Safety and immunogenicity of the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine as a booster in adults previously vaccinated with the BBIBP-CorV vaccine.

This phase 3 observer-blind, randomized, controlled study was conducted in adults ≥18 years of age to assess the safety and immunogenicity of NVX-CoV2373 as a heterologous booster compared to BBIBP-CorV when utilized as a homologous booster. Approximately 1000 participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single dose of NVX-CoV2373 or BBIBP-CorV after prior vaccination with 2 or 3 doses of BBIBP-CorV. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were collected for 7 days after vaccination. Unsolicited AEs were collected for 28 days following the booster dose and serious adverse and adverse events of special interest (AESI) were collected throughout the study. Anti-spike IgG and neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were measured at baseline, day 14, day 28, and day 180. The study achieved its primary non-inferiority endpoint and also demonstrated statistically higher neutralization responses when NVX-CoV2373 was utilized as a heterologous booster compared with BBIBP-CorV as a homologous booster. Both vaccines had an acceptably low reactogenicity profile, and no new safety concerns were found. Heterologous boosting with NVX-CoV2373 was a highly immunogenic and safe vaccine regimen in those previously vaccinated with BBIBP-CorV.

Burden and Impact of Reactogenicity among Adults Receiving COVID-19 Vaccines in the United States and Canada: Results from a Prospective Observational Study.

As SARS-CoV-2 variants continue to emerge, vaccination remains a critical tool to reduce the COVID-19 burden. Vaccine reactogenicity and the impact on work productivity/daily activities are recognized as contributing factors to vaccine hesitancy. To encourage continued COVID-19 vaccination, a more complete understanding of the differences in reactogenicity and impairment due to vaccine-related side effects across currently available vaccines is necessary. The 2019nCoV-406 study (n = 1367) was a prospective observational study of reactogenicity and associated impairments in adults in the United States and Canada who received an approved/authorized COVID-19 vaccine. Compared with recipients of mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccines, a smaller percentage of NVX-CoV2373 booster recipients reported local and systemic reactogenicity. This study's primary endpoint (percentage of participants with ≥50% overall work impairment on ≥1 of the 6 days post-vaccination period) did not show significant differences. However, the data suggest that NVX-CoV2373 booster recipients trended toward being less impaired overall than recipients of an mRNA booster; further research is needed to confirm this observed trend. The results of this real-world study suggest that NVX-CoV2373 may be a beneficial vaccine option with limited impact on non-work activities, in part due to the few reactogenicity events after vaccination.

The Novavax Heterologous COVID Booster Demonstrates Lower Reactogenicity Than mRNA: A Targeted Review.

COVID-19 continues to be a global health concern and booster doses are necessary for maintaining vaccine-mediated protection, limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Despite multiple COVID vaccine options, global booster uptake remains low. Reactogenicity, the occurrence of adverse local/systemic side effects, plays a crucial role in vaccine uptake and acceptance, particularly for booster doses. We conducted a targeted review of the reactogenicity of authorized/approved mRNA and protein-based vaccines demonstrated by clinical trials and real-world evidence. It was found that mRNA-based boosters show a higher incidence and an increased severity of reactogenicity compared with the Novavax protein-based COVID vaccine, NVX-CoV2373. In a recent NIAID study, the incidence of pain/tenderness, swelling, erythema, fatigue/malaise, headache, muscle pain, or fever was higher in individuals boosted with BNT162b2 (0.4 to 41.6% absolute increase) or mRNA-1273 (5.5 to 55.0% absolute increase) compared with NVX-CoV2373. Evidence suggests that NVX-CoV2373, when utilized as a heterologous booster, demonstrates less reactogenicity compared with mRNA vaccines, which, if communicated to hesitant individuals, may strengthen booster uptake rates worldwide.

