Assessment of the safety and efficacy of vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in different populations is essential, as is investigation of the efficacy ...of the vaccines against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including the B.1.351 (501Y.V2) variant first identified in South Africa.
We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial to assess the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) in people not infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in South Africa. Participants 18 to less than 65 years of age were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses of vaccine containing 5×10
viral particles or placebo (0.9% sodium chloride solution) 21 to 35 days apart. Serum samples obtained from 25 participants after the second dose were tested by pseudovirus and live-virus neutralization assays against the original D614G virus and the B.1.351 variant. The primary end points were safety and efficacy of the vaccine against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic coronavirus 2019 illness (Covid-19) more than 14 days after the second dose.
Between June 24 and November 9, 2020, we enrolled 2026 HIV-negative adults (median age, 30 years); 1010 and 1011 participants received at least one dose of placebo or vaccine, respectively. Both the pseudovirus and the live-virus neutralization assays showed greater resistance to the B.1.351 variant in serum samples obtained from vaccine recipients than in samples from placebo recipients. In the primary end-point analysis, mild-to-moderate Covid-19 developed in 23 of 717 placebo recipients (3.2%) and in 19 of 750 vaccine recipients (2.5%), for an efficacy of 21.9% (95% confidence interval CI, -49.9 to 59.8). Among the 42 participants with Covid-19, 39 cases (95.1% of 41 with sequencing data) were caused by the B.1.351 variant; vaccine efficacy against this variant, analyzed as a secondary end point, was 10.4% (95% CI, -76.8 to 54.8). The incidence of serious adverse events was balanced between the vaccine and placebo groups.
A two-dose regimen of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine did not show protection against mild-to-moderate Covid-19 due to the B.1.351 variant. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04444674; Pan African Clinical Trials Registry number, PACTR202006922165132).
There is a paucity of data on COVID-19 vaccines in people living with HIV-1, who could be at increased risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19. We evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of a ...Matrix-M adjuvanted recombinant spike protein nanoparticle COVID-19 vaccine (NVX-CoV2373; Novavax) in HIV-negative people and people living with HIV-1.
In this randomised, observer-blinded, multicentre, placebo-controlled phase 2A/B trial in South Africa, participants aged 18–84 years, with and without underlying HIV-1, were enrolled from 16 sites and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive two intramuscular injections of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo, 21 days apart. People living with HIV-1 were on stable antiretroviral therapy and had an HIV-1 viral load of less than 1000 copies per mL. Vaccine dosage was 5 μg SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein with 50 μg Matrix-M adjuvant, whereas 0·9% saline was used as placebo injection (volume 0·5 mL each). All study staff and participants remained masked to study group assignment. We previously reported an interim analysis on the efficacy and safety of the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine (coprimary endpoints). In this Article, we present an expanded safety analysis for the full cohort of participants and report on the secondary objective of vaccine immunogenicity in the full cohort of people living with HIV-1 and in HIV-negative individuals overall and stratified by baseline SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04533399, and the Pan-African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR202009726132275.
Participants were enrolled between Aug 17 and Nov 25, 2020. The safety analysis set included 4164 HIV-negative participants (2089 in the intervention group and 2075 in the placebo group) and 244 people living with HIV-1 (122 in the intervention group and 122 in the placebo group). 1422 (34·1%) of 4164 HIV-negative people and 83 (34·0%) of 244 people living with HIV-1 were categorised as baseline SARS-CoV-2-positive (ie, anti-spike IgG reactive at enrolment or had a reactive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test by 14 days after the second study vaccination). In the NVX-CoV2373 group, solicited local and systemic adverse events were more common in HIV-negative participants (427 30·6% local and 401 28·7% systemic) than in people living with HIV-1 (20 25·3% local and 20 25·3% systemic) among those who were baseline SARS-CoV-2-seronegative (naive). Of the serious adverse events that occurred among HIV-negative people (of whom, two 0·1% were baseline SARS-CoV-2-negative and four 0·6% were baseline SARS-CoV-2-positive) and people living with HIV-1 (for whom there were no serious adverse events) in the NVX-CoV2373 group, none were assessed as related to the vaccine. Among participants who were baseline SARS-CoV-2-negative in the NVX-CoV2373 group, the anti-spike IgG geometric mean titres (GMTs) and seroconversion rates (SCRs) were lower in people living with HIV-1 (n=62) than in HIV-negative people (n=1234) following the first vaccination (GMT: 508·6 vs 1195·3 ELISA units EU/mL; SCR: 51·6% vs 81·3%); and similarly so 14 days after the second vaccination for GMTs (14 420·5 vs 31 631·8 EU/mL), whereas the SCR was similar at this point (100·0% vs 99·3%). In the NVX-CoV2373 group, anti-spike IgG GMTs 14 days after the second vaccination were substantially higher in those who were baseline SARS-CoV-2-positive than in those who were baseline SARS-CoV-2-seronegative for HIV-negative participants (100 666·1 vs 31 631·8 EU/mL) and for people living with HIV-1 (98 399·5 vs 14 420·5 EU/mL). This was also the case for angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor-binding antibody and neutralising antibody titres.
