RESUMO
The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) has three major lineages BA.1, BA.2, and BA.31. BA.1 rapidly became dominant and has demonstrated substantial escape from neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) induced by vaccination2-4. BA.2 has recently increased in frequency in multiple regions of the world, suggesting that BA.2 has a selective advantage over BA.1. BA.1 and BA.2 share multiple common mutations, but both also have unique mutations1 (Fig. 1A). The ability of BA.2 to evade NAbs induced by vaccination or infection has not yet been reported. We evaluated WA1/2020, Omicron BA.1, and BA.2 NAbs in 24 individuals who were vaccinated and boosted with the mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine5 and in 8 individuals who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 (Table S1). O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=61 SRC="FIGDIR/small/22270533v1_fig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=79 SRC="FIGDIR/small/22270533v1_fig1a.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (26K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1b39fc8org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1bf16ceorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@7248ecorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@111a215_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG O_FLOATNOFigure 1.C_FLOATNO Neutralizing antibody responses to Omicron BA.1 and BA.2. A. Cartoon showing BA.1 and BA.2 mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 Spike. NTD, N-terminal domain; RBD, receptor binding domain; RBM, receptor binding motif; SD1, subdomain 1; SD2, subdomain 2; FP, fusion peptide; HR1, heptad repeat 1; HR2, heptad repeat 2. B. Neutralizing antibody (NAb) titers by a luciferase-based pseudovirus neutralization assay in individuals two weeks following initial BNT162b2 vaccination (Prime), prior to boost (Pre-Boost), and two weeks following the third boost with BNT162b2 (Boost). C. NAb titers in 8 individuals following infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1, of whom 7 were vaccinated. The individual with negative NAb titers was unvaccinated and was sampled 4 days following diagnosis and hospitalization with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Responses were measured against the SARS-CoV-2 WA1/2020, Omicron BA.1, and BA.2 variants. Medians (red bars) are depicted and shown numerically with fold differences. C_FIG O_TBL View this table: org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@a84ecborg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1cd2d42org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1567410org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@ddcf54org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@56b617_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_TBL O_FLOATNOTable S1.C_FLOATNO O_TABLECAPTIONStudy population. C_TABLECAPTION C_TBL
RESUMO
The rapid spread of the highly mutated SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant has raised substantial concerns about the protective efficacy of currently available vaccines. We assessed Omicron-specific humoral and cellular immune responses in 65 individuals who were vaccinated with two immunizations of BNT162b2 and were boosted after at least 6 months with either Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson; N=41) or BNT162b2 (Pfizer; N=24) (Table S1). O_TBL View this table: org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@41c8baorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@e14f5forg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@21ea87org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@ac4522org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1eed52b_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_TBL O_FLOATNOTable S1.C_FLOATNO O_TABLECAPTIONCharacteristics of the study population C_TABLECAPTION C_TBL
RESUMO
Live oral vaccines have been explored for their protective efficacy against respiratory viruses, particularly for adenovirus serotypes 4 and 7. The potential of a live oral vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), however, remains unclear. In this study, we assessed the immunogenicity of live SARS-CoV-2 delivered to the gastrointestinal tract in rhesus macaques and its protective efficacy against intranasal and intratracheal SARS-CoV-2 challenge. Post-pyloric administration of SARS-CoV-2 by esophagogastroduodenoscopy resulted in limited virus replication in the gastrointestinal tract and minimal to no induction of mucosal antibody titers in rectal swabs, nasal swabs, and bronchoalveolar lavage. Low levels of serum neutralizing antibodies were induced and correlated with modestly diminished viral loads in nasal swabs and bronchoalveolar lavage following intranasal and intratracheal SARS-CoV-2 challenge. Overall, our data show that post-pyloric inoculation of live SARS-CoV-2 is weakly immunogenic and confers partial protection against respiratory SARS-CoV-2 challenge in rhesus macaques. ImportanceSARS-CoV-2 remains a global threat, despite the rapid deployment but limited coverage of multiple vaccines. Alternative vaccine strategies that have favorable manufacturing timelines, greater ease of distribution and improved coverage may offer significant public health benefits, especially in resource-limited settings. Live oral vaccines have the potential to address some of these limitations; however no studies have yet been conducted to assess the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of a live oral vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. Here we report that oral administration of live SARS-CoV-2 in non-human primates may offer prophylactic benefits, but that formulation and route of administration will require further optimization.
