Search

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

Aim: To determine the association between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within the COL1A2 gene and dental fluorosis among 4- and 8-year-old Nigerian children. Methods: A cross-sectional study was undertaken among 125 four and eight-year-old Nigerian children living in naturally fluoridated areas of Ibadan, Nigeria. Drinking and cooking water samples were collected for F analysis. Buccal mucosa swabs were collected from all children and genomic DNA extracted. Presence or absence of the SNP within the COL1A2 gene was identified by PCR and DNA sequencing for 70 of the participants. Results: The median (minimum, maximum) F concentration of drinking and cooking water were 0.05 ( 1) but this association was not statistically significant. Conclusion: The majority of the study participants had the heterozygote SNP AC genotype of COL1A2 gene. F concentration in drinking water was the only statistically significant predictor of dental fluorosis. The risk of dental fluorosis tended to increase with the presence of SNPs AA and AC (RR > 1) but was not statistically significant.

Grant information: STRADL is supported by the Wellcome Trust through a Strategic Award (104036/Z/14/Z). GS:SFHS received core support from the CSO of the Scottish Government Health Directorates (CZD/16/6) and the Scottish Funding Council (HR03006). ADM is supported by Innovate UK, the European Commission, the Scottish Funding Council via the Scottish Imaging Network SINAPSE, and the CSO. HCW is supported by a JMAS SIM Fellowship from the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, by an ESAT College Fellowship from the University of Edinburgh, and has received previous funding from the Sackler Trust. LR has previously received financial support from Pfizer (formerly Wyeth) in relation to imaging studies of people with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. JDH is supported by the MRC. DJM is an NRS Clinician, funded by the CSO. RMR is supported by the British Heart Foundation. ISP-V and MRM are supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at the University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health; and MRM is also supported by the MRC (MC_UU_12013/6). JMW is supported by MRC UK Dementia Research Institute and MRC Centre and project grants, EPSRC, Fondation Leducq, Stroke Association, British Heart Foundation, Alzheimer Society, and the European Union H2020 PHC-03-15 SVDs@Target grant agreement (666881). DJP is supported by Wellcome Trust Longitudinal Population Study funding (216767/Z/19/Z) the Eva Lester bequest to the University of Edinburgh. AMM is additionally supported by the MRC (MC_PC_17209, MC_PC_MR/R01910X/1, MR/S035818/1), The Wellcome Trust (216767/Z/19/Z ), The Sackler Trust, and has previously received research funding from Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and Janssen. Both AMM and IJD are members of The University of Edinburgh Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology, part of the cross council Lifelong Health and Wellbeing Initiative (MR/K026992/1); funding from the BBSRC and MRC is gratefully acknowledged. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript

A personal account: experiences, guesses and convictions. What led a woman in 1945 to let her child be adopted? What impelled two women in their sixties to adopt, and what allowed it? Growing up adopted, in that time and in that household. Being grown up and having been adopted: what endures? And some conclusions about the ethos and practice of adoption