Search

Background: COVID-19 vaccines with alternative strain compositions are needed to provide broad protection against newly emergent SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. This study aimed to describe the clinical efficacy and safety of a bivalent SARS-CoV-2 recombinant protein vaccine as a two-injection primary series during a period of circulation of the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant., Methods: We conducted a phase 3, parallel, randomised, modified double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults aged 18 years or older at 54 clinical research centres in eight countries (Colombia, Ghana, India, Kenya, Mexico, Nepal, Uganda, and Ukraine). Participants were recruited from the community and randomly assigned (1:1) by use of an interactive response technology system to receive two intramuscular 0·5 mL injections, 21 days apart, of the bivalent vaccine (5 μg of ancestral [D614] and 5 μg of beta [B.1.351] variant spike protein, with AS03 adjuvant) or placebo (0·9% normal saline). All participants, outcome assessors, and laboratory staff performing assays were masked to group assignments; those involved in the preparation and administration of the vaccines were unmasked. Participants were stratified by age (18-59 years and ≥60 years) and baseline SARS-CoV-2 rapid serodiagnostic test positivity. Symptomatic COVID-19 was defined as laboratory-confirmed (via nucleic acid amplification test or PCR test) COVID-19 with COVID-19-like illness symptoms. The primary efficacy endpoint was the clinical efficacy of the bivalent vaccine for prevention of symptomatic COVID-19 at least 14 days after the second injection (dose 2). Safety was assessed in all participants receiving at least one injection of the study vaccine or placebo. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04904549) and is closed to recruitment., Findings: Between Oct 19, 2021, and Feb 15, 2022, 13 002 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive the first dose of the study vaccine (n=6512) or placebo (n=6490). 12 924 participants (6472 in the vaccine group and 6452 in the placebo group) received at least one study injection, of whom 7542 (58·4%) were male and 9693 (75·0%) were SARS-CoV-2 non-naive. Of these 12 924 participants, 11 543 (89·3%) received both study injections (5788 in the vaccine group and 5755 in the placebo group). The efficacy-evaluable population after dose 2 comprised 11 416 participants (5736 in the vaccine group and 5680 in the placebo group). The median duration of follow-up was 85 days (IQR 50-95) after dose 1 and 58 days (29-70) after dose 2. 121 symptomatic COVID-19 cases were reported at least 14 days after dose 2 (32 in the vaccine group and 89 in the placebo group), with an overall vaccine efficacy of 64·7% (95% CI 46·6 to 77·2). Vaccine efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 was 75·1% (95% CI 56·3 to 86·6) in SARS-CoV-2 non-naive participants and 30·9% (-39·3 to 66·7) in SARS-CoV-2-naive participants. Viral genome sequencing identified the infecting strain in 68 (56·2%) of 121 cases (omicron [BA.1 and BA.2] in 63; delta in four; and both omicron and delta in one). Immediate unsolicited adverse events were reported by four (<0·1%) participants in the vaccine group and seven (0·1%) participants in the placebo group. Immediate unsolicited adverse reactions within 30 min after any injection were reported by four (<0·1%) participants in the vaccine group and six (<0·1%) participants in the placebo group. In the reactogenicity subset with available data, solicited reactions (solicited injection-site reactions and solicited systemic reactions) within 7 days after any injection occurred in 1398 (57·8%) of 2420 vaccine recipients and 983 (40·9%) of 2403 placebo recipients. Grade 3 solicited reactions were reported by 196 (8·1%; 95% CI 7·0 to 9·3) of 2420 vaccine recipients and 118 (4·9%; 4·1 to 5·9) of 2403 placebo recipients within 7 days after any injection, with comparable frequencies after dose 1 and dose 2 in the vaccine group. At least one serious adverse event occurred in 30 (0·5%) participants in the vaccine group and 26 (0·4%) in the placebo group. The proportion of adverse events of special interest and deaths was less than 0·1% in both study groups. No adverse event of special interest, serious adverse event, or death was deemed to be treatment related. There were no reported cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, myocarditis, pericarditis, Bell's Palsy, or Guillain-Barré syndrome, or other immune-mediated diseases., Interpretation: The bivalent variant vaccine conferred heterologous protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the epidemiological context of the circulating contemporary omicron variant. These findings suggest that vaccines developed with an antigen from a non-predominant strain could confer cross-protection against newly emergent SARS-CoV-2 variants, although further investigation is warranted., Funding: Sanofi, US Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, and the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests GHD, MIB, BF, M-HG, MC, JA, CAD, RMC, SG, SSr, and SSa are Sanofi employees. MIB, BF, M-HG, JA, CAD, RMC, and SSr hold stock or stock options in Sanofi. SG, RMC, and SSr hold patents pending on a COVID-19 vaccine. The Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health (CVD) receives grants from Pfizer to conduct clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines. KMN receives no salary support for this grant. KMN receives grants from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) to participate in overall organisation of COVID-19 vaccine trials and for participation in vaccine trials. RMC has received institutional funding from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) for the present study; has received support for attending meetings or travel, from Sanofi; and holds patents planned, issued, or pending from Sanofi. M-HG has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Sanofi. NR has received institutional funding from the NIH; and institutional grants or contracts from Merck, Sanofi, Quidel, Pfizer, and Lilly. SRW has received institutional funding from Sanofi and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and NIH; and institutional grants or contracts from Janssen Vaccines/Johnson & Johnson, Moderna Tx, Vir Biotechnology, and Worcester HIV Vaccine; has participated on data safety monitoring or advisory boards for Janssen Vaccines/Johnson & Johnson; and his spouse