Pivoting to protein: the immunogenicity and safety of protein-based NVX-CoV2373 as a heterologous booster for inactivated and viral vector COVID-19 vaccines.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately half of the 13.4 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses administered globally were inactivated or viral vector platforms. The harmonization and optimization of vaccine regimens has become a key focus of policymakers and health-care providers and presents an opportunity to reassess the continued use of pandemic-era vaccines. AREAS COVERED: Immunological evidence from studies of various homologous and heterologous regimens has been rapidly published; however, interpretation of these data is complicated by the many vaccine types and highly variable participant viral exposure and vaccination histories. Recent studies demonstrate that after primary series doses of inactivated (i.e. BBV152, and BBIBP-CorV), and viral vector (ChAdOx1 nCov-2019) vaccines, a heterologous boost with protein-based NVX-CoV2373 elicits more potent ancestral strain and omicron-specific antibody responses compared to homologous and heterologous inactivated and viral vector boosts. EXPERT OPINION: While mRNA vaccines likely yield similar performance to protein-based heterologous booster doses, the latter offers notable advantages to countries with high uptake of inactivated and viral vector vaccines in terms of transportation and storage logistics and can potentially appeal to vaccine hesitant individuals. Moving forward, vaccine-mediated protection in inactivated and viral vector recipients may be optimized with the use of a heterologous protein-based booster such as NVX-CoV2373. PIVOTING TO PROTEIN: The Immunogenicity and Safety of Protein-based NVX-CoV2373 as a Heterologous Booster for Inactivated and Viral Vector COVID-19 Vaccines. Inactivated or viral vector primary series following a booster dose with homologous or heterologous inactivated vaccines (i.e., BBV152, BBIBP-CorV), and homologous or heterologous viral vector vaccines (i.e., ChAd-Ox1 nCov-19) induces suboptimal immunogenicity compared to the enhanced immunogenicity of heterologous protein-based vaccine NVX-CoV2373.

Safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. As SARS-CoV-2 moves into endemic status, vaccination remains a key element in protecting the health of individuals, societies, and economies worldwide. AREAS COVERED: NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax, Gaithersburg, MD) is a recombinant protein vaccine composed of SARS-CoV-2 spike trimer nanoparticles formulated with saponin-based Matrix-M™ adjuvant (Novavax, Gaithersburg, MD). NVX-CoV2373 is authorized for emergency use in adults and adolescents aged ≥12 years in the United States and numerous other countries. EXPERT OPINION: In clinical trials, NVX-CoV2373 showed tolerable reactogenicity and favorable safety profiles characterized by mostly mild-to-moderate adverse events of short duration and by low rates of severe and serious adverse events comparable to those seen with placebo. The two-dose primary vaccination series resulted in robust increases in anti-spike protein immunoglobulin G, neutralizing antibody titers, and cellular immune responses. NVX-CoV2373 vaccination was associated with complete protection against severe disease and a high (90%) rate of protection against symptomatic disease in adults, including symptomatic disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 variants. Additionally, the NVX-CoV2373 adjuvanted recombinant protein platform offers a means to address issues of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy and global vaccine equity.

NVX-CoV2373 vaccine efficacy against hospitalization: A post hoc analysis of the PREVENT-19 phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

PREVENT-19, the pivotal phase 3 trial of the Novavax adjuvanted, recombinant spike protein COVID-19 vaccine (NVX-CoV2373), demonstrated that the vaccine was well tolerated and efficacious (vaccine efficacy, VE = 90%) for the prevention of symptomatic COVID-19. In the trial, participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive 2 doses of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo 21 days apart. Throughout the study, the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant was alpha, but additional variants were in circulation (i.e., beta, gamma, epsilon, and iota). VE among the per-protocol efficacy analysis population was calculated according to pre-specified disease severity (mild, moderate, or severe) criteria, but the impact on the risk of COVID-19-associated hospitalization was not specifically investigated. During this analysis period (January 25, 2021, to April 30, 2021 [95 days]), 4 hospitalizations occurred among the 77 events analyzed for the primary endpoint using the per-protocol population, 0 among vaccine recipients and 4 among placebo recipients, yielding a post hoc VE against hospitalization of 100% (95% CI: 28.8, 100). Among an expanded efficacy population, also identified post hoc, which included COVID-19-associated hospitalizations without a requirement for diagnostic polymerase chain reaction testing performed at the study central laboratory, 12 total hospitalizations were identified, 0 among vaccine recipients and 12 among placebo recipients, yielding a post hoc VE against hospitalization of 100% (95% CI: 83.1, 100). These additional data from the PREVENT-19 trial provide relevant public health information concerning the attributes of NVX-CoV2373.

