Immunogenicity of COVID-19 adsorbed inactivated vaccine (CoronaVac) and additional doses of mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine in immunocompromised adults compared with immunocompetent persons.

Inactivated COVID-19 vaccines data in immunocompromised individuals are scarce. This trial assessed the immunogenicity of two CoronaVac doses and additional BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine doses in immunocompromised (IC) and immunocompetent (H) individuals. Adults with solid organ transplant (SOT), hematopoietic stem cell transplant, cancer, inborn immunity errors or rheumatic diseases were included in the IC group. Immunocompetent adults were used as control group for comparison. Participants received two CoronaVac doses within a 28-day interval. IC received two additional BNT162b2 doses and H received a third BNT162b2 dose (booster). Blood samples were collected at baseline, 28 days after each dose, pre-booster and at the trial end. We used three serological tests to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N), trimeric spike (S), and receptor binding domain (RBD). Outcomes included seroconversion rates (SCR), geometric mean titers (GMT) and GMT ratio (GMTR). A total of 241 IC and 100 H adults participated in the study. After two CoronaVac doses, IC had lower SCR than H: anti-N, 33.3% vs 79%; anti-S, 33.8% vs 86%, and anti-RBD, 48.5% vs 85%, respectively. IC also showed lower GMT than H: anti-N, 2.3 vs 15.1; anti-S, 58.8 vs 213.2 BAU/mL; and anti-RBD, 22.4 vs 168.0 U/mL, respectively. After the 3rd and 4th BNT162b2 doses, IC had significant anti-S and anti-RBD seroconversion, but still lower than H after the 3rd dose. After boosting, GMT increased in IC, but remained lower than in the H group. CoronaVac two-dose schedule immunogenicity was lower in IC than in H. BNT162b2 heterologous booster enhanced immune response in both groups.

Live, Attenuated, Tetravalent Butantan-Dengue Vaccine in Children and Adults.

BACKGROUND: Butantan-Dengue Vaccine (Butantan-DV) is an investigational, single-dose, live, attenuated, tetravalent vaccine against dengue disease, but data on its overall efficacy are needed. METHODS: In an ongoing phase 3, double-blind trial in Brazil, we randomly assigned participants to receive Butantan-DV or placebo, with stratification according to age (2 to 6 years, 7 to 17 years, and 18 to 59 years); 5 years of follow-up is planned. The objectives of the trial were to evaluate overall vaccine efficacy against symptomatic, virologically confirmed dengue of any serotype occurring more than 28 days after vaccination (the primary efficacy end point), regardless of serostatus at baseline, and to describe safety up to day 21 (the primary safety end point). Here, vaccine efficacy was assessed on the basis of 2 years of follow-up for each participant, and safety as solicited vaccine-related adverse events reported up to day 21 after injection. Key secondary objectives were to assess vaccine efficacy among participants according to dengue serostatus at baseline and according to the dengue viral serotype; efficacy according to age was also assessed. RESULTS: Over a 3-year enrollment period, 16,235 participants received either Butantan-DV (10,259 participants) or placebo (5976 participants). The overall 2-year vaccine efficacy was 79.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70.0 to 86.3) - 73.6% (95% CI, 57.6 to 83.7) among participants with no evidence of previous dengue exposure and 89.2% (95% CI, 77.6 to 95.6) among those with a history of exposure. Vaccine efficacy was 80.1% (95% CI, 66.0 to 88.4) among participants 2 to 6 years of age, 77.8% (95% CI, 55.6 to 89.6) among those 7 to 17 years of age, and 90.0% (95% CI, 68.2 to 97.5) among those 18 to 59 years of age. Efficacy against DENV-1 was 89.5% (95% CI, 78.7 to 95.0) and against DENV-2 was 69.6% (95% CI, 50.8 to 81.5). DENV-3 and DENV-4 were not detected during the follow-up period. Solicited systemic vaccine- or placebo-related adverse events within 21 days after injection were more common with Butantan-DV than with placebo (58.3% of participants, vs. 45.6%). CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of Butantan-DV prevented symptomatic DENV-1 and DENV-2, regardless of dengue serostatus at baseline, through 2 years of follow-up. (Funded by Instituto Butantan and others; DEN-03-IB ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02406729, and WHO ICTRP number, U1111-1168-8679.).

