An mRNA Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 - Preliminary Report Jackson, Lisa A; Anderson, Evan J; Rouphael, Nadine G ...
New England journal of medicine/The New England journal of medicine,
11/2020, Volume:
383, Issue:
20
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in late 2019 and spread globally, prompting an international effort to accelerate development of a vaccine. The candidate ...vaccine mRNA-1273 encodes the stabilized prefusion SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.
We conducted a phase 1, dose-escalation, open-label trial including 45 healthy adults, 18 to 55 years of age, who received two vaccinations, 28 days apart, with mRNA-1273 in a dose of 25 μg, 100 μg, or 250 μg. There were 15 participants in each dose group.
After the first vaccination, antibody responses were higher with higher dose (day 29 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay anti-S-2P antibody geometric mean titer GMT, 40,227 in the 25-μg group, 109,209 in the 100-μg group, and 213,526 in the 250-μg group). After the second vaccination, the titers increased (day 57 GMT, 299,751, 782,719, and 1,192,154, respectively). After the second vaccination, serum-neutralizing activity was detected by two methods in all participants evaluated, with values generally similar to those in the upper half of the distribution of a panel of control convalescent serum specimens. Solicited adverse events that occurred in more than half the participants included fatigue, chills, headache, myalgia, and pain at the injection site. Systemic adverse events were more common after the second vaccination, particularly with the highest dose, and three participants (21%) in the 250-μg dose group reported one or more severe adverse events.
The mRNA-1273 vaccine induced anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune responses in all participants, and no trial-limiting safety concerns were identified. These findings support further development of this vaccine. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; mRNA-1273 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04283461).
Testing of vaccine candidates to prevent infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in an older population is important, since increased incidences of illness and ...death from coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have been associated with an older age.
We conducted a phase 1, dose-escalation, open-label trial of a messenger RNA vaccine, mRNA-1273, which encodes the stabilized prefusion SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S-2P) in healthy adults. The trial was expanded to include 40 older adults, who were stratified according to age (56 to 70 years or ≥71 years). All the participants were assigned sequentially to receive two doses of either 25 μg or 100 μg of vaccine administered 28 days apart.
Solicited adverse events were predominantly mild or moderate in severity and most frequently included fatigue, chills, headache, myalgia, and pain at the injection site. Such adverse events were dose-dependent and were more common after the second immunization. Binding-antibody responses increased rapidly after the first immunization. By day 57, among the participants who received the 25-μg dose, the anti-S-2P geometric mean titer (GMT) was 323,945 among those between the ages of 56 and 70 years and 1,128,391 among those who were 71 years of age or older; among the participants who received the 100-μg dose, the GMT in the two age subgroups was 1,183,066 and 3,638,522, respectively. After the second immunization, serum neutralizing activity was detected in all the participants by multiple methods. Binding- and neutralizing-antibody responses appeared to be similar to those previously reported among vaccine recipients between the ages of 18 and 55 years and were above the median of a panel of controls who had donated convalescent serum. The vaccine elicited a strong CD4 cytokine response involving type 1 helper T cells.
In this small study involving older adults, adverse events associated with the mRNA-1273 vaccine were mainly mild or moderate. The 100-μg dose induced higher binding- and neutralizing-antibody titers than the 25-μg dose, which supports the use of the 100-μg dose in a phase 3 vaccine trial. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; mRNA-1273 Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04283461.).
Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with dysregulated inflammation. The effects of combination treatment with baricitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, plus remdesivir are not ...known.
We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating baricitinib plus remdesivir in hospitalized adults with Covid-19. All the patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (≤14 days) or placebo (control). The primary outcome was the time to recovery. The key secondary outcome was clinical status at day 15.
A total of 1033 patients underwent randomization (with 515 assigned to combination treatment and 518 to control). Patients receiving baricitinib had a median time to recovery of 7 days (95% confidence interval CI, 6 to 8), as compared with 8 days (95% CI, 7 to 9) with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.32; P = 0.03), and a 30% higher odds of improvement in clinical status at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.6). Patients receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation at enrollment had a time to recovery of 10 days with combination treatment and 18 days with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.08). The 28-day mortality was 5.1% in the combination group and 7.8% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.09). Serious adverse events were less frequent in the combination group than in the control group (16.0% vs. 21.0%; difference, -5.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.8 to -0.3; P = 0.03), as were new infections (5.9% vs. 11.2%; difference, -5.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to -1.9; P = 0.003).
