Search

The clinical impact of coadministration of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir among vaccinated populations is uncertain. This study emulated a clinical trial to assess whether nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir reduces risk for hospitalization or death among outpatients with early COVID-19 in the setting of prevalent SARS-CoV-2 immunity and immune-evasive SARS-CoV-2 lineages. Visual Abstract. Nirmatrelvir Plus Ritonavir for Early COVID-19 in a Large U.S. Health System.: The clinical impact of coadministration of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir among vaccinated populations is uncertain. This study emulated a clinical trial to assess whether nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir reduces risk for hospitalization or death among outpatients with early COVID-19 in the setting of prevalent SARS-CoV-2 immunity and immune-evasive SARS-CoV-2 lineages. Background: In the EPIC-HR (Evaluation of Protease Inhibition for Covid-19 in High-Risk Patients) trial, nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir led to an 89% reduction in hospitalization or death among unvaccinated outpatients with early COVID-19. The clinical impact of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir among vaccinated populations is uncertain. Objective: To assess whether nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir reduces risk for hospitalization or death among outpatients with early COVID-19 in the setting of prevalent SARS-CoV-2 immunity and immune-evasive SARS-CoV-2 lineages. Design: Population-based cohort study analyzed to emulate a clinical trial using inverse probability–weighted models to account for anticipated bias in treatment. Setting: A large health care system providing care for 1.5 million patients in Massachusetts and New Hampshire during the Omicron wave (1 January to 17 July 2022). Patients: 44 551 nonhospitalized adults (90.3% with ≥3 vaccine doses) aged 50 years or older with COVID-19 and no contraindications for nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir. Measurements: The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalization within 14 days or death within 28 days of a COVID-19 diagnosis. Results: During the study period, 12 541 (28.1%) patients were prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir, and 32 010 (71.9%) were not. Patients prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir were more likely to be older, have more comorbidities, and be vaccinated. The composite outcome of hospitalization or death occurred in 69 (0.55%) patients who were prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and 310 (0.97%) who were not (adjusted risk ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.75]). Recipients of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir had lower risk for hospitalization (adjusted risk ratio, 0.60 [CI, 0.44 to 0.81]) and death (adjusted risk ratio, 0.29 [CI, 0.12 to 0.71]). Limitation: Potential residual confounding due to differential access to COVID-19 vaccines, diagnostic tests, and treatment. Conclusion: The overall risk for hospitalization or death was already low (1%) after an outpatient diagnosis of COVID-19, but nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir reduced this risk further. Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple candidate vaccines to prevent COVID-19 have entered large-scale phase 3 placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials, and several have demonstrated substantial short-term efficacy. At some point after demonstration of substantial efficacy, placebo recipients should be offered the efficacious vaccine from their trial, which will occur before longer-term efficacy and safety are known. The absence of a placebo group could compromise assessment of longer-term vaccine effects. However, by continuing follow-up after vaccination of the placebo group, this study shows that placebo-controlled vaccine efficacy can be mathematically derived by assuming that the benefit of vaccination over time has the same profile for the original vaccine recipients and the original placebo recipients after their vaccination. Although this derivation provides less precise estimates than would be obtained by a standard trial where the placebo group remains unvaccinated, this proposed approach allows estimation of longer-term effect, including durability of vaccine efficacy and whether the vaccine eventually becomes harmful for some. Deferred vaccination, if done open-label, may lead to riskier behavior in the unblinded original vaccine group, confounding estimates of long-term vaccine efficacy. Hence, deferred vaccination via blinded crossover, where the vaccine group receives placebo and vice versa, would be the preferred way to assess vaccine durability and potential delayed harm. Deferred vaccination allows placebo recipients timely access to the vaccine when it would no longer be proper to maintain them on placebo, yet still allows important insights about immunologic and clinical effectiveness over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A prophylactic HIV-1 vaccine is a global health priority.Objective: To assess a novel vaccine platform as a prophylactic HIV-1 regimen.Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Both participants and study personnel were blinded to treatment allocation. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01215149).Setting: United States, East Africa, and South Africa.Patients: Healthy adults without HIV infection.Intervention: 2 HIV-1 vaccines (adenovirus serotype 26 with an HIV-1 envelope A insert [Ad26.EnvA] and adenovirus serotype 35 with an HIV-1 envelope A insert [Ad35.Env], both administered at a dose of 5 × 1010 viral particles) in homologous and heterologous combinations.Measurements: Safety and immunogenicity and the effect of baseline vector immunity.Results: 217 participants received at least 1 vaccination, and 210 (>96%) completed follow-up. No vaccine-associated serious adverse events occurred. All regimens were generally well-tolerated. All regimens elicited humoral and cellular immune responses in nearly all participants. Preexisting Ad26- or Ad35-neutralizing antibody titers had no effect on vaccine safety and little effect on immunogenicity. In both homologous and heterologous regimens, the second vaccination significantly increased EnvA antibody titers (approximately 20-fold from the median enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay titers of 30-300 to 3000). The heterologous regimen of Ad26-Ad35 elicited significantly higher EnvA antibody titers than Ad35-Ad26. T-cell responses were modest and lower in East Africa than in South Africa and the United States.Limitations: Because the 2 envelope inserts were not identical, the boosting responses were complex to interpret. Durability of the immune responses elicited beyond 1 year is unknown.Conclusion: Both vaccines elicited significant immune responses in all populations. Baseline vector immunity did not significantly affect responses. Second vaccinations in all regimens significantly boosted EnvA antibody titers, although vaccine order in the heterologous regimen had a modest effect on the immune response.Primary Funding Source: International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, National Institutes of Health, Ragon Institute, Crucell Holland. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]