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.

Phase 3 Safety and Efficacy of AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) Covid-19 Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of the AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) vaccine in a large, diverse population at increased risk for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the United States, Chile, and Peru has not been known. METHODS: In this ongoing, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial, we investigated the safety, vaccine efficacy, and immunogenicity of two doses of AZD1222 as compared with placebo in preventing the onset of symptomatic and severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) 15 days or more after the second dose in adults, including older adults, in the United States, Chile, and Peru. RESULTS: A total of 32,451 participants underwent randomization, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive AZD1222 (21,635 participants) or placebo (10,816 participants). AZD1222 was safe, with low incidences of serious and medically attended adverse events and adverse events of special interest; the incidences were similar to those observed in the placebo group. Solicited local and systemic reactions were generally mild or moderate in both groups. Overall estimated vaccine efficacy was 74.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.3 to 80.5; P<0.001) and estimated vaccine efficacy was 83.5% (95% CI, 54.2 to 94.1) in participants 65 years of age or older. High vaccine efficacy was consistent across a range of demographic subgroups. In the fully vaccinated analysis subgroup, no severe or critical symptomatic Covid-19 cases were observed among the 17,662 participants in the AZD1222 group; 8 cases were noted among the 8550 participants in the placebo group (<0.1%). The estimated vaccine efficacy for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection (nucleocapsid antibody seroconversion) was 64.3% (95% CI, 56.1 to 71.0; P<0.001). SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binding and neutralizing antibodies increased after the first dose and increased further when measured 28 days after the second dose. CONCLUSIONS: AZD1222 was safe and efficacious in preventing symptomatic and severe Covid-19 across diverse populations that included older adults. (Funded by AstraZeneca and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04516746.).

Statistical design and analysis of controlled human malaria infection trials.

BACKGROUND: Malaria is a potentially life-threatening disease caused by Plasmodium protozoa transmitted by infected Anopheles mosquitoes. Controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) trials are used to assess the efficacy of interventions for malaria elimination. The operating characteristics of statistical methods for assessing the ability of interventions to protect individuals from malaria is uncertain in small CHMI studies. This paper presents simulation studies comparing the performance of a variety of statistical methods for assessing efficacy of intervention in CHMI trials. METHODS: Two types of CHMI designs were investigated: the commonly used single high-dose design (SHD) and the repeated low-dose design (RLD), motivated by simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) challenge studies. In the context of SHD, the primary efficacy endpoint is typically time to infection. Using a continuous time survival model, five statistical tests for assessing the extent to which an intervention confers partial or full protection under single dose CHMI designs were evaluated. For RLD, the primary efficacy endpoint is typically the binary infection status after a specific number of challenges. A discrete time survival model was used to study the characteristics of RLD versus SHD challenge studies. RESULTS: In a SHD study with the continuous time survival model, log-rank test and t-test are the most powerful and provide more interpretable results than Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and Lachenbruch tests, while the likelihood ratio test is uniformly most powerful but requires knowledge of the underlying probability model. In the discrete time survival model setting, SHDs are more powerful for assessing the efficacy of an intervention to prevent infection than RLDs. However, additional information can be inferred from RLD challenge designs, particularly using a likelihood ratio test. CONCLUSIONS: Different statistical methods can be used to analyze controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) experiments, and the choice of method depends on the specific characteristics of the experiment, such as the sample size allocation between the control and intervention groups, and the nature of the intervention. The simulation results provide guidance for the trade off in statistical power when choosing between different statistical methods and study designs.

Retrospective, Observational Studies for Estimating Vaccine Effects on the Secondary Attack Rate of SARS-CoV-2.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are highly efficacious at preventing symptomatic infection, severe disease, and death. Most of the evidence that COVID-19 vaccines also reduce transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is based on retrospective, observational studies. Specifically, an increasing number of studies are evaluating vaccine effectiveness against the secondary attack rate of SARS-CoV-2 using data available in existing health-care databases or contact-tracing databases. Since these types of databases were designed for clinical diagnosis or management of COVID-19, they are limited in their ability to provide accurate information on infection, infection timing, and transmission events. We highlight challenges with using existing databases to identify transmission units and confirm potential SARS-CoV-2 transmission events. We discuss the impact of common diagnostic testing strategies, including event-prompted and infrequent testing, and illustrate their potential biases in estimating vaccine effectiveness against the secondary attack rate of SARS-CoV-2. We articulate the need for prospective observational studies of vaccine effectiveness against the SARS-CoV-2 secondary attack rate, and we provide design and reporting considerations for studies using retrospective databases.