Live, attenuated, tetravalent Butantan- Dengue vaccine in children and adults

BACKGROUND Butantan–Dengue Vaccine (Butantan-DV) is an investigational, single-dose, live, attenuated, tetravalent vaccine against dengue disease, but data on its overall efficacy are needed. METHODS In an ongoing phase 3, double-blind trial in Brazil, we randomly assigned participants to receive Butantan-DV or placebo, with stratification according to age (2 to 6 years, 7 to 17 years, and 18 to 59 years); 5 years of follow-up is planned. The objectives of the trial were to evaluate overall vaccine efficacy against symptomatic, virologically con firmed dengue of any serotype occurring more than 28 days after vaccination (the primary efficacy end point), regardless of serostatus at baseline, and to describe safety up to day 21 (the primary safety end point). Here, vaccine efficacy was assessed on the basis of 2 years of follow-up for each participant, and safety as solicited vaccine-related adverse events reported up to day 21 after injection. Key secondary objectives were to assess vaccine efficacy among participants according to dengue serostatus at baseline and according to the dengue viral serotype; efficacy according to age was also assessed. RESULTS Over a 3-year enrollment period, 16,235 participants received either Butantan-DV (10,259 participants) or placebo (5976 participants). The overall 2-year vaccine effi cacy was 79.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70.0 to 86.3) — 73.6% (95% CI, 57.6 to 83.7) among participants with no evidence of previous dengue exposure and 89.2% (95% CI, 77.6 to 95.6) among those with a history of exposure. Vaccine effi cacy was 80.1% (95% CI, 66.0 to 88.4) among participants 2 to 6 years of age, 77.8% (95% CI, 55.6 to 89.6) among those 7 to 17 years of age, and 90.0% (95% CI, 68.2 to 97.5) among those 18 to 59 years of age. Efficacy against DENV-1 was 89.5% (95% CI, 78.7 to 95.0) and against DENV-2 was 69.6% (95% CI, 50.8 to 81.5). DENV-3 and DENV-4 were not detected during the follow-up period. Solicited systemic vaccine- or placebo-related adverse events within 21 days after injection were more common with Butantan-DV than with placebo (58.3% of participants, vs. 45.6%). CONCLUSIONS A single dose of Butantan-DV prevented symptomatic DENV-1 and DENV-2, regard less of dengue serostatus at baseline, through 2 years of follow-up. (Funded by Instituto Butantan and others; DEN-03-IB ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02406729, and WHO ICTRP number, U1111-1168-8679.)

Human Papillomavirus (HPV) seroprevalence, cervical HPV prevalence, genotype distribution and cytological lesions in solid organ transplant recipients and immunocompetent women in Sao Paulo, Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at increased risk of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) persistent infection and disease. This study aimed to evaluate HPV seroprevalence, cervical HPV prevalence, genotype distribution, and frequency of HPV-related cervical lesions in SOT recipients in comparison to immunocompetent women. METHODS: Cross-sectional study including SOT and immunocompetent women aged 18 to 45 years who denied previous HPV-related lesions. Cervical samples were screened for HPV-DNA by a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based DNA microarray system (PapilloCheck®) and squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL) by liquid-based cytology. A multiplexed pseudovirion-based serology assay (PsV-Luminex) was used to measure HPV serum antibodies. RESULTS: 125 SOT and 132 immunocompetent women were enrolled. Cervical samples were collected from 113 SOT and 127 immunocompetent women who had initiated sexual activity. HPV-DNA prevalence was higher in SOT than in immunocompetent women (29.6% vs. 20.2%, p = 0.112), but this difference was not statistically significant. High-risk (HR)-HPV was significantly more frequent in SOT than in immunocompetent women (19.4% vs. 7.9%, p = 0.014). Simultaneous infection with ≥2 HR-HPV types was found in 3.1% of SOT and 0.9% of immunocompetent women. HPV seropositivity for at least one HPV type was high in both groups: 63.8% of 105 SOT and 69.7% of 119 immunocompetent women (p = 0.524). Low-grade (LSIL) and high-grade SIL (HSIL) were significantly more frequent in SOT (9.7% and 5.3%, respectively) than in immunocompetent women (1.6% and 0.8%, respectively) (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These results may reflect the increased risk of HPV persistent infection and disease progression in SOT women due to chronic immunosuppression.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of HPV vaccination in women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to access HPV vaccines' safety and immunogenicity in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) women. METHODS: The search was conducted in the most relevant databases. Meta-analyses to evaluate seroconversion rates for each HPV vaccine type and SLE flare rates after vaccination were performed. RESULTS: We identified 3,467 articles; six papers referring to SLE population were included. Five articles that evaluated vaccine immunogenicity at 7th month after enrollment were included in the meta-analysis. Overall seroconversion rates among SLE participants were 89.3% (95%CI, 0.76-1.00) for HPV6; 92.4% (95%CI, 0.82-1.00) for HPV11; 96.4% (95%CI, 0.93-1.00) for HPV16; and 91.8% (95%CI, 0.85-1.00) for HPV18. Five studies were included in the qualitative analysis of vaccines safety. Pain at the injection site was the most common adverse event (AE). Just one study reported serious AE not related to the vaccine. Flare rate after HPV vaccination was 12,6% (95% CI, 0.04-0.21). CONCLUSION: Few studies, small sample size, evaluated HPV vaccines in SLE women. Seroconversion rates in SLE women were like healthy women, but anti-HPV geometric mean titers (GMT) were slightly lower in SLE women. HPV vaccines were safe in this population.