Safety and Efficacy of the NVX-CoV2373 Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine at Completion of the Placebo-Controlled Phase of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The recombinant protein-based vaccine, NVX-CoV2373, demonstrated 89.7% efficacy against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a phase 3, randomized, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled trial in the United Kingdom. The protocol was amended to include a blinded crossover. Data to the end of the placebo-controlled phase are reported. METHODS: Adults aged 18-84 years received 2 doses of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo (1:1) and were monitored for virologically confirmed mild, moderate, or severe COVID-19 (onset from 7 days after second vaccination). Participants who developed immunoglobulin G (IgG) against nucleocapsid protein but did not show symptomatic COVID-19 were considered asymptomatic. Secondary outcomes included anti-spike (S) IgG responses, wild-type virus neutralization, and T-cell responses. RESULTS: Of 15 185 participants, 13 989 remained in the per-protocol efficacy population (6989 NVX-CoV2373, 7000 placebo). At a maximum of 7.5 months (median, 4.5) postvaccination, there were 24 cases of COVID-19 among NVX-CoV2373 recipients and 134 cases among placebo recipients, a vaccine efficacy of 82.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 73.3%-88.8%). Vaccine efficacy was 100% (95% CI, 17.9%-100.0%) against severe disease and 76.3% (95% CI, 57.4%-86.8%) against asymptomatic disease. High anti-S and neutralization responses to vaccination were evident, together with S-protein-specific induction of interferon-γ secretion in peripheral blood T cells. Incidence of serious adverse events and adverse events of special interest were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: A 2-dose regimen of NVX-CoV2373 conferred a high level of ongoing protection against asymptomatic, symptomatic, and severe COVID-19 through >6 months postvaccination. A gradual decrease of protection suggests that a booster may be indicated. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: EudraCT, 2020-004123-16.

Safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of a COVID-19 vaccine (NVX-CoV2373) co-administered with seasonal influenza vaccines: an exploratory substudy of a randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The safety and immunogenicity profile of COVID-19 vaccines when administered concomitantly with seasonal influenza vaccines have not yet been reported. We therefore aimed to report the results of a substudy within a phase 3 UK trial, by evaluating the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of NVX-CoV2373 when co-administered with licensed seasonal influenza vaccines. METHODS: We did a planned exploratory substudy as part of the randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine (NVX-CoV2373) by co-administrating the influenza vaccine at four study hospitals in the UK. Approximately, the first 400 participants meeting the main study entry criteria-with no contraindications to influenza vaccination-were invited to join the substudy. Participants of the main study were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive two intramuscular injections of either NVX-CoV2373 (5 µg) or placebo (normal saline) 21 days apart; participants enrolled into the substudy were co-vaccinated with a single (0·5 mL) intramuscular, age-appropriate (quadrivalent influenza cell-based vaccine [Flucelvax Quadrivalent; Seqirus UK, Maidenhead] for those aged 18-64 years and adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine [Fluad; Seqirus UK, Maidenhead] for those ≥65 years), licensed, influenza vaccine on the opposite deltoid to that of the first study vaccine dose or placebo. The influenza vaccine was administered in an open-label manner and at the same time as the first study injection. Reactogenicity was evaluated via an electronic diary for 7 days after vaccination in addition to monitoring for unsolicited adverse events, medically attended adverse events, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was assessed with influenza haemagglutination inhibition and SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike protein IgG assays. Vaccine efficacy against PCR-confirmed, symptomatic COVID-19 was assessed in participants who were seronegative at baseline, received both doses of study vaccine or placebo, had no major protocol deviations affecting the primary endpoint, and had no confirmed cases of symptomatic COVID-19 from the first dose until 6 days after the second dose (per-protocol efficacy population). Immunogenicity was assessed in participants who received scheduled two doses of study vaccine, had a baseline sample and at least one post-vaccination sample, and had no major protocol violations before unmasking (per-protocol immunogenicity population). Reactogenicity was analysed in all participants who received at least one dose of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo and had data collected for reactogenicity events. Safety was analysed in all participants who received at least one dose of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo. Comparisons were made between participants of the substudy and the main study (who were not co-vaccinated for influenza). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04583995. FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2020, and Nov 28, 2020, a total of 15 187 participants were randomised into the main phase 3 trial, of whom 15 139 received treatment (7569 received dose one of NVX-CoV2373 and 7570 received dose one of placebo). 431 participants were co-vaccinated with a seasonal influenza vaccine in the substudy (217 received NVX-CoV2373 plus the influenza vaccine and 214 received placebo plus the influenza vaccine). In general, the substudy participants were younger, more racially diverse, and had fewer comorbid conditions than those in the main study. Reactogenicity events were more common in the co-administration group than in the NVX-CoV2373 alone group: tenderness (113 [64·9%] of 174 vs 592 [53·3%] of 1111) or pain (69 [39·7%] vs 325 [29·3%]) at injection site, fatigue (48 [27·7%] vs 215 [19·4%]), and muscle pain (49 [28·3%] vs 237 [21·4%]). Incidences of unsolicited adverse events, treatment-related medically attended adverse events, and serious adverse events were low and balanced between the co-administration group and the NVX-CoV2373 alone group. No episodes of anaphylaxis or deaths were reported within the substudy. Co-administration resulted in no change to influenza vaccine immune response although a reduction in antibody responses to the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine was noted. NVX-CoV2373 vaccine efficacy in the substudy (ie, participants aged 18 to <65 years) was 87·5% (95% CI -0·2 to 98·4) and in the main study was 89·8% (95% CI 79·7-95·5). INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this substudy is the first to show the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy profile of a COVID-19 vaccine when co-administered with seasonal influenza vaccines. Our results suggest concomitant vaccination might be a viable immunisation strategy. FUNDING: Novavax.

Clinical and economic impacts of large volume delayed sampling and pathogen reduction technology platelet processing strategies in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Large volume delayed sampling (LVDS) and pathogen reduction technology (PRT) are strategies for platelet processing to minimize transfusion of contaminated platelet components (PCs). This study holistically compares the economic and clinical impact of LVDS and PRT in the United States. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A decision model was constructed to simulate collection, processing, and use of PCs and to compare processing strategies: PRT with 5-day shelf life, LVDS with 7-day shelf life (LVDS7), and LVDS with 5-day shelf life extended to 7 days with secondary testing (LVDS5/2). Target population was adults requiring two or more transfusions. Collection, processing, storage, and distribution data were obtained from the National Blood Collection and Utilization Survey and published literature. Patient outcomes associated with transfusions were obtained from AABB guidelines, meta-analyses, and other published clinical studies. Costs were obtained from reimbursement schedules and other published sources. RESULTS: Given 10,000 donated units, 9512, 9511, and 9651 units of PRT, LVDS5/2, and LVDS7 PCs were available for transfusion, respectively. With these units, 1502, 2172, and 2329 transfusions can be performed with similar levels of adverse events. Assuming 30 transfusions a day, a hospital would require 69,325, 47,940, and 45,383 units of PRT, LVDS5/2, and LVDS7 platelets to perform these transfusions. The mean costs to perform transfusions were significantly higher with PRT units. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with PRT, LVDS strategies were associated with lower costs and higher PC availability while patients experienced similar levels of adverse events. Increased utilization of LVDS has the potential to improve efficiency, expand patient access to platelets, and reduce health care costs.