Antinucleocapsid Antibodies After SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the Blinded Phase of the Randomized, Placebo-Controlled mRNA-1273 COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Immunoassays for determining past SARS-CoV-2 infection have not been systematically evaluated in vaccinated persons in comparison with unvaccinated persons. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate antinucleocapsid antibody (anti-N Ab) seropositivity in mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccinees with breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: Nested substudy of a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled vaccine efficacy trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04470427). SETTING: 99 sites in the United States, July 2020 through March 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were aged 18 years or older, had no known history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and were at risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe COVID-19. Substudy participants were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection during the trial's blinded phase. INTERVENTION: 2 mRNA-1273 or placebo injections 28 days apart. MEASUREMENTS: Nasopharyngeal swabs from days 1 and 29 (vaccination days) and from symptom-prompted illness visits were tested for SARS-CoV-2 via polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Serum samples from days 1, 29, and 57 and the participant decision visit (PDV, when participants were informed of treatment assignment; median day 149) were tested for anti-N Abs by the Elecsys immunoassay. RESULTS: Among 812 participants with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 illness during the blinded phase of the trial (through March 2021), seroconversion to anti-N Abs (median of 53 days after diagnosis) occurred in 21 of 52 mRNA-1273 vaccinees (40% [95% CI, 27% to 54%]) versus 605 of 648 placebo recipients (93% [CI, 92% to 95%]). Each 1-log increase in SARS-CoV-2 viral copies at diagnosis was associated with 90% higher odds of anti-N Ab seroconversion (odds ratio, 1.90 [CI, 1.59 to 2.28]). LIMITATION: The scope was restricted to mRNA-1273 vaccinees and the Elecsys assay, the sample size was small, data on Delta and Omicron infections were lacking, and the analysis did not address a prespecified objective of the trial. CONCLUSION: Vaccination status should be considered when interpreting seroprevalence and seropositivity data based solely on anti-N Ab testing. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health.

Evaluating Vaccine Efficacy Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection.

Although interim results from several large, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials demonstrated high vaccine efficacy (VE) against symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), it is unknown how effective the vaccines are in preventing people from becoming asymptomatically infected and potentially spreading the virus unwittingly. It is more difficult to evaluate VE against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection than against symptomatic COVID-19 because infection is not observed directly but rather is known to occur between 2 antibody or reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests. Additional challenges arise as community transmission changes over time and as participants are vaccinated on different dates because of staggered enrollment of participants or crossover of placebo recipients to the vaccine arm before the end of the study. Here, we provide valid and efficient statistical methods for estimating potentially waning VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection with blood or nasal samples under time-varying community transmission, staggered enrollment, and blinded or unblinded crossover. We demonstrate the usefulness of the proposed methods through numerical studies that mimic the BNT162b2 phase 3 trial and the Prevent COVID U study. In addition, we assess how crossover and the frequency of diagnostic tests affect the precision of VE estimates.

Clinical Endpoints for Evaluating Efficacy in COVID-19 Vaccine Trials.

Several vaccine candidates to protect against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have entered or will soon enter large-scale, phase 3, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials. To facilitate harmonized evaluation and comparison of the efficacy of these vaccines, a general set of clinical endpoints is proposed, along with considerations to guide the selection of the primary endpoints on the basis of clinical and statistical reasoning. The plausibility that vaccine protection against symptomatic COVID-19 could be accompanied by a shift toward more SARS-CoV-2 infections that are asymptomatic is highlighted, as well as the potential implications of such a shift.

A Deferred-Vaccination Design to Assess Durability of COVID-19 Vaccine Effect After the Placebo Group Is Vaccinated.