Low tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine coverage among healthcare workers in a quaternary university hospital in São Paulo, Brazil: need for continuous surveillance and implementation of active strategies

Abstract Introduction: Vaccination with tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) has been recommended for healthcare workers (HCWs) by Brazilian Ministry of Health since November 2014. Objective: To describe the strategies implemented to improve Tdap uptake, cumulative vaccine coverage after each intervention, variables associated to Tdap vaccination, and reasons for non-vaccination among HCWs of the main building of a quaternary hospital attached to the Sao Paulo University Medical School. Methods: A list of HCWs eligible for pertussis vaccination was generated. From April to December 2015, the following interventions were implemented: note on intern journal reminding the importance of pertussis vaccination; email to the head nurses strengthening vaccine recommendations; lectures on pertussis and Tdap for physicians of Obstetrics and Neonatology Clinics; on-site vaccination by mobile teams at the Obstetrics, Neonatology, and Anesthesiology Clinics. Vaccine coverage was accessed at the end of each month. Multivariate Poisson regression model with a robust error variance was used to evaluate variables associated with Tdap vaccination. Reasons for non-vaccination were evaluated from January to May 2017 through phone calls for HCWs who had not received Tdap. Results: The study included 456 HCWs. After the interventions, Tdap coverage raised from 2.8% to 41.2%. In the multivariate analysis, occupation (physician), working place (obstetrics or anesthesiology) and influenza vaccination in 2015 were independently associated to Tdap vaccination. The main reason for non-vaccination was unawareness of Tdap recommendations. Conclusions: Tdap uptake among HCWs was low in our hospital. Providing vaccination at convenient places/times for HCW seems to be the most efficient strategy to increase vaccine uptake.

Low tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine coverage among healthcare workers in a quaternary university hospital in São Paulo, Brazil: need for continuous surveillance and implementation of active strategies.

INTRODUCTION: Vaccination with tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) has been recommended for healthcare workers (HCWs) by Brazilian Ministry of Health since November 2014. OBJECTIVE: To describe the strategies implemented to improve Tdap uptake, cumulative vaccine coverage after each intervention, variables associated to Tdap vaccination, and reasons for non-vaccination among HCWs of the main building of a quaternary hospital attached to the Sao Paulo University Medical School. METHODS: A list of HCWs eligible for pertussis vaccination was generated. From April to December 2015, the following interventions were implemented: note on intern journal reminding the importance of pertussis vaccination; email to the head nurses strengthening vaccine recommendations; lectures on pertussis and Tdap for physicians of Obstetrics and Neonatology Clinics; on-site vaccination by mobile teams at the Obstetrics, Neonatology, and Anesthesiology Clinics. Vaccine coverage was accessed at the end of each month. Multivariate Poisson regression model with a robust error variance was used to evaluate variables associated with Tdap vaccination. Reasons for non-vaccination were evaluated from January to May 2017 through phone calls for HCWs who had not received Tdap. RESULTS: The study included 456 HCWs. After the interventions, Tdap coverage raised from 2.8% to 41.2%. In the multivariate analysis, occupation (physician), working place (obstetrics or anesthesiology) and influenza vaccination in 2015 were independently associated to Tdap vaccination. The main reason for non-vaccination was unawareness of Tdap recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Tdap uptake among HCWs was low in our hospital. Providing vaccination at convenient places/times for HCW seems to be the most efficient strategy to increase vaccine uptake.

A systematic review of adult tetanus-diphtheria-acellular (Tdap) coverage among healthcare workers.