Safety and Efficacy of NVX-CoV2373 Covid-19 Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Early clinical data from studies of the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine (Novavax), a recombinant nanoparticle vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that contains the full-length spike glycoprotein of the prototype strain plus Matrix-M adjuvant, showed that the vaccine was safe and associated with a robust immune response in healthy adult participants. Additional data were needed regarding the efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of this vaccine in a larger population. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 33 sites in the United Kingdom, we assigned adults between the ages of 18 and 84 years in a 1:1 ratio to receive two intramuscular 5-µg doses of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo administered 21 days apart. The primary efficacy end point was virologically confirmed mild, moderate, or severe SARS-CoV-2 infection with an onset at least 7 days after the second injection in participants who were serologically negative at baseline. RESULTS: A total of 15,187 participants underwent randomization, and 14,039 were included in the per-protocol efficacy population. Of the participants, 27.9% were 65 years of age or older, and 44.6% had coexisting illnesses. Infections were reported in 10 participants in the vaccine group and in 96 in the placebo group, with a symptom onset of at least 7 days after the second injection, for a vaccine efficacy of 89.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80.2 to 94.6). No hospitalizations or deaths were reported among the 10 cases in the vaccine group. Five cases of severe infection were reported, all of which were in the placebo group. A post hoc analysis showed an efficacy of 86.3% (95% CI, 71.3 to 93.5) against the B.1.1.7 (or alpha) variant and 96.4% (95% CI, 73.8 to 99.5) against non-B.1.1.7 variants. Reactogenicity was generally mild and transient. The incidence of serious adverse events was low and similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: A two-dose regimen of the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine administered to adult participants conferred 89.7% protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and showed high efficacy against the B.1.1.7 variant. (Funded by Novavax; EudraCT number, 2020-004123-16.).

Limiting Acute Kidney Injury Progression In Sepsis: Study Protocol and Trial Simulation.

OBJECTIVES: To describe study design considerations and to simulate a trial of biomarker-guided sepsis management aimed to reduce acute kidney injury (acute kidney injury). Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2 and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7, urinary biomarkers of cell-cycle arrest, and indicators of kidney stress can detect acute kidney injury before clinical manifestations. We sought to determine the event rates for acute kidney injury as a function of serial measurements of urinary (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2)•(insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7) in patients at risk of sepsis-associated acute kidney injury, so that an escalating series of kidney-sparing sepsis bundles based on international guidelines could be applied. DESIGN: We described the study protocol of "Limiting acute kidney injury Progression In Sepsis," a phase 4, multicenter, adaptive, randomized controlled trial. We performed simulations to estimate the rates for the trial's primary endpoint using patient-level data from two previous studies (Sapphire and Protocolized Care for Early Septic Shock). SETTING: Academic and community ICUs. PATIENTS: Critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock, without evidence of stage 2/3 acute kidney injury at enrollment. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Our primary endpoint is progression of two or more stages of acute kidney injury, death, or dialysis within 72 hours after enrollment. In the Sapphire simulation, 45 of 203 patients (22%) with sepsis met the endpoint. In Protocolized Care for Early Septic Shock, 144 of 607 patients (24%) with septic shock met the endpoint. In both simulations, (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2)•(insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7) patterns, suggested by Limiting acute kidney injury Progression In Sepsis protocol, stratified the risk for the endpoint from 6% (three negative tests) to 41% (for patients eligible for the highest level of kidney-sparing sepsis bundle) in Sapphire, and 14% (two negative tests) to 46% (for the highest level of kidney-sparing sepsis bundle) in Protocolized Care for Early Septic Shock. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of our Limiting acute kidney injury Progression In Sepsis trial simulation confirmed that (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2)•(insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7) could identify patients with different rates of progression to moderate/severe acute kidney injury, death, or dialysis in 72 hours. The Limiting acute kidney injury Progression In Sepsis protocol algorithm is therefore feasible in terms of identifying suitably high-risk individuals for kidney-sparing sepsis bundle.

Mild traumatic brain injury in the United States: demographics, brain imaging procedures, health-care utilization and costs.