Multiple candidate vaccines to prevent COVID-19 have entered large-scale phase 3 placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials, and several have demonstrated substantial short-term efficacy. At some point after demonstration of substantial efficacy, placebo recipients should be offered the efficacious vaccine from their trial, which will occur before longer-term efficacy and safety are known. The absence of a placebo group could compromise assessment of longer-term vaccine effects. However, by continuing follow-up after vaccination of the placebo group, this study shows that placebo-controlled vaccine efficacy can be mathematically derived by assuming that the benefit of vaccination over time has the same profile for the original vaccine recipients and the original placebo recipients after their vaccination. Although this derivation provides less precise estimates than would be obtained by a standard trial where the placebo group remains unvaccinated, this proposed approach allows estimation of longer-term effect, including durability of vaccine efficacy and whether the vaccine eventually becomes harmful for some. Deferred vaccination, if done open-label, may lead to riskier behavior in the unblinded original vaccine group, confounding estimates of long-term vaccine efficacy. Hence, deferred vaccination via blinded crossover, where the vaccine group receives placebo and vice versa, would be the preferred way to assess vaccine durability and potential delayed harm. Deferred vaccination allows placebo recipients timely access to the vaccine when it would no longer be proper to maintain them on placebo, yet still allows important insights about immunologic and clinical effectiveness over time.

Efficient nonparametric inference on the effects of stochastic interventions under two-phase sampling, with applications to vaccine efficacy trials.

The advent and subsequent widespread availability of preventive vaccines has altered the course of public health over the past century. Despite this success, effective vaccines to prevent many high-burden diseases, including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), have been slow to develop. Vaccine development can be aided by the identification of immune response markers that serve as effective surrogates for clinically significant infection or disease endpoints. However, measuring immune response marker activity is often costly, which has motivated the usage of two-phase sampling for immune response evaluation in clinical trials of preventive vaccines. In such trials, the measurement of immunological markers is performed on a subset of trial participants, where enrollment in this second phase is potentially contingent on the observed study outcome and other participant-level information. We propose nonparametric methodology for efficiently estimating a counterfactual parameter that quantifies the impact of a given immune response marker on the subsequent probability of infection. Along the way, we fill in theoretical gaps pertaining to the asymptotic behavior of nonparametric efficient estimators in the context of two-phase sampling, including a multiple robustness property enjoyed by our estimators. Techniques for constructing confidence intervals and hypothesis tests are presented, and an open source software implementation of the methodology, the txshift R package, is introduced. We illustrate the proposed techniques using data from a recent preventive HIV vaccine efficacy trial.

Modification of the Association Between T-Cell Immune Responses and Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection Risk by Vaccine-Induced Antibody Responses in the HVTN 505 Trial.

Background: HVTN 505 was a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) preventive vaccine efficacy trial of a DNA/recombinant adenovirus serotype 5 (rAd5) vaccine regimen. We assessed antibody responses measured 1 month after final vaccination (month 7) as correlates of HIV-1 acquisition risk. Methods: Binding antibody responses were quantified in serum samples from 25 primary endpoint vaccine cases (diagnosed with HIV-1 infection between month 7 and month 24) and 125 randomly sampled frequency-matched vaccine controls (HIV-1 negative at month 24). We prespecified for a primary analysis tier 6 antibody response biomarkers that measure immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin A (IgA) binding to Env proteins and 2 previously assessed T-cell response biomarkers. Results: Envelope-specific IgG responses were significantly correlated with decreased HIV-1 risk. Moreover, the interaction of IgG responses and Env-specific CD8+ T-cell polyfunctionality score had a highly significant association with HIV-1 risk after adjustment for multiple comparisons. Conclusions: Vaccinees with higher levels of Env IgG have significantly decreased HIV-1 risk when CD8+ T-cell responses are low. Moreover, vaccinees with high CD8+ T-cell responses generally have low risk, and those with low CD8+ T-cell and low Env antibody responses have high risk. These findings suggest the critical importance of inducing a robust IgG Env response when the CD8+ T-cell response is low.

A Randomized Trial Evaluating the Prophylactic Activity of DSM265 Against Preerythrocytic Plasmodium falciparum Infection During Controlled Human Malarial Infection by Mosquito Bites and Direct Venous Inoculation.

