 0.02), use of amikacin (P = 0.02) and decreased renal function (P = 0.01) were significantly associated with ototoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: There is local variation in both the choice of injectable agent and in ototoxicity screening practices. Long-term morbidity from injectable treatment is significant even in this well-resourced setting, and the data suggest capreomycin might be associated with less ototoxicity when compared with amikacin. There is a need for more high-quality clinical data to inform future guidelines for treatment and monitoring.
Subject(s)
Antitubercular Agents/administration & dosage , Antitubercular Agents/adverse effects , Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant/drug therapy , Adult , Deafness/chemically induced , Deafness/diagnosis , Deafness/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Injections/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , United KingdomABSTRACT
We present the case of a Nepalese British soldier with peripheral oedema and a significantly raised eosinophil count. After extensive investigation looking for a parasitic cause of his illness, he was diagnosed with eosinophilic fasciitis, a connective tissue disorder, often triggered by heavy exertion and responsiveness to immunosuppression. In a military setting, in which clinicians are likely to encounter patients who have spent time in tropical areas, it is important to still consider non-infectious causes of eosinophilia.