holds stocks and stock options in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. NG has received institutional funding from Sanofi, GSK, and the NIAID and NIH; and is in receipt of grants or contracts from the NIH, NIAID, and the Division of AIDS (DAIDS). MA and TT are employees of NIAID, which funded aspects of the current study. LS, MAC, and MK are employees of GSK and own shares in the GSK group of companies. MJ and JJK have received institutional support from Sanofi and NIAID and NIH with respect to this study. MLR has received institutional support or contracts for the present manuscript from Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Ingenuity Pathway Analysis, and the US Medical Research and Development Command. SSa was a Sanofi employee at the time of study conduct; and holds patents planned, issued, or pending on COVID-19 vaccines. LC has received grant funding from the NIAID/NIH. AC, KPA, ASB, TB, DD, MK-J, HK, RM, NLM, HR, SMVM, FS, JT, and TAW, declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The ability to produce a long-lasting, or durable, immune response is a crucial characteristic of many highly effective vaccines. A goal of early-phase vaccine trials is often to compare the immune response durability of multiple tested vaccine regimens. One parameter for measuring immune response durability is the area under the mean post-peak log immune response profile. In this paper, we compare immune response durability across vaccine regimens within and between two phase I trials of DNA-primed HIV vaccine regimens, HVTN 094 and HVTN 096. We compare four estimators of this durability parameter and the resulting statistical inferences for comparing vaccine regimens. Two of these estimators use the trapezoid rule as an empirical approximation of the area under the marginal log response curve, and the other two estimators are based on linear and nonlinear models for the marginal mean log response. We conduct a simulation study to compare the four estimators, provide guidance on estimator selection, and use the nonlinear marginal mean model to analyze immunogenicity data from the two HIV vaccine trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two phase 3 placebo-controlled trials of the CYD-TDV vaccine, evaluated in children aged 2-14 y (CYD14) and 9-16 y (CYD15), demonstrated vaccine efficacy (VE) of 56.5% and 60.8%, respectively, against symptomatic virologically confirmed dengue (VCD). Sieve analyses were conducted to evaluate whether and how VE varied with amino acid sequence features of dengue viruses (DENVs). DENV premembrane/envelope amino acid sequences from VCD endpoint cases were aligned with the vaccine insert sequences, and extensions of the proportional hazards model were applied to assess variation in VE with amino acid mismatch proportion distances from vaccine strains, individual amino acid residues, and phylogenetic genotypes. In CYD14, VE against VCD of any serotype (DENV-Any) decreased significantly with increasing amino acid distance from the vaccine, whereas in CYD15, VE against DENV-Any was distance-invariant. Restricting to the common age range and amino acid distance range between the trials and accounting for differential VE by serotype, however, showed no evidence of VE variation with distance in either trial. In serotype-specific analyses, VE against DENV4 decreased significantly with increasing amino acid distance from the DENV4 vaccine insert and was significantly greater against residuematched DENV4 at eight signature positions. These effects were restricted to 2- to 8-y-olds, potentially because greater seropositivity of older children at baseline might facilitate a broader protective immune response. The relevance of an antigenicmatch between vaccine strains and circulating DENVs was also supported by greater estimated VE against serotypes and genotypes for which the circulating DENVs had shorter amino acid sequence distances from the vaccine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the HVTN 505 DNA/recombinant adenovirus type 5 vector HIV-1 vaccine trial showed no overall efficacy, analysis of breakthrough HIV-1 sequences in participants can help determine whether vaccine-induced immune responses impacted viruses that caused infection. We analyzed 480 HIV-1 genomes sampled from 27 vaccine and 20 placebo recipients and found that intra-host HIV-1 diversity was significantly lower in vaccine recipients (P ≤ 0.04, Q-values ≤ 0.09) in Gag, Pol, Vif and envelope glycoprotein gp120 (Env-gp120). Furthermore, Env-gp120 sequences from vaccine recipients were significantly more distant from the subtype B vaccine insert than sequences from placebo recipients (P = 0.01, Q-value = 0.12). These vaccine effects were associated with signatures mapping to CD4 binding site and CD4-induced monoclonal antibody footprints. These results suggest either (i) no vaccine efficacy to block acquisition of any viral genotype but vaccine-accelerated Env evolution post-acquisition; or (ii) vaccine efficacy against HIV-1s with Env sequences closest to the vaccine insert combined with increased acquisition due to other factors, potentially including the vaccine vector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An objective of randomized placebo-controlled preventive HIV vaccine efficacy (VE) trials is to assess the relationship between vaccine effects to prevent HIV acquisition and continuous genetic distances of the exposing HIVs to multiple HIV strains represented in the vaccine. The set of genetic distances, only observed in failures, is collectively termed the 'mark.' The objective has motivated a recent study of a multivariate mark-specific hazard ratio model in the competing risks failure time analysis framework. Marks of interest, however, are commonly subject to substantial missingness, largely due to rapid post-acquisition viral evolution. In this article, we investigate the mark-specific hazard ratio model with missing multivariate marks and develop two inferential procedures based on (i) inverse probability weighting (IPW) of the complete cases, and (ii) augmentation of the IPW estimating functions by leveraging auxiliary data predictive of the mark. Asymptotic properties and finite-sample performance of the inferential procedures are presented. This research also provides general inferential methods for semiparametric density ratio/biased sampling models with missing data. We apply the developed procedures to data from the HVTN 502 'Step' HIV VE trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]