Baricitinib plus remdesivir was superior to remdesivir alone in reducing recovery time and accelerating improvement in clinical status among patients with Covid-19, notably among those receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation. The combination was associated with fewer serious adverse events. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04401579.).
Microneedle patches provide an alternative to conventional needle-and-syringe immunisation, and potentially offer improved immunogenicity, simplicity, cost-effectiveness, acceptability, and safety. ...We describe safety, immunogenicity, and acceptability of the first-in-man study on single, dissolvable microneedle patch vaccination against influenza.
The TIV-MNP 2015 study was a randomised, partly blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 1, clinical trial at Emory University that enrolled non-pregnant, immunocompetent adults from Atlanta, GA, USA, who were aged 18–49 years, naive to the 2014–15 influenza vaccine, and did not have any significant dermatological disorders. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to four groups and received a single dose of inactivated influenza vaccine (fluvirin: 18 μg of haemagglutinin per H1N1 vaccine strain, 17 μg of haemagglutinin per H3N2 vaccine strain, and 15 μg of haemagglutinin per B vaccine strain) (1) by microneedle patch or (2) by intramuscular injection, or received (3) placebo by microneedle patch, all administered by an unmasked health-care worker; or received a single dose of (4) inactivated influenza vaccine by microneedle patch self-administered by study participants. A research pharmacist prepared the randomisation code using a computer-generated randomisation schedule with a block size of 4. Because of the nature of the study, participants were not masked to the type of vaccination method (ie, microneedle patch vs intramuscular injection). Primary safety outcome measures are the incidence of study product-related serious adverse events within 180 days, grade 3 solicited or unsolicited adverse events within 28 days, and solicited injection site and systemic reactogenicity on the day of study product administration through 7 days after administration, and secondary safety outcomes are new-onset chronic illnesses within 180 days and unsolicited adverse events within 28 days, all analysed by intention to treat. Secondary immunogenicity outcomes are antibody titres at day 28 and percentages of seroconversion and seroprotection, all determined by haemagglutination inhibition antibody assay. The trial is completed and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02438423.
Between June 23, 2015, and Sept 25, 2015, 100 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to a group. There were no treatment-related serious adverse events, no treatment-related unsolicited grade 3 or higher adverse events, and no new-onset chronic illnesses. Among vaccinated groups (vaccine via health-care worker administered microneedle patch or intramuscular injection, or self-administered microneedle patch), overall incidence of solicited adverse events (n=89 vs n=73 vs n=73) and unsolicited adverse events (n=18 vs n=12 vs n=14) were similar. Reactogenicity was mild, transient, and most commonly reported as tenderness (15 60% of 25 participants 95% CI 39–79) and pain (11 44% of 25 24–65) after intramuscular injection; and as tenderness (33 66% of 50 51–79), erythema (20 40% of 50 26–55), and pruritus (41 82% of 50 69–91) after vaccination by microneedle patch application. The geometric mean titres were similar at day 28 between the microneedle patch administered by a health-care worker versus the intramuscular route for the H1N1 strain (1197 95% CI 855–1675 vs 997 703–1415; p=0·5), the H3N2 strain (287 192–430 vs 223 160–312; p=0·4), and the B strain (126 86–184 vs 94 73–122; p=0·06). Similar geometric mean titres were reported in participants who self-administered the microneedle patch (all p>0·05). The seroconversion percentages were significantly higher at day 28 after microneedle patch vaccination compared with placebo (all p<0·0001) and were similar to intramuscular injection (all p>0·01).
Use of dissolvable microneedle patches for influenza vaccination was well tolerated and generated robust antibody responses.
National Institutes of Health.
Summary Haemophagocytic syndrome or haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis is a rare disease that is often fatal despite treatment. Haemophagocytic syndrome is caused by a dysregulation in natural ...killer T-cell function, resulting in activation and proliferation of lymphocytes or histiocytes with uncontrolled haemophagocytosis and cytokine overproduction. The syndrome is characterised by fever, hepatosplenomegaly, cytopenias, liver dysfunction, and hyperferritinaemia. Haemophagocytic syndrome can be either primary, with a genetic aetiology, or secondary, associated with malignancies, autoimmune diseases, or infections. Infections associated with haemophagocytic syndrome are most frequently caused by viruses, particularly Epstein-Barr virus (EBV). We present a case of EBV-associated haemophagocytic syndrome in a young adult with no known immunosuppression. We briefly review haemophagocytic syndrome and then discuss its associated infections, particularly EBV and other herpes viruses, HIV, influenza, parvovirus, and hepatitis viruses, as well as bacterial, fungal, and parasitic organisms.