Objective: To characterize mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) patients in the USA, describing location of diagnosis, timing, and modality of imaging procedures, health-care resource utilization (HRU) and costs in the 12-month period post-diagnosis. Research Design: Retrospective claims analysis Methods: Anonymized data from the OptumHealth Care Solutions claims database (2006-2016). The index date was the first date with an mTBI diagnosis. HRU and costs (2016 USD) were assessed in the 12-month post-index period. Results: A total of 80,004 patients with mTBI were included: 60% were under 26 years and 54% were male. Mild TBI was most frequently diagnosed in an emergency department (ED) for all age groups, except patients aged 11-17 years, for whom the outpatient setting was the most frequent place of diagnosis. Almost half (47%) received brain imaging on the index date, with 98% of which receiving computed tomography. Mean follow-up health-care costs were $13,564 (SD = $41,071), primarily from inpatient ($4,675, SD = $29,982) and non-ED outpatient/physician office visits ($4,207, SD = $12,697). Older patients had greater HRU and higher health-care costs. Conclusions: The findings of this claims-based study show substantial HRU and costs associated with mTBI diagnosis during a 12-month follow-up period.

Economic and clinical benefits of early identification of acute kidney injury using a urinary biomarker.

Purpose: To evaluate the budget impact of adding a diagnostic test of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 2 and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 7 ([TIMP-2]·[IGFBP7]), which identifies patients at risk of moderate-to-severe acute kidney injury (AKI), to the current standard of care (SOC) in a hospital setting.Materials and methods: A budget impact model (2017 USD) was developed from the perspective of a hypothetical US hospital system serving 10,000 inpatients annually. The model estimated the impact of assessing the risk of AKI using SOC vs a combination of SOC and the US Food and Drug Administration-approved assay [TIMP-2]·[IGFBP7] over a 1-year period. Potential cost implications were assessed using estimates for payer mix among patients, diagnostic efficacy, and patient healthcare resource utilization. The model also considered provider adoption rates and the estimated costs of [TIMP-2]·[IGFBP7].Results: Compared to SOC alone, adding [TIMP-2]·[IGFBP7] to SOC was associated with a $1,855 reduction in uncompensated care per patient tested, which, after accounting for the additional costs of the test ($277), resulted in net savings of $1,578 per patient tested. The findings were robust to input parameter variations, as demonstrated by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. In the probabilistic sensitivity analyses, net cost savings to the hospital ranged from $50,308-$3,971,514, or $101-$7,943 per tested patient (mean = $1,710; 95% confidence interval = $1,691-$1,729).Conclusions: The introduction of [TIMP-2]·[IGFBP7] as a novel tool in the identification of AKI risk may result in considerable cost savings from a hospital perspective under this model's base-case assumptions. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings in a real-world setting.Key points for decision makersAn economic model was constructed to determine the budget impact of adding a diagnostic test ([TIMP-2]·[IGFBP7]), which identifies patients at risk of moderate-to-severe acute kidney injury, to the current standard of care (SOC) in a hospital setting.According to the present model, the use of [TIMP-2]·[IGFBP7] to identify acute kidney injury risk may reduce costs for hospitals by ∼$1,578 per patient tested.

Midturbinate Swabs Are Comparable to Nasopharyngeal Swabs for Quantitative Detection of Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Infants.

Nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs are generally used to detect respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in infants. However, midturbinate (MT) swabs may provide comparable results. In this study, we enrolled hospitalized infants aged <24 months with RSV and collected NP and MT swabs. The resulting viral loads measured by real-time reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction were similar. Most parents preferred MT swabs over NP swabs.

Psychometric evaluation of a caregiver diary for the assessment of symptoms of respiratory syncytial virus.