During the last decades pertussis incidence raised globally. Several vaccination strategies targeting adults to reduce pertussis among young infants have been proposed, including vaccination of healthcare workers (HCWs). The aim of this study was to analyse, by performing a systematic review of literature, published papers that evaluated Tdap coverage among HCWs, variables associated with vaccine uptake and efforts implemented to raise vaccination rates. We searched the MedLine, Embase, SCOPUS, LILACS, Web of Science and Cochrane for full-text studies that evaluated Tdap coverage in HCW. Two independent reviewers screened the articles and extracted the data.Twenty-eight studies published from 2009 to 2018 were reviewed. Most studies were conducted in the USA. Initial Tdap coverage varied from 6.1% to 63.9%. USA and France are the only two countries with studies evaluating Tdap coverage within HCWs using national data. In the USA, Tdap coverage in HCWs raised from 6.1% to 45.1% from 2007 to 2015. In the analysis of French national data, a Tdap coverage of 63.9% was observed. Five studies used interventions to raise Tdap coverage in HCWs. Two intervention studies implemented mandatory vaccination and three used educational strategies. All of them achieved coverages over 86%. Only eleven studies analysed the association of Tdap vaccination with variables of interest. Previous immunization with other vaccines recommended for HCWs (like influenza, hepatitis B and MMR) was positively associated with Tdap uptake in four studies. In conclusion, overall Tdap coverage among HCWs is low, but seems to increase over the years after the vaccine introduction and with implementation of interventions to increase coverage.

Management of anastomotic biliary stricture after liver transplantation: metal versus plastic stent.

BACKGROUND: Post-transplant anastomotic biliary strictures remain refractory to endoscopic therapy in a considerable number of cases. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare fully-covered self-expandable metal and plastic stents in the management of post-transplant biliary strictures. METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model; results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean standardized difference. The primary outcome was stricture resolution, while recurrence rate after stent placement, treatment time, and safety of the procedure were the secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Through a systematic literature review until October 2017, we identified 7 studies, of which 4 were randomized controlled trials. Stricture resolution was slightly higher with metal stents, with no statistical difference between the two procedures (OR 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60-3.15; P=0.45) and low heterogeneity (I2=6%). Stricture recurrence showed a non-significant trend in favor of plastic stents (OR 1.82, 95%CI 0.52-6.31, P=0.35). Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with placement of metal stents offered a significant improvement in terms of reduced treatment time (mean standardized difference: -3.58 months, 95%CI -6.23 to -0.93; P=0.008), but with more frequent complications, although not significantly so (OR 2.34, 95%CI 0.75-7.25; P=0.14). Sensitivity analysis confirmed all the findings. CONCLUSION: Metal stents appear to be a promising tool that can decrease treatment time, although there is still no clear evidence of their superiority over plastic stents in terms of efficacy.

Prospective cohort studies to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the 2013, 2014, and 2015 seasonal influenza vaccines produced by Instituto Butantan.

Annual vaccination is the most effective way to prevent seasonal influenza illness. Instituto Butantan (IB) performed clinical studies with its 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines (inactivated split-virion). Prospective cohort studies were carried out to describe the safety and immunogenicity of Instituto Butantan influenza vaccines, in healthy adults and elderly, from 2013 to 2015. Immediately after the informed consent was signed, participants underwent blood collection followed by vaccination. On study days 1, 2 and 3 post-vaccination participants were contacted by the staff to evaluate the occurrence of solicited (local and systemic) and non-solicited adverse reactions. On study day 21 (+7) subjects returned to the clinical site for final safety assessments and blood collection to evaluate post-vaccination immunogenicity. The immunogenicity analyses were performed by means of hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay. The immunogenicity endpoints were: seroprotection (SPR) and seroconversion (SCR) rates and the geometric mean HI antibody titer ratio (GMTR). The 2013 study was conducted at the Centro de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais (CRIE) and at the Centro de Pesquisa Clínica do Instituto da Criança, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo while the 2014 and 2015 studies were conducted at CRIE. The vaccine composition followed the WHO recommendation for the Southern hemisphere seasonal influenza vaccine. Forty-seven healthy adults and 13 elderly participated in the 2013 study, 60 healthy adults and 60 elderly in the 2014 study, and 62 healthy adults and 57 elderly in the 2015 study. In the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies, pain was the most frequent local adverse reaction and headache the most frequent systemic adverse reaction. All observed adverse reactions were classified as mild or moderate and none as severe. SPR >70% and SPR >60% were observed in adults and elderly, respectively, for the three vaccine viruses, in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies. SCR >40% was observed in adults, for the three vaccine viruses, only in the 2014 study and SCR >30% was observed in the elderly, for the three vaccine viruses, only in the 2013 and 2014 studies. GMTR >2.5 among adults, for the three vaccine viruses was only observed in the 2013 study and GMTR >2.0 was observed among elderly, for the three vaccine viruses, in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies. The 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasonal influenza vaccines produced by Instituto Butantan were safe and immunogenic according to the immunogenicity criteria defined by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

