Considerations for unblinding individual study participants during vaccine trials.

Premature unblinding of individual participants is rarely reported in publications, but such unblinding can disrupt vaccine trials by causing worry and drop-out of other participants or "pseudo unblinding," in which participants or investigators over-interpret certain symptoms as being related to receiving an investigational product. This review summarizes appropriate reasons for unblinding in vaccine trials. Regulatory guidance could be improved by distinguishing guidance for vaccine trials from drug trials, with the recognition that unblinding individual participants in vaccine studies is rarely needed for management of adverse events following immunization.

KIR+CD8+ T cells suppress pathogenic T cells and are active in autoimmune diseases and COVID-19.

In this work, we find that CD8+ T cells expressing inhibitory killer cell immunoglobulin-like receptors (KIRs) are the human equivalent of Ly49+CD8+ regulatory T cells in mice and are increased in the blood and inflamed tissues of patients with a variety of autoimmune diseases. Moreover, these CD8+ T cells efficiently eliminated pathogenic gliadin-specific CD4+ T cells from the leukocytes of celiac disease patients in vitro. We also find elevated levels of KIR+CD8+ T cells, but not CD4+ regulatory T cells, in COVID-19 patients, correlating with disease severity and vasculitis. Selective ablation of Ly49+CD8+ T cells in virus-infected mice led to autoimmunity after infection. Our results indicate that in both species, these regulatory CD8+ T cells act specifically to suppress pathogenic T cells in autoimmune and infectious diseases.

The critical role of background rates of possible adverse events in the assessment of COVID-19 vaccine safety.

Beginning in December of 2019, a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, emerged in China and is now a global pandemic with extensive morbidity and mortality. With the emergence of this threat, an unprecedented effort to develop vaccines against this virus began. As vaccines are now being introduced globally, we face the prospect of millions of people being vaccinated with multiple types of vaccines many of which use new vaccine platforms. Since medical events happen without vaccines, it will be important to know at what rate events occur in the background so that when adverse events are identified one has a frame of reference with which to compare the rates of these events so as to make an initial assessment as to whether there is a potential safety concern or not. Background rates vary over time, by geography, by sex, socioeconomic status and by age group. Here we describe two key steps for post-introduction safety evaluation of COVID-19 vaccines: Defining a dynamic list of Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) and establishing background rates for these AESI. We use multiple examples to illustrate use of rates and caveats for their use. In addition we discuss tools available from the Brighton Collaboration that facilitate case evaluation and understanding of AESI.

Vaccine-associated enhanced disease: Case definition and guidelines for data collection, analysis, and presentation of immunization safety data.

This is a Brighton Collaboration Case Definition of the term "Vaccine Associated Enhanced Disease" to be utilized in the evaluation of adverse events following immunization. The Case Definition was developed by a group of experts convened by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) in the context of active development of vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and other emerging pathogens. The case definition format of the Brighton Collaboration was followed to develop a consensus definition and defined levels of certainty, after an exhaustive review of the literature and expert consultation. The document underwent peer review by the Brighton Collaboration Network and by selected Expert Reviewers prior to submission.

Consensus summary report for CEPI/BC March 12-13, 2020 meeting: Assessment of risk of disease enhancement with COVID-19 vaccines.

A novel coronavirus (CoV), Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), emerged in late 2019 in Wuhan, China and has since spread as a global pandemic. Safe and effective vaccines are thus urgently needed to reduce the significant morbidity and mortality of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease and ease the major economic impact. There has been an unprecedented rapid response by vaccine developers with now over one hundred vaccine candidates in development and at least six having reached clinical trials. However, a major challenge during rapid development is to avoid safety issues both by thoughtful vaccine design and by thorough evaluation in a timely manner. A syndrome of "disease enhancement" has been reported in the past for a few viral vaccines where those immunized suffered increased severity or death when they later encountered the virus or were found to have an increased frequency of infection. Animal models allowed scientists to determine the underlying mechanism for the former in the case of Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine and have been utilized to design and screen new RSV vaccine candidates. Because some Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and SARS-CoV-1 vaccines have shown evidence of disease enhancement in some animal models, this is a particular concern for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. To address this challenge, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and the Brighton Collaboration (BC) Safety Platform for Emergency vACcines (SPEAC) convened a scientific working meeting on March 12 and 13, 2020 of experts in the field of vaccine immunology and coronaviruses to consider what vaccine designs could reduce safety concerns and how animal models and immunological assessments in early clinical trials can help to assess the risk. This report summarizes the evidence presented and provides considerations for safety assessment of COVID-19 vaccine candidates in accelerated vaccine development.