BACKGROUND: There are no clinical outcome assessment (COA) tools developed in accordance with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance suitable for the evaluation of symptoms associated with respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection among infants. The Gilead RSV Caregiver Diary (GRCD) is being developed to fulfill this need; the present research evaluates the GRCD and documents its reliability, validity, and responsiveness among children < 24 months of age with acute RSV infection. METHODS: A prospective, observational study was conducted in the United States during the 2014-2015 northern hemisphere winter season. Subjects were < 24-month, full-term, previously healthy infants with confirmed RSV infection and ≤5 days of symptoms. The GRCD was completed twice daily for 14 days by caregivers. Additional data were collected during the initial visit, subsequent visits, and end-of-study interview. Test-retest reliability (kappa and intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs]), construct validity (correlations and factor analyses), discriminating ability (analyses of variance and chi-square), and responsiveness (effect sizes and standardized response means) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 103 subjects were enrolled (mean age 7.4 ± 5.3 months). GRCD items were grouped into different subscales according to question content, which, with the exception of the behavior impact domain (ICC = 0.43), demonstrated internal consistency (alphas = 0.78-0.94) and test-retest reliability (ICCs = 0.77-0.94). Hypothesized correlations with parent global ratings of RSV severity ranged from 0.45 to 0.70 and provided support for construct validity. Support for discriminating ability was limited. Effect sizes ranged from - 1.48 to - 4.40, indicating the GRCD was responsive to change. CONCLUSIONS: These psychometric analyses support the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the GRCD for assessing RSV symptoms in children < 24 months of age.

Development of a novel observer-reported outcome measure for the assessment of Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) infection symptoms in pediatric clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a seasonal infection affecting most children by 2 years of age and the leading cause of lower respiratory tract infection requiring hospitalization in infants. Novel antiviral medications are in development to improve the clinical outcomes of RSV; however, no clinical outcome assessments (COAs) for RSV have been developed in alignment with the United States Food and Drug Administration patient-reported outcome guidance to assist in the evaluation of new therapies. To address this need, an observer-reported outcome (ObsRO) measure designed to assess observable RSV symptoms was created. METHODS: The literature was reviewed to evaluate existing COAs and identify constructs of interest. Individual caregiver interviews elicited concepts that informed item development, and candidate items were subsequently evaluated in two rounds of cognitive testing. Separate cohorts of caregivers of RSV-infected nonhospitalized and hospitalized infants participated. Therapeutic-area experts provided input throughout the instrument development process. RESULTS: Caregivers of 39 children < 24 months old with RSV (31 nonhospitalized, 8 hospitalized) participated in in-depth, individual interviews during concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing, resulting in 21 concepts identified as potentially observable and relevant to young children with RSV. The item pool was reduced to 12 cardinal symptoms and behavior impacts reported to be directly observable by caregivers, with 10 daytime and 9 nighttime symptoms to capture diurnal variation in severity. CONCLUSIONS: The RSV Caregiver Diary assesses RSV symptom severity and change from the parent or caregiver perspective in a standardized manner to measure treatment benefit. Following psychometric evaluation and refinement, this tool is expected to be suitable for assisting in the clinical development of RSV therapeutics.

Oral GS-5806 activity in a respiratory syncytial virus challenge study.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a common cause of infant hospitalizations and is increasingly recognized as a cause of considerable morbidity and mortality. No accepted antiviral treatment exists. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of GS-5806, an oral RSV-entry inhibitor, in healthy adults who received a clinical challenge strain of RSV intranasally. Participants were monitored for 12 days. At the time of a positive test for RSV infection or 5 days after inoculation, whichever occurred first, participants were randomly assigned to receive GS-5806 or placebo in one of seven sequential cohorts. Cohorts 1 to 4 received a first dose of 50 mg of GS-5806 and then 25 mg daily for the next 4 days, cohort 5 received a first dose of 50 mg and then 25 mg daily for the next 2 days, cohort 6 received one 100-mg dose, and cohort 7 received a first dose of 10 mg and then 5 mg daily for the next 4 days. Dose selection for cohorts 5, 6, and 7 occurred after an interim analysis of data for cohorts 1 to 4. The primary end point was the area under the curve (AUC) for the viral load, which was assessed after administration of the first dose through the 12th day after inoculation. Secondary end points were mucus weight and symptom scores. RESULTS: Among the 54 participants in cohorts 1 to 4 who were infected with RSV, active treatment was associated with a lower viral load (adjusted mean, 250.7 vs. 757.7 log10 plaque-forming-unit equivalents [PFUe] × hours per milliliter; P<0.001), lower total mucus weight (mean, 6.9 g vs. 15.1 g; P=0.03), and a lower AUC for the change from baseline in symptom scores (adjusted mean, -20.2 vs. 204.9 × hours; P=0.005). The results were similar in cohorts 5, 6, and 7. Adverse events, including low neutrophil counts and increased levels of alanine aminotransferase, were more common among participants receiving GS-5806. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with GS-5806 reduced the viral load and the severity of clinical disease in a challenge study of healthy adults. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01756482.).