Prospective cohort studies to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the 2013, 2014, and 2015 seasonal influenza vaccines produced by Instituto Butantan

Annual vaccination is the most effective way to prevent seasonal influenza illness. Instituto Butantan (IB) performed clinical studies with its 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines (inactivated split-virion). Prospective cohort studies were carried out to describe the safety and immunogenicity of Instituto Butantan influenza vaccines, in healthy adults and elderly, from 2013 to 2015. Immediately after the informed consent was signed, participants underwent blood collection followed by vaccination. On study days 1, 2 and 3 post-vaccination participants were contacted by the staff to evaluate the occurrence of solicited (local and systemic) and non-solicited adverse reactions. On study day 21 (+7) subjects returned to the clinical site for final safety assessments and blood collection to evaluate post-vaccination immunogenicity. The immunogenicity analyses were performed by means of hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay. The immunogenicity endpoints were: seroprotection (SPR) and seroconversion (SCR) rates and the geometric mean HI antibody titer ratio (GMTR). The 2013 study was conducted at the Centro de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais (CRIE) and at the Centro de Pesquisa Clínica do Instituto da Criança, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo while the 2014 and 2015 studies were conducted at CRIE. The vaccine composition followed the WHO recommendation for the Southern hemisphere seasonal influenza vaccine. Forty-seven healthy adults and 13 elderly participated in the 2013 study, 60 healthy adults and 60 elderly in the 2014 study, and 62 healthy adults and 57 elderly in the 2015 study. In the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies, pain was the most frequent local adverse reaction and headache the most frequent systemic adverse reaction. All observed adverse reactions were classified as mild or moderate and none as severe. SPR >70% and SPR >60% were observed in adults and elderly, respectively, for the three vaccine viruses, in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies. SCR >40% was observed in adults, for the three vaccine viruses, only in the 2014 study and SCR >30% was observed in the elderly, for the three vaccine viruses, only in the 2013 and 2014 studies. GMTR >2.5 among adults, for the three vaccine viruses was only observed in the 2013 study and GMTR >2.0 was observed among elderly, for the three vaccine viruses, in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies. The 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasonal influenza vaccines produced by Instituto Butantan were safe and immunogenic according to the immunogenicity criteria defined by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

Prospective cohort studies to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the 2013, 2014, and 2015 seasonal influenza vaccines produced by Instituto Butantan

Annual vaccination is the most effective way to prevent seasonal influenza illness. Instituto Butantan (IB) performed clinical studies with its 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines (inactivated split-virion). Prospective cohort studies were carried out to describe the safety and immunogenicity of Instituto Butantan influenza vaccines, in healthy adults and elderly, from 2013 to 2015. Immediately after the informed consent was signed, participants underwent blood collection followed by vaccination. On study days 1, 2 and 3 post-vaccination participants were contacted by the staff to evaluate the occurrence of solicited (local and systemic) and non-solicited adverse reactions. On study day 21 (+7) subjects returned to the clinical site for final safety assessments and blood collection to evaluate post-vaccination immunogenicity. The immunogenicity analyses were performed by means of hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay. The immunogenicity endpoints were: seroprotection (SPR) and seroconversion (SCR) rates and the geometric mean HI antibody titer ratio (GMTR). The 2013 study was conducted at the Centro de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais (CRIE) and at the Centro de Pesquisa Clínica do Instituto da Criança, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo while the 2014 and 2015 studies were conducted at CRIE. The vaccine composition followed the WHO recommendation for the Southern hemisphere seasonal influenza vaccine. Forty-seven healthy adults and 13 elderly participated in the 2013 study, 60 healthy adults and 60 elderly in the 2014 study, and 62 healthy adults and 57 elderly in the 2015 study. In the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies, pain was the most frequent local adverse reaction and headache the most frequent systemic adverse reaction. All observed adverse reactions were classified as mild or moderate and none as severe. SPR >70% and SPR >60% were observed in adults and elderly, respectively, for the three vaccine viruses, in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies. SCR >40% was observed in adults, for the three vaccine viruses, only in the 2014 study and SCR >30% was observed in the elderly, for the three vaccine viruses, only in the 2013 and 2014 studies. GMTR >2.5 among adults, for the three vaccine viruses was only observed in the 2013 study and GMTR >2.0 was observed among elderly, for the three vaccine viruses, in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies. The 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasonal influenza vaccines produced by Instituto Butantan were safe and immunogenic according to the immunogenicity criteria defined by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).