RESUMO
Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been distributed at massive scale in developed countries, and have been effective at preventing COVID-19. Access to vaccines is limited, however, in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) due to insufficient supply, high costs, and cold storage requirements. New vaccines that can be produced in existing manufacturing facilities in LMICs, can be manufactured at low cost, and use widely available, proven, safe adjuvants like alum, would improve global immunity against SARS-CoV-2. One such protein subunit vaccine is produced by the Serum Institute of India Pvt. Ltd. and is currently in clinical testing. Two protein components, the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (RBD) and hepatitis B surface antigen virus-like particles (VLPs), are each produced in yeast, which would enable a low-cost, high-volume manufacturing process. Here, we describe the design and preclinical testing of the RBD-VLP vaccine in cynomolgus macaques. We observed titers of neutralizing antibodies (>104) above the range of protection for other licensed vaccines in non-human primates. Interestingly, addition of a second adjuvant (CpG1018) appeared to improve the cellular response while reducing the humoral response. We challenged animals with SARS-CoV-2, and observed a ~3.4 and ~2.9 log10 reduction in median viral loads in bronchoalveolar lavage and nasal mucosa, respectively, compared to sham controls. These results inform the design and formulation of current clinical COVID-19 vaccine candidates like the one described here, and future designs of RBD-based vaccines against variants of SARS-CoV-2 or other betacoronaviruses.
RESUMO
The global COVID-19 pandemic has sparked intense interest in the rapid development of vaccines as well as animal models to evaluate vaccine candidates and to define immune correlates of protection. We recently reported a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV-2 virus strain (MA10) with the potential to infect wild-type laboratory mice, driving high levels of viral replication in respiratory tract tissues as well as severe clinical and respiratory symptoms, aspects of COVID-19 disease in humans that are important to capture in model systems. We evaluated the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of novel rhesus adenovirus serotype 52 (RhAd52) vaccines against MA10 challenge in mice. Baseline seroprevalence is lower for rhesus adenovirus vectors than for human or chimpanzee adenovirus vectors, making these vectors attractive candidates for vaccine development. We observed that RhAd52 vaccines elicited robust binding and neutralizing antibody titers, which inversely correlated with viral replication after challenge. These data support the development of RhAd52 vaccines and the use of the MA10 challenge virus to screen novel vaccine candidates and to study the immunologic mechanisms that underscore protection from SARS-CoV-2 challenge in wild-type mice. ImportanceWe have developed a series of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines using rhesus adenovirus serotype 52 (RhAd52) vectors, which exhibits a lower seroprevalence than human and chimpanzee vectors, supporting their development as novel vaccine vectors or as an alternative Ad vector for boosting. We sought to test these vaccines using a recently reported mouse-adapted SARS-CoV-2 (MA10) virus to i) evaluate the protective efficacy of RhAd52 vaccines and ii) further characterize this mouse-adapted challenge model and probe immune correlates of protection. We demonstrate RhAd52 vaccines elicit robust SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses and protect against clinical disease and viral replication in the lungs. Further, binding and neutralizing antibody titers correlated with protective efficacy. These data validate the MA10 mouse model as a useful tool to screen and study novel vaccine candidates, as well as the development of RhAd52 vaccines for COVID-19.
RESUMO
We previously reported that a single immunization with an adenovirus serotype 26 (Ad26) vector-based vaccine expressing an optimized SARS-CoV-2 spike (Ad26.COV2.S) protected rhesus macaques against SARS-CoV-2 challenge. In this study, we evaluated the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of reduced doses of Ad26.COV2.S. 30 rhesus macaques were immunized once with 1x1011, 5x1010, 1.125x1010, or 2x109 vp Ad26.COV2.S or sham and were challenged with SARS-CoV-2 by the intranasal and intratracheal routes. Vaccine doses as low as 2x109 vp provided robust protection in bronchoalveolar lavage, whereas doses of 1.125x1010 vp were required for protection in nasal swabs. Activated memory B cells as well as binding and neutralizing antibody titers following vaccination correlated with protective efficacy. At suboptimal vaccine doses, viral breakthrough was observed but did not show evidence of virologic, immunologic, histopathologic, or clinical enhancement of disease compared with sham controls. These data demonstrate that a single immunization with a relatively low dose of Ad26.COV2.S effectively protected against SARS-CoV-2 challenge in rhesus macaques. Moreover, our findings show that a higher vaccine dose may be required for protection in the upper respiratory tract compared with the lower respiratory tract.