Factors associated with in-office influenza vaccination by U.S. pediatric providers.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, influenza vaccination is recommended for all children 6 months and older; however, vaccination rates are below target levels. A broad sample of U.S. pediatric offices was assessed to determine factors that influence in-office influenza vaccination rates. METHODS: Offices (N = 174) were recruited to participate in an observational study over three influenza seasons (2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011). Only data from the first year of an office's participation in the study were used. Associations of coverage and 2-dose compliance rates with office characteristics and selected vaccination activities were examined using univariate regression analyses and linear regression analyses using office characteristics identified a priori and vaccination activities with P values ≤ 0.10 in univariate analyses. RESULTS: Influenza vaccination coverage for children 6 months to 18 years of age averaged 25.2% (range: 2.0%-69.1%) and 2-dose compliance for children < 9 years of age averaged 53.4% (range: 5.4%-96.2%). Factors associated with increased coverage were non-rural site (P = 0.025), smaller office size (fewer than 5000 patients; P < 0.001), use of evening and weekend hours to offer influenza vaccine (P = 0.004), a longer vaccination period (P = 0.014), and a greater influenza vaccine coverage rate among office staff (P = 0.012). Increased 2-dose compliance was associated with smaller office size (P = 0.001) and using patient reminders (P = 0.012) and negatively related to use of electronic provider reminders to vaccinate (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: To maximize influenza vaccine coverage and compliance, offices could offer the vaccine during evening and weekend hours, extend the duration of vaccine availability, encourage staff vaccination, and remind patients that influenza vaccination is due. Additional efforts may be required in large offices and those in rural locations.

A postlicensure evaluation of the safety of Ann Arbor strain live attenuated influenza vaccine in children 24-59 months of age.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) was initially approved for use in individuals aged 5-49 years in 2003, which was extended to individuals aged 2-49 years in 2007. At that time, a postlicensure commitment was made to describe the safety of LAIV within a cohort of eligible children aged 2-5 years. METHODS: A prospective observational postmarketing study was conducted to evaluate the safety of LAIV. Rates of medically attended events (MAEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) in eligible children aged 24-59 months receiving LAIV as part of routine care from October 2007 to March 2010 were compared with rates in a within-cohort self-control, as well as matched unvaccinated and matched trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV)-vaccinated controls. Children with asthma and other high-risk medical conditions before vaccination were excluded. All MAEs and SAEs through 42 days postvaccination and all hospitalizations and deaths through 6 months postvaccination were analyzed. Statistical significance was declared without multiplicity adjustment. RESULTS: A total of 28,226 unique LAIV recipients were matched with similar numbers of TIV-vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Of 4696 MAE incidence rate comparisons, 83 (1.8%) were statistically significantly higher and 221 (4.7%) were statistically significantly lower in LAIV recipients versus controls. No pattern of MAE rate differences suggested a safety signal with LAIV. Asthma/wheezing MAEs were not statistically increased in LAIV recipients. No anaphylaxis events occurred within 3 days postvaccination. Rates of SAEs were similar between LAIV and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this postlicensure evaluation of LAIV safety in US children are consistent with preapproval clinical studies and Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System reports, both of which demonstrated no significant increase in asthma/wheezing events or other adverse outcomes among eligible children aged 24-59 months who received LAIV.