Neisseria meningitidis (the meningococcus) causes significant morbidity and mortality in children and young adults worldwide through epidemic or sporadic meningitis and/or septicemia. In this review, ...we describe the biology, microbiology, and epidemiology of this exclusive human pathogen. N.meningitidis is a fastidious, encapsulated, aerobic gram-negative diplococcus. Colonies are positive by the oxidase test and most strains utilize maltose. The phenotypic classification of meningococci, based on structural differences in capsular polysaccharide, lipooligosaccharide (LOS) and outer membrane proteins, is now complemented by genome sequence typing (ST). The epidemiological profile of N. meningitidis is variable in different populations and over time and virulence of the meningococcus is based on a transformable/plastic genome and expression of certain capsular polysaccharides (serogroups A, B, C, W-135, Y and X) and non-capsular antigens. N. meningitidis colonizes mucosal surfaces using a multifactorial process involving pili, twitching motility, LOS, opacity associated, and other surface proteins. Certain clonal groups have an increased capacity to gain access to the blood, evade innate immune responses, multiply, and cause systemic disease. Although new vaccines hold great promise, meningococcal infection continues to be reported in both developed and developing countries, where universal vaccine coverage is absent and antibiotic resistance increasingly more common.
The Zika virus epidemic and associated congenital infections have prompted rapid vaccine development. We assessed two new DNA vaccines expressing premembrane and envelope Zika virus structural ...proteins.
We did two phase 1, randomised, open-label trials involving healthy adult volunteers. The VRC 319 trial, done in three centres, assessed plasmid VRC5288 (Zika virus and Japanese encephalitis virus chimera), and the VRC 320, done in one centre, assessed plasmid VRC5283 (wild-type Zika virus). Eligible participants were aged 18–35 years in VRC19 and 18–50 years in VRC 320. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 by a computer-generated randomisation schedule prepared by the study statistician. All participants received intramuscular injection of 4 mg vaccine. In VRC 319 participants were assigned to receive vaccinations via needle and syringe at 0 and 8 weeks, 0 and 12 weeks, 0, 4, and 8 weeks, or 0, 4, and 20 weeks. In VRC 320 participants were assigned to receive vaccinations at 0, 4, and 8 weeks via single-dose needle and syringe injection in one deltoid or split-dose needle and syringe or needle-free injection with the Stratis device (Pharmajet, Golden, CO, USA) in each deltoid. Both trials followed up volunteers for 24 months for the primary endpoint of safety, assessed as local and systemic reactogenicity in the 7 days after each vaccination and all adverse events in the 28 days after each vaccination. The secondary endpoint in both trials was immunogenicity 4 weeks after last vaccination. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02840487 and NCT02996461.
VRC 319 enrolled 80 participants (20 in each group), and VRC 320 enrolled 45 participants (15 in each group). One participant in VRC 319 and two in VRC 320 withdrew after one dose of vaccine, but were included in the safety analyses. Both vaccines were safe and well tolerated. All local and systemic symptoms were mild to moderate. In both studies, pain and tenderness at the injection site was the most frequent local symptoms (37 46% of 80 participants in VRC 319 and 36 80% of 45 in VRC 320) and malaise and headache were the most frequent systemic symptoms (22 27% and 18 22%, respectively, in VRC 319 and 17 38% and 15 33%, respectively, in VRC 320). For VRC5283, 14 of 14 (100%) participants who received split-dose vaccinations by needle-free injection had detectable positive antibody responses, and the geometric mean titre of 304 was the highest across all groups in both trials.
VRC5283 was well tolerated and has advanced to phase 2 efficacy testing.
Intramural Research Program of the Vaccine Research Center, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health.
The last decade has witnessed tremendous progress in immunology and vaccinology, owing to several scientific and technological breakthroughs. Systems vaccinology is a field that has emerged at the ...forefront of vaccine research and development and provides a unique way to probe immune responses to vaccination in humans. The goals of systems vaccinology are to use systems-based approaches to define signatures that can be used to predict vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy and to delineate the molecular mechanisms driving protective immunity. The application of systems biological approaches in influenza vaccination studies has enabled the discovery of early signatures that predict immunogenicity to vaccination and yielded novel mechanistic insights about vaccine-induced immunity. Here we review the contributions of systems vaccinology to influenza vaccine development and critically examine the potential of systems vaccinology toward enabling the development of a universal influenza vaccine that provides robust and durable immunity against diverse influenza viruses.
PDF
