A Brighton Collaboration standardized template with key considerations for a benefit/risk assessment for the Novavax COVID-19 Vaccine (NVX-CoV2373), a recombinant spike protein vaccine with Matrix-M adjuvant to prevent disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 viruses.

Novavax, a global vaccine company, began evaluating NVX-CoV2373 in human studies in May 2020 and the pivotal placebo-controlled phase 3 studies started in November 2020; five clinical studies provided adult and adolescent clinical data for over 31,000 participants who were administered NVX-CoV2373. This extensive data has demonstrated a well-tolerated response to NVX-CoV2373 and high vaccine efficacy against mild, moderate, or severe COVID-19 using a two-dose series (Dunkle et al., 2022) [1], (Heath et al., 2021) [2], (Keech et al., 2020) [3], (Mallory et al., 2022) [4]. The most common adverse events seen after administration with NVX-CoV2373 were injection site tenderness, injection site pain, fatigue, myalgia, headache, malaise, arthralgia, nausea, or vomiting. In addition, immunogenicity against variants of interest (VOI) and variants of concern (VOC) was established with high titers of ACE2 receptor-inhibiting and neutralizing antibodies in these studies (EMA, 2022) [5], (FDA, 2023) [6]. Further studies on correlates of protection determined that titers of anti-Spike IgG and neutralizing antibodies correlated with efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 established in clinical trials (p < 0.001 for recombinant protein vaccine and p = 0.005 for mRNA vaccines for IgG levels) (Fong et al., 2022) [7]. Administration of a booster dose of the recombinant protein vaccine approximately 6 months following the primary two-dose series resulted in substantial increases in humoral antibodies against both the prototype strain and all evaluated variants, similar to or higher than the antibody levels observed in phase 3 studies that were associated with high vaccine efficacy (Dunkle et al., 2022) [1], (Mallory et al., 2022) [4]. These findings, together with the well tolerated safety profile, support use of the recombinant protein vaccine as primary series and booster regimens.

Influenza A(H7N9) Pandemic Preparedness: Assessment of the Breadth of Heterologous Antibody Responses to Emerging Viruses from Multiple Pre-Pandemic Vaccines and Population Immunity.

Influenza A(H7N9) viruses remain as a high pandemic threat. The continued evolution of the A(H7N9) viruses poses major challenges in pandemic preparedness strategies through vaccination. We assessed the breadth of the heterologous neutralizing antibody responses against the 3rd and 5th wave A(H7N9) viruses using the 1st wave vaccine sera from 4 vaccine groups: 1. inactivated vaccine with 2.8 µg hemagglutinin (HA)/dose + AS03A; 2. inactivated vaccine with 5.75 µg HA/dose + AS03A; 3. inactivated vaccine with 11.5 µg HA/dose + MF59; and 4. recombinant virus like particle (VLP) vaccine with 15 µg HA/dose + ISCOMATRIX™. Vaccine group 1 had the highest antibody responses to the vaccine virus and the 3rd/5th wave drifted viruses. Notably, the relative levels of cross-reactivity to the drifted viruses as measured by the antibody GMT ratios to the 5th wave viruses were similar across all 4 vaccine groups. The 1st wave vaccines induced robust responses to the 3rd and Pearl River Delta lineage 5th wave viruses but lower cross-reactivity to the highly pathogenic 5th wave A(H7N9) virus. The population in the United States was largely immunologically naive to the A(H7N9) HA. Seasonal vaccination induced cross-reactive neuraminidase inhibition and binding antibodies to N9, but minimal cross-reactive antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) antibodies to A(H7N9).

Integration of disability-related content in nursing curricula.

Despite evidence that health care professionals, including nurses, do not perceive persons with disabilities in a positive light and fail to attend to their health care needs, it is not known how nursing programs address the topic of disability. This descriptive study was conducted to examine the extent to which schools of nursing in the United States address disability-related issues and the strategies used to integrate disability-related content in their curricula. A 27-item investigator-developed survey was sent to a national stratified random sample of 1,000 schools of nursing. Questions pertained to curricular content, specific groups of persons with disabilities, and teaching methods and resources used to teach nursing students about disability. Respondents indicated that they included some content related to disability in their curricula. Nursing textbooks were the most common source of information used. Barriers to including disability-related content were lack of time and lack of faculty interest or expertise. These findings can serve as a stimulus to increase the extent and breadth of disability-related issues in nursing curricula.