Efficacy of NVX-CoV2373 Covid-19 Vaccine against the B.1.351 Variant.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants threatens progress toward control of the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. In a phase 1-2 trial involving healthy adults, the NVX-CoV2373 nanoparticle vaccine had an acceptable safety profile and was associated with strong neutralizing-antibody and antigen-specific polyfunctional CD4+ T-cell responses. Evaluation of vaccine efficacy was needed in a setting of ongoing SARS-CoV-2 transmission. METHODS: In this phase 2a-b trial in South Africa, we randomly assigned human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-negative adults between the ages of 18 and 84 years or medically stable HIV-positive participants between the ages of 18 and 64 years in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses of either the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine (5 µg of recombinant spike protein with 50 µg of Matrix-M1 adjuvant) or placebo. The primary end points were safety and vaccine efficacy against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic Covid-19 at 7 days or more after the second dose among participants without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: Of 6324 participants who underwent screening, 4387 received at least one injection of vaccine or placebo. Approximately 30% of the participants were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 at baseline. Among 2684 baseline seronegative participants (94% HIV-negative and 6% HIV-positive), predominantly mild-to-moderate Covid-19 developed in 15 participants in the vaccine group and in 29 in the placebo group (vaccine efficacy, 49.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.1 to 72.8). Vaccine efficacy among HIV-negative participants was 60.1% (95% CI, 19.9 to 80.1). Of 41 sequenced isolates, 38 (92.7%) were the B.1.351 variant. Post hoc vaccine efficacy against B.1.351 was 51.0% (95% CI, -0.6 to 76.2) among the HIV-negative participants. Preliminary local and systemic reactogenicity events were more common in the vaccine group; serious adverse events were rare in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The NVX-CoV2373 vaccine was efficacious in preventing Covid-19, with higher vaccine efficacy observed among HIV-negative participants. Most infections were caused by the B.1.351 variant. (Funded by Novavax and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04533399.).

Immunogenicity and safety of SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein vaccine in South African people living with and without HIV-1 infection: A phase 2 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Response data for COVID-19 vaccines in immunosuppressed individuals are typically limited to standard dosing in small populations. Adjusting number or interval of doses may impact immune responses based on HIV status. METHODS: This phase 2 randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled South African study (2019nCoV-505/NCT05112848) enrolled medically stable people living with HIV (PLWH) and HIV-uninfected participants aged 18-65 years. PLWH were randomised 1:1:1 to receive NVX-CoV2373 on day 0 (D0) and either D21 (2-DoseD0/D21) or D70 (2-DoseD0/D70), or on D0, D21, and D70 (3-Dose). HIV-uninfected participants were randomised 1:1 to each 2-Dose regimen. PLWH were stratified into well-controlled and less-well-controlled subgroups. The primary immunologic endpoint included serum IgG and neutralising antibody responses (per geometric mean fold rise [GMFR] in titre and seroconversion rate) to ancestral SARS-CoV-2 at D35 (2-DoseD0/D21) and D84 (2-DoseD0/D70 and 3-Dose). The primary safety endpoints were participants with an unsolicited adverse event through D84, at D120, and at D180, or reactogenicity ≤7 days post-vaccination. RESULTS: Of 288 PLWH, 98, 96, and 94 were randomised into the 2-DoseD0/D21, 2-DoseD0/D70, and 3-Dose groups, respectively; 96 HIV-uninfected participants were randomised to the 2-DoseD0/D21 (n = 47) or 2-DoseD0/D70 (n = 49) regimens. Most (>85%) of the population were SARS-CoV-2 positive at baseline. Ancestral anti-spike IgG GMFRs in PLWH and HIV-uninfected participants, respectively, were 12·4 and 12·9 (D35) and 12·2 and 13·6 (D84). Comparable outcomes occurred across dosing regimens and in well-controlled and less-well-controlled PLWH. Microneutralization GMFRs at D84 in PLWH and HIV-uninfected participants, respectively, were: 6·9 and 10·1 (2-DoseD0/D21), 11·0 and 11·3 (2-DoseD0/D70), and 17·2 (PLWH 3-Dose). Antibody responses against BA.1 trended similar to those against the ancestral virus. Safety outcomes were comparable among PLWH and HIV-uninfected participants. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that NVX-CoV2373 produced consistent immunogenicity responses to SARS-CoV-2 among PLWH and HIV-uninfected participants, with no new safety signals.

Efficacy of primary series AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern: Final analysis of a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2 study in South African adults (COV005).

COVID-19 vaccine efficacy (VE) has been observed to vary against antigenically distinct SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoC). Here we report the final analysis of VE and safety from COV005: a phase 1b/2, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of primary series AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) vaccination in South African adults aged 18-65 years. South Africa's first, second, and third waves of SARS-CoV-2 infections were respectively driven by the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 virus (wild type, WT), and SARS-CoV-2 Beta and Delta VoCs. VE against asymptomatic and symptomatic infection was 90.6% for WT, 6.7% for Beta and 77.1% for Delta. No cases of severe COVID-19 were documented ahead of unblinding. Safety was consistent with the interim analysis, with no new safety concerns identified. Notably, South Africa's Delta wave occurred ≥ 9 months after primary series vaccination, suggesting that primary series AZD1222 vaccination offers a good durability of protection, potentially due to an anamnestic response. Clinical trial identifier: CT.gov NCT04444674.