The safety of the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine in people living with HIV-1 was similar to that in HIV-negative participants. However, people living with HIV-1 not previously exposed to SARS-CoV-2 had attenuated humoral immune responses to NVX-CoV2373 compared with their HIV-negative vaccine counterparts, but not so if they were baseline SARS-CoV-2-positive.
Novavax and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; investigational vaccine manufacturing support was provided by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.
People living with HIV are at an increased risk of fatal outcome when admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19 compared with HIV-negative individuals. We aimed to assess safety and immunogenicity of ...the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in people with HIV and HIV-negative individuals in South Africa.
In this ongoing, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1B/2A trial (COV005), people with HIV and HIV-negative participants aged 18–65 years were enrolled at seven South African locations and were randomly allocated (1:1) with full allocation concealment to receive a prime-boost regimen of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, with two doses given 28 days apart. Eligibility criteria for people with HIV included being on antiretroviral therapy for at least 3 months, with a plasma HIV viral load of less than 1000 copies per mL. In this interim analysis, safety and reactogenicity was assessed in all individuals who received at least one dose of ChAdOx1 nCov 19 between enrolment and Jan 15, 2021. Primary immunogenicity analyses included participants who received two doses of trial intervention and were SARS-CoV-2 seronegative at baseline. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04444674, and the Pan African Clinicals Trials Registry, PACTR202006922165132.
Between June 24 and Nov 12, 2020, 104 people with HIV and 70 HIV-negative individuals were enrolled. 102 people with HIV (52 vaccine; 50 placebo) and 56 HIV-negative participants (28 vaccine; 28 placebo) received the priming dose, 100 people with HIV (51 vaccine; 49 placebo) and 46 HIV-negative participants (24 vaccine; 22 placebo) received two doses (priming and booster). In participants seronegative for SARS-CoV-2 at baseline, there were 164 adverse events in those with HIV (86 vaccine; 78 placebo) and 237 in HIV-negative participants (95 vaccine; 142 placebo). Of seven serious adverse events, one severe fever in a HIV-negative participant was definitely related to trial intervention and one severely elevated alanine aminotranferase in a participant with HIV was unlikely related; five others were deemed unrelated. One HIV-negative participant died (unlikely related). People with HIV and HIV-negative participants showed vaccine-induced serum IgG responses against wild-type Wuhan-1 Asp614Gly (also known as D614G). For participants seronegative for SARS-CoV-2 antigens at baseline, full-length spike geometric mean concentration (GMC) at day 28 was 163·7 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL (95% CI 89·9–298·1) for people with HIV (n=36) and 112·3 BAU/mL (61·7–204·4) for HIV-negative participants (n=23), with a rising day 42 GMC booster response in both groups. Baseline SARS-CoV-2 seropositive people with HIV demonstrated higher antibody responses after each vaccine dose than did people with HIV who were seronegative at baseline. High-level binding antibody cross-reactivity for the full-length spike and receptor-binding domain of the beta variant (B.1.351) was seen regardless of HIV status. In people with HIV who developed high titre responses, predominantly those who were receptor-binding domain seropositive at enrolment, neutralising activity against beta was retained.
ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 was well tolerated, showing favourable safety and immunogenicity in people with HIV, including heightened immunogenicity in SARS-CoV-2 baseline-seropositive participants. People with HIV showed cross-reactive binding antibodies to the beta variant and Asp614Gly wild-type, and high responders retained neutralisation against beta.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, South African Medical Research Council, UK Research and Innovation, UK National Institute for Health Research, and the South African Medical Research Council.
The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) Variant of Concern (VOC) and its sub-lineages (including BA.2, BA.4, BA.5, BA.2.12.1) contain spike mutations that confer high level resistance to neutralizing ...antibodies induced by vaccination with ancestral spike or infection with previously circulating variants. The NVX-CoV2373 vaccine, a protein nanoparticle vaccine containing the ancestral spike sequence, has value in countries with constrained cold-chain requirements. Here we report neutralizing titers following two or three doses of NVX-CoV2373. We show that after two doses, Omicron sub-lineages BA.1 and BA.4/BA.5 were resistant to neutralization by 72% (21/29) and 59% (17/29) of samples respectively. However, after a third dose of NVX-CoV2373, we observed high titers against Omicron BA.1 (GMT: 1,197) and BA.4/BA.5 (GMT: 582), with responses similar in magnitude to those triggered by three doses of an mRNA vaccine. These data are of particular relevance as BA.4/BA.5 is dominating in multiple locations, and highlight the potential utility of the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine as a booster in resource-limited environments.