Background: DSM265 is a selective inhibitor of Plasmodium dihydroorotate dehydrogenase that fully protected against controlled human malarial infection (CHMI) by direct venous inoculation of Plasmodium falciparum sporozoites when administered 1 day before challenge and provided partial protection when administered 7 days before challenge. Methods: A double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was performed to assess safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of 1 oral dose of 400 mg of DSM265 before CHMI. Three cohorts were studied, with DSM265 administered 3 or 7 days before direct venous inoculation of sporozoites or 7 days before 5 bites from infected mosquitoes. Results: DSM265-related adverse events consisted of mild-to-moderate headache and gastrointestinal symptoms. DSM265 concentrations were consistent with pharmacokinetic models (mean area under the curve extrapolated to infinity, 1707 µg*h/mL). Placebo-treated participants became positive by quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and were treated 7-10 days after CHMI. Among DSM265-treated subjects, 2 of 6 in each cohort were sterilely protected. DSM265-treated recipients had longer times to development of parasitemia than placebo-treated participants (P < .004). Conclusions: This was the first CHMI study of a novel antimalarial compound to compare direct venous inoculation of sporozoites and mosquito bites. Times to qRT-PCR positivity and treatment were comparable for both routes. DSM265 given 3 or 7 days before CHMI was safe and well tolerated but sterilely protected only one third of participants.

Higher T-Cell Responses Induced by DNA/rAd5 HIV-1 Preventive Vaccine Are Associated With Lower HIV-1 Infection Risk in an Efficacy Trial.

Background: It is important to identify vaccine-induced immune responses that predict the preventative efficacy of a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 vaccine. We assessed T-cell response markers as correlates of risk in the HIV Vaccine Trials Network (HVTN) 505 HIV-1 vaccine efficacy trial. Methods: 2504 participants were randomized to DNA/rAd5 vaccine or placebo, administered at weeks 0, 4, 8, and 24. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were obtained at week 26 from all 25 primary endpoint vaccine cases and 125 matched vaccine controls, and stimulated with vaccine-insert-matched peptides. Primary variables were total HIV-1-specific CD4+ T-cell magnitude and Env-specific CD4+ polyfunctionality. Four secondary variables were also assessed. Immune responses were evaluated as predictors of HIV-1 infection among vaccinees using Cox proportional hazards models. Machine learning analyses identified immune response combinations best predicting HIV-1 infection. Results: We observed an unexpectedly strong inverse correlation between Env-specific CD8+ immune response magnitude and HIV-1 infection risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.18 per SD increment; P = .04) and between Env-specific CD8+ polyfunctionality and infection risk (HR = 0.34 per SD increment; P < .01). Conclusions: Further research is needed to determine if these immune responses are predictors of vaccine efficacy or markers of natural resistance to HIV-1 infection.

Power/sample size calculations for assessing correlates of risk in clinical efficacy trials.

In a randomized controlled clinical trial that assesses treatment efficacy, a common objective is to assess the association of a measured biomarker response endpoint with the primary study endpoint in the active treatment group, using a case-cohort, case-control, or two-phase sampling design. Methods for power and sample size calculations for such biomarker association analyses typically do not account for the level of treatment efficacy, precluding interpretation of the biomarker association results in terms of biomarker effect modification of treatment efficacy, with detriment that the power calculations may tacitly and inadvertently assume that the treatment harms some study participants. We develop power and sample size methods accounting for this issue, and the methods also account for inter-individual variability of the biomarker that is not biologically relevant (e.g., due to technical measurement error). We focus on a binary study endpoint and on a biomarker subject to measurement error that is normally distributed or categorical with two or three levels. We illustrate the methods with preventive HIV vaccine efficacy trials and include an R package implementing the methods. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Is HIV epidemic control by 2030 realistic?

Rates of new HIV acquisition remain unacceptably high in most populations in low-income, middle-income, and high-income settings despite advances in treatment and prevention strategies. Although biomedical advances in primary prevention of new infections exist, systematic scale-up of these interventions has not occurred at the pace required to end AIDS by 2030. Low population coverage, adherence to oral pre-exposure prophylaxis in settings with high rates of HIV acquisition, and the fact that a significant proportion of new HIV infections occurs in populations not identified as high risk and are hence not targeted for prevention approaches impedes current prevention strategies. Although long-acting injectables and monoclonal antibodies are promising approaches to help reduce incidence, high cost and the need for high coverage rates mean that a vaccine or vaccine-like intervention still remains the most likely scenario to produce a population-level impact on HIV incidence, especially in countries with generalised epidemics. Current global efforts are not sufficient to meet 2030 HIV epidemic goals; acknowledgment of this issue is required to ensure persistent advocacy for population-based control of the ongoing HIV pandemic.