Immunogenicity and safety of a SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein nanoparticle vaccine in people living with and without HIV-1 infection: a randomised, controlled, phase 2A/2B trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on COVID-19 vaccines in people living with HIV-1, who could be at increased risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19. We evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of a Matrix-M adjuvanted recombinant spike protein nanoparticle COVID-19 vaccine (NVX-CoV2373; Novavax) in HIV-negative people and people living with HIV-1. METHODS: In this randomised, observer-blinded, multicentre, placebo-controlled phase 2A/B trial in South Africa, participants aged 18-84 years, with and without underlying HIV-1, were enrolled from 16 sites and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive two intramuscular injections of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo, 21 days apart. People living with HIV-1 were on stable antiretroviral therapy and had an HIV-1 viral load of less than 1000 copies per mL. Vaccine dosage was 5 µg SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein with 50 µg Matrix-M adjuvant, whereas 0·9% saline was used as placebo injection (volume 0·5 mL each). All study staff and participants remained masked to study group assignment. We previously reported an interim analysis on the efficacy and safety of the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine (coprimary endpoints). In this Article, we present an expanded safety analysis for the full cohort of participants and report on the secondary objective of vaccine immunogenicity in the full cohort of people living with HIV-1 and in HIV-negative individuals overall and stratified by baseline SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04533399, and the Pan-African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR202009726132275. FINDINGS: Participants were enrolled between Aug 17 and Nov 25, 2020. The safety analysis set included 4164 HIV-negative participants (2089 in the intervention group and 2075 in the placebo group) and 244 people living with HIV-1 (122 in the intervention group and 122 in the placebo group). 1422 (34·1%) of 4164 HIV-negative people and 83 (34·0%) of 244 people living with HIV-1 were categorised as baseline SARS-CoV-2-positive (ie, anti-spike IgG reactive at enrolment or had a reactive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test by 14 days after the second study vaccination). In the NVX-CoV2373 group, solicited local and systemic adverse events were more common in HIV-negative participants (427 [30·6%] local and 401 [28·7%] systemic) than in people living with HIV-1 (20 [25·3%] local and 20 [25·3%] systemic) among those who were baseline SARS-CoV-2-seronegative (naive). Of the serious adverse events that occurred among HIV-negative people (of whom, two [0·1%] were baseline SARS-CoV-2-negative and four [0·6%] were baseline SARS-CoV-2-positive) and people living with HIV-1 (for whom there were no serious adverse events) in the NVX-CoV2373 group, none were assessed as related to the vaccine. Among participants who were baseline SARS-CoV-2-negative in the NVX-CoV2373 group, the anti-spike IgG geometric mean titres (GMTs) and seroconversion rates (SCRs) were lower in people living with HIV-1 (n=62) than in HIV-negative people (n=1234) following the first vaccination (GMT: 508·6 vs 1195·3 ELISA units [EU]/mL; SCR: 51·6% vs 81·3%); and similarly so 14 days after the second vaccination for GMTs (14 420·5 vs 31 631·8 EU/mL), whereas the SCR was similar at this point (100·0% vs 99·3%). In the NVX-CoV2373 group, anti-spike IgG GMTs 14 days after the second vaccination were substantially higher in those who were baseline SARS-CoV-2-positive than in those who were baseline SARS-CoV-2-seronegative for HIV-negative participants (100 666·1 vs 31 631·8 EU/mL) and for people living with HIV-1 (98 399·5 vs 14 420·5 EU/mL). This was also the case for angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor-binding antibody and neutralising antibody titres. INTERPRETATION: The safety of the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine in people living with HIV-1 was similar to that in HIV-negative participants. However, people living with HIV-1 not previously exposed to SARS-CoV-2 had attenuated humoral immune responses to NVX-CoV2373 compared with their HIV-negative vaccine counterparts, but not so if they were baseline SARS-CoV-2-positive. FUNDING: Novavax and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; investigational vaccine manufacturing support was provided by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.

"You Are on the Right Track With the App:" Qualitative Analysis of Mobile Phone Use and User Feedback Regarding Mobile Phone Sexual Risk Assessments for HIV Prevention Research.

Background: Accurate self-report of sexual behavior assists in identifying potential HIV exposure in HIV prevention trials. Brief mobile phone assessments, completed daily or after sexual activity, can improve the validity and reliability of self-reported sexual behavior and allow for remote survey completion outside of the clinic setting. We conducted a qualitative study to better understand participants mobile phone use and to explore their perspectives on how to improve an existing mobile application-based sexual risk assessment. Methods: Sexually active, HIV seronegative men (n = 14) and women (n = 15) aged 18-39 years were recruited through an HIV counseling and testing clinic and community outreach in Soweto, South Africa. We conducted qualitative research through four age-stratified focus group discussions (FGDs) and analyzed a brief socio-demographics and mobile phone access questionnaire. All participants completed a sexual risk assessment before the FGD. Using a framework analytic approach, data were coded with Nvivo software. Results: All participants had access to mobile phones and internet, and 27 (93.1%) were able to download applications on their personal phones. Participants preferred mobile risk assessments to be offered in a choice of South African languages, using formal language (as opposed to emojis), with straight-forward wording and limited to five to 10 questions. Most participants found it acceptable to complete the assessment once a week, on a weekday, while a few were willing to complete it after each sexual encounter. It was suggested that a message reminder to complete the assessment should be sent at least daily until it is completed. The majority agreed that a password-protected application with a discreet logo was ideal for privacy, ease of use and flexibility for completion in any setting. A concern with this format, however, was the potential data use requirement. Participants expressed privacy concerns with using SMS, WhatsApp and other social media for risk assessments. Most agreed on an airtime incentive between ZAR5-10 (USD 0.29-0.58) per survey. Participants encouraged researchers to provide feedback to them about their sexual risk. Conclusions: Completion of mobile phone sexual risk assessments can be optimized with minimal incentives by ensuring that questionnaires are simple, brief, infrequent and have trusted privacy measures.