COVID-19 vaccine rollout is lagging in Africa, where there has been a high rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to evaluate the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection before vaccination with the ...ChAdOx-nCoV19 (AZD1222) vaccine on antibody responses through to 180 days.
We did an unmasked post-hoc immunogenicity analysis after the first and second doses of AZD1222 in a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 1b–2a study done in seven locations in South Africa. AZD1222 recipients who were HIV-uninfected, were stratified into baseline seropositive or seronegative groups using the serum anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) immunoglobulin G (IgG) electroluminescence immunoassay to establish SARS-CoV-2 infection before the first dose of AZD1222. Binding IgG to spike (anti-S) and receptor binding domain (anti-RBD) were measured before the first dose (day 0), second dose (day 28), day 42, and day 180. Neutralising antibody (NAb) against SARS-CoV-2 variants D614G, beta, delta, gamma, and A.VOI.V2, and omicron BA1 and BA.4 variants, were measured by pseudovirus assay (day 28, day 42, and day 180). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04444674, and the Pan African Clinicals Trials Registry, PACTR202006922165132.
Of 185 individuals who were randomly assigned to AZD1222, we included 91 individuals who were baseline seropositive and 58 who were baseline seronegative, in the final analysis. In the seropositive group, there was little change of anti-S IgG (and anti-RBD IgG) or neutralising antibody (NAb) titres at day 42 compared with at day 28. Anti-S (and anti-RBD) IgG geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) were higher throughout in the seropositive compared with the seronegative group, including at day 180 (GMCs 517·8 95% CI 411·3–651·9 vs 82·1 55·2–122·3 BAU/mL). Also D614G NAb geometric mean titres (GMTs) were higher in the seropositive group than the seronegative group, as was the percentage with titres of at least 185 (80% putative risk reduction threshold PRRT against wild-type–alpha COVID-19), including at day 180 (92·0% 74·0–99·0 vs 18·2% 2·3–51·8). Similar findings were observed for beta, A.VOI.V2, and gamma. For delta, BA.1, and BA.4, NAb GMTs and the proportion with titres above the PRRT were substantially higher in the seropositive compared with seronegative group at day 28 and day 42, but no longer differed between the groups by day 180.
A single dose of AZD1222 in the general African population, where COVID-19 vaccine coverage is low and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity is 90%, could enhance the magnitude and quality of antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the South African Medical Research Council, the UK Research and Innovation, the UK National Institute for Health Research, and the South African Medical Research Council.
For the Zulu translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
It is unknown if early COVID-19 monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy can reduce risk of Long COVID. The mAbs amubarvimab/romlusevimab were previously demonstrated to reduce risk of hospitalization/death ...by 79%. This study assessed the impact of amubarvimab/romlusevimab on late outcomes, including Long COVID.
Non-hospitalized high-risk adults within 10 days of COVID-19 symptom onset enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial of amubarvimab/romlusevimab for COVID-19 treatment. Late symptoms, assessed using a participant-completed symptom diary, were a pre-specified exploratory endpoint. The primary outcome for this analysis was the composite of Long COVID by participant self-report (presence of COVID-19 symptoms as recorded in the diary at week 36) or hospitalization or death by week 36. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to address incomplete outcome ascertainment, giving weighted risk ratios (wRR) comparing amubarvimab/romlusevimab to placebo.
Participants received amubarvimab/romlusevimab (n = 390) or placebo (n = 390) between January and July 2021. Median age was 49 years, 52% were female, 18% Black/African American, 49% Hispanic/Latino, and 9% COVID-19-vaccinated at entry. At week 36, 103 (13%) had incomplete outcome ascertainment, and 66 (17%) on amubarvimab/romlusevimab and 92 (24%) on placebo met the primary outcome (wRR = 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53–0.93). The difference was driven by fewer hospitalizations/deaths with amubarvimab/romlusevimab (4%) than placebo (13%). Among 652 participants with available diary responses, 53 (16%) on amubarvimab/romlusevimab and 44 (14%) on placebo reported presence of Long COVID.
Amubarvimab/romlusevimab treatment, while highly effective in preventing hospitalizations/deaths, did not reduce risk of Long COVID. Additional interventions are needed to prevent Long COVID.
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health. Amubarvimab and romlusevimab supplied by Brii Biosciences.