Incidence and prevalence of hepatitis C and B infections among men who have sex with men and transgender women enrolled in a United States HIV vaccine trial.

Background: Rising hepatitis C and B virus (HCV and HBV) rates have been reported in men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women (TGW). This study characterizes HCV and HBV infections longitudinally among 2,496 MSM/TGW aged 18-50 years and at risk for HIV acquisition enrolled in an HIV-1 vaccine trial in 18 U.S. cities between 2009-2013. Methods: Participants completed behavioral surveys, HIV testing, and blood collection over 24 months. Of the 2,397 participants who consented for future testing, 1,792 (74.8%) had available paired stored blood samples at baseline and a later timepoint (Month 24 [N = 999]; if unavailable, M12 [N = 775] or M15 [N = 18]). Results: Among 1,792 participants, 98.1% were MSM, 0.8% were TGW, and the median age was 30 years (IQR 24, 40). Participants reported a median number of 3 male sex partners (IQR 1,5) within the past 3 months. Condomless insertive anal sex was reported by 55.8% and condomless receptive anal sex by 46.7%.1.3% reported injection drug use. During follow-up, 1.4% reported pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use. At baseline 11/1792 (0.61%) participants had HCV infection (HCV AB positive, RNA detectable), with all having persistent detectable RNA and chronic HCV infection at follow-up. Phylogenetic analysis showed no clusters of HCV infection. 8 participants had HCV AB positive, RNA undetectable at baseline and follow-up, representing past HCV infection with clearance; only 2 acquired HCV, which cleared over 12-24 months. At baseline, 2 participants (2/1792 = 0.11%) had positive HBsAg, indicating chronic HBV infection. Over 12-24 months, 4 (4/1790, 0.22%) developed HBsAg positivity; these participants had HBcAB positivity at baseline, thereby likely representing reactivation. There were no new HBV infections during follow-up. Conclusion: Among 1,792 men who have sex with men and transgender women aged 18-50 years and at risk for HIV acquisition enrolled in a U.S. HIV-1 vaccine trial, incident hepatitis C infection rates were extremely low, with no cases of incident hepatitis B infection. These rates of incident HCV infection and HBSAg positivity are lower than previously reported among MSM/TGW.

Sexually transmitted infections amongst men who have sex with men (MSM) in South Africa.

There is limited data about bacterial STIs in MSM populations in sub-Saharan Africa. Our retrospective analysis used data from the HVTN 702 HIV vaccine clinical trial (October 2016 to July 2021). We evaluated multiple variables. Polymerase chain reaction testing was conducted on urine and rectal samples to detect Neisseria gonorrhoea (NG) and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) every 6 months. Syphilis serology was conducted at month 0 and thereafter every 12 months. We calculated STI prevalence and the associated 95% confidence intervals until 24 months of follow-up. The trial enrolled 183 participants who identified as male or transgender female, and of homosexual or bisexual orientation. Of these, 173 had STI testing done at month 0, median age was 23 (IQR 20-25) years, with median 20.5 (IQR 17.5-24.8) months follow-up (FU). The clinical trial also enrolled and performed month 0 STI testing on 3389 female participants, median age 23 (IQR 21-27) years, median 24.8 (IQR 18.8-24.8) months FU and 1080 non-MSM males with a median age of 27 (IQR 24-31) years, median 24.8 (IQR 23-24.8) months FU. At month 0, CT prevalence was similar in MSM and females (26.0% vs 23.0%, p = 0.492) but was more prevalent in MSM compared to non-MSM males (26.0% vs 14.3%, p = 0.001). CT was the most prevalent STI among MSM at months 0 and 6 but declined from month 0 to month 6 (26.0% vs 17.1%, p = 0.023). In contrast, NG did not decline in MSM between months 0 and 6 (8.1% vs 7.1%, p = 0.680) nor did syphilis prevalence between months 0 and 12 (5.2% vs 3.8%, p = 0.588). Bacterial STI burden is higher in MSM compared to non-MSM males, and CT is the most prevalent bacterial STI amongst MSM. Preventive STI vaccines, especially against CT, may be helpful to develop.

Stochastic interventional approach to assessing immune correlates of protection: Application to the COVE messenger RNA-1273 vaccine trial.

BACKGROUND: Stochastic interventional vaccine efficacy (SVE) analysis is a new approach to correlate of protection (CoP) analysis of a phase III trial that estimates how vaccine efficacy (VE) would change under hypothetical shifts of an immune marker. METHODS: We applied nonparametric SVE methodology to the COVE trial of messenger RNA-1273 vs placebo to evaluate post-dose 2 pseudovirus neutralizing antibody (nAb) titer against the D614G strain as a CoP against COVID-19. Secondly, we evaluated the ability of these results to predict VE against variants based on shifts of geometric mean titers to variants vs D614G. Prediction accuracy was evaluated by 13 validation studies, including 12 test-negative designs. RESULTS: SVE analysis of COVE supported post-dose 2 D614G titer as a CoP: estimated VE ranged from 66.9% (95% confidence interval: 36.2, 82.8%) to 99.3% (99.1, 99.4%) at 10-fold decreased or increased titer shifts, respectively. The SVE estimates only weakly predicted variant-specific VE estimates (concordance correlation coefficient 0.062 for post 2-dose VE). CONCLUSION: SVE analysis of COVE supports nAb titer as a CoP for messenger RNA vaccines. Predicting variant-specific VE proved difficult due to many limitations. Greater anti-Omicron titers may be needed for high-level protection against Omicron vs anti-D614G titers needed for high-level protection against pre-Omicron COVID-19.

Kinetics of the Antibody Response to Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Individuals in the Blinded Phase of the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy Trial.

Background: Hybrid immunity is associated with more durable protection against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We describe the antibody responses following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Methods: The 55 vaccine arm COVID-19 cases diagnosed during the blinded phase of the Coronavirus Efficacy trial were matched with 55 placebo arm COVID-19 cases. Pseudovirus neutralizing antibody (nAb) activity to the ancestral strain and binding antibody (bAb) responses to nucleocapsid and spike antigens (ancestral and variants of concern [VOCs]) were assessed on disease day 1 (DD1) and 28 days later (DD29). Results: The primary analysis set was 46 vaccine cases and 49 placebo cases with COVID-19 at least 57 days post-first dose. For vaccine group cases, there was a 1.88-fold rise in ancestral antispike bAbs 1 month post-disease onset, although 47% had no increase. The vaccine-to-placebo geometric mean ratios for DD29 antispike and antinucleocapsid bAbs were 6.9 and 0.04, respectively. DD29 mean bAb levels were higher for vaccine vs placebo cases for all VOCs. DD1 nasal viral load positively correlated with bAb levels in the vaccine group. Conclusions: Following COVID-19, vaccinated participants had higher levels and greater breadth of antispike bAbs and higher nAb titers than unvaccinated participants. These were largely attributable to the primary immunization series.

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccination.

BACKGROUND: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. METHODS: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7-15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. FINDINGS: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05-0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01-0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. INTERPRETATION: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.

Immune correlates analysis of a phase 3 trial of the AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) vaccine.

In the phase 3 trial of the AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) vaccine conducted in the U.S., Chile, and Peru, anti-spike binding IgG concentration (spike IgG) and pseudovirus 50% neutralizing antibody titer (nAb ID50) measured four weeks after two doses were assessed as correlates of risk and protection against PCR-confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19). These analyses of SARS-CoV-2 negative participants were based on case-cohort sampling of vaccine recipients (33 COVID-19 cases by 4 months post dose two, 463 non-cases). The adjusted hazard ratio of COVID-19 was 0.32 (95% CI: 0.14, 0.76) per 10-fold increase in spike IgG concentration and 0.28 (0.10, 0.77) per 10-fold increase in nAb ID50 titer. At nAb ID50 below the limit of detection (< 2.612 IU50/ml), 10, 100, and 270 IU50/ml, vaccine efficacy was -5.8% (-651%, 75.6%), 64.9% (56.4%, 86.9%), 90.0% (55.8%, 97.6%) and 94.2% (69.4%, 99.1%). These findings provide further evidence towards defining an immune marker correlate of protection to help guide regulatory/approval decisions for COVID-19 vaccines.