Search

Background: data on vaccine immunogenicity against SARS-CoV-2 are needed for the 40 million people globally living with HIV who might have less functional immunity and more associated comorbidities than the general population. We aimed to explore safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in people with HIV. Methods: in this single-arm open-label vaccination substudy within the protocol of the larger phase 2/3 trial COV002, adults aged 18–55 years with HIV were enrolled at two HIV clinics in London, UK. Eligible participants were required to be on antiretroviral therapy (ART), with undetectable plasma HIV viral loads (0·05 for all analyses). Interpretation: in this study of people with HIV, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 was safe and immunogenic, supporting vaccination for those well controlled on ART. Funding: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.

Duration of protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection in people with HIV (PWH) following vaccination is unclear. In a sub-study of the phase 2/3 the COV002 trial (NCT04400838), 54 HIV positive male participants on antiretroviral therapy (undetectable viral loads, CD4+ T cells >350 cells/ul) received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) 4-6 weeks apart and were followed for 6 months. Responses to vaccination were determined by serology (IgG ELISA and MesoScale Discovery (MSD)), neutralisation, ACE-2 inhibition, gamma interferon ELISpot, activation-induced marker (AIM) assay and T cell proliferation. We show that 6 months after vaccination the majority of measurable immune responses were greater than pre-vaccination baseline, but with evidence of a decline in both humoral and cell mediated immunity. There was, however, no significant difference compared to a cohort of HIV-uninfected individuals vaccinated with the same regimen. Responses to the variants of concern were detectable, although were lower than wild type. Pre-existing cross-reactive T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike were associated with greater post-vaccine immunity and correlated with prior exposure to beta coronaviruses. These data support the on-going policy to vaccinate PWH against SARS-CoV-2, and underpin the need for long-term monitoring of responses after vaccination.

Extension of the interval between vaccine doses for the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine was introduced in the UK to accelerate population coverage with a single dose. In a study of 503 healthcare workers, we show that after priming following the first vaccine there is a marked decline in SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody (NAb) levels, but, in contrast, a sustained T cell response to spike protein. This divergent immune profile was accompanied by robust protection from infection over this period from the circulating alpha (B.1.1.7) variant. Importantly, following the second vaccine dose, NAb levels were higher after the extended dosing interval (6-14 weeks) compared to the conventional 3-4 week regimen, accompanied by a clear enrichment of CD4+ T cells expressing IL2. These data on dynamic cellular and humoral responses indicate that extension of the dosing interval is an effective, immunogenic protocol and that antiviral T cell responses are a potential mechanism of protection.Trial Registration Details: PITCH is a sub-study of the SIREN study which is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN11041050,Funding Information: This work was funded by the UK Department of Health and Social Care as part of the PITCH (Protective Immunity from T cells to Covid-19 in Health workers) Consortium, with contributions from UKRI/NIHR through the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium (UK-CIC), the Huo Family Foundation and The National Institute for Health Research (UKRIDHSC COVID-19 Rapid Response Rolling Call, Grant Reference Number COV19-RECPLAS).EB and PK are NIHR Senior Investigators and PK is funded by WT109965MA. SJD is funded by an NIHR Global Research Professorship (NIHR300791). TdS is funded by a Wellcome Trust Intermediate Clinical Fellowship (110058/Z/15/Z). RPP is funded by a Career Re-entry Fellowship (204721/Z/16/Z). CJAD is funded by a Wellcome Clinical Research Career Development Fellowship (211153/Z/18/Z). DS is supported by the NIHR Academic Clinical Lecturer programme in Oxford. LT is supported by the Wellcome Trust (grant number 205228/Z/16/Z) and the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections (NIHR200907) at University of Liverpool in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford. DGW is supported by an NIHR Advanced Fellowship in Liverpool. LT and MC are supported by U.S. Food and Drug Administration Medical Countermeasures Initiative contract 75F40120C00085. Declaration of Interests: AJP is Chair of UK Dept. Health and Social Care’s (DHSC) Joint Committee on Vaccination & Immunisation (JCVI), but does not participate in policy decisions on COVID-19 vaccines. He is a member of the WHO’s SAGE. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of DHSC, JCVI, or WHO. AJP is chief investigator on clinical trials of Oxford University’s COVID-19 vaccine funded by NIHR. Oxford University has entered a joint COVID-19 vaccine development partnership with AstraZeneca. Ethics Approval Statement: PITCH is a sub-study of the SIREN study which was approved by the Berkshire Research Ethics Committee, Health Research 250 Authority (IRAS ID 284460, REC reference 20/SC/0230), with PITCH recognised as a sub-study on 2 December 2020. SIREN is registered with ISRCTN (Trial ID:252 ISRCTN11041050). Some participants were recruited under aligned study protocols. In Birmingham participants were recruited under the Determining the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection in convalescent health care workers (COCO) study (IRAS ID: 282525). In Liverpool some participants were recruited under the “Human immune responses to acute virus infections” Study (16/NW/0170), approved by North West - Liverpool Central Research Ethics Committee on 8 March 2016, and amended on 14th September 2020 and 4th May 2021. In Oxford, participants were recruited under the GI Biobank Study 16/YH/0247, approved by the research ethics committee (REC) at Yorkshire & The Humber - Sheffield Research Ethics Committee on 29 July 2016, which has been amended for this purpose on 8 June 2020. In Sheffield, participants were recruited under the Observational Biobanking study STHObs (18/YH/0441), which was amended for this study on 10 September 2020. The study was conducted in compliance with all relevant ethical regulations for work with human participants, and according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (2008) and the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines. Written informed consent was obtained for all patients enrolled in the study.

Background: Pharmacist prescribing is now well established in several western countries. In New Zealand, an independent prescribing authority for suitably experienced clinical pharmacists has been approved, subject to successful delivery of a postgraduate educational program. Aim: To describe the development of an educational program for pharmacist prescribers in New Zealand and to reflect on its suitability in producing safe and competent pharmacist prescribers. Method: The educational program was based on similar courses in the UK and adapted to the competency requirements of the Pharmacy Council of New Zealand. The 2-semester program comprises 2 courses: Principles of Prescribing and Prescribing Practicum. A key feature of the Practicum is the requirement for 150 hours of prescribing practice supervised by a designated medical practitioner. Results: The educational program was delivered for the first time in 2012 with 14 students enrolled. 10 students passed at the first attempt and 4 students passed after repeating elements of the Practicum. The program has been granted conditional accreditation by the Australian Pharmacy Council. Conclusion: An educational program for pharmacist prescribers in New Zealand has been successfully developed and delivered. Graduates are eligible to register in the Pharmacist Prescriber Scope of Practice.

This paper describes a test which was developed for use in assessing the functional oral hygiene status of an elderly population. The instrument was tested among 80 community-dwelling elderly subjects 65 or more years old. The instrument, the Oral Hygiene Performance Test [OHPT], is a direct-observation measure which objectively quantifies the individual's ability to perform oral hygiene and thus reduces subjective evaluation. The test utilized several items from other already-validated instruments currently in use in geriatric medicine to assess functional abilities in a geriatric population. Additional items were developed by the research team and were included in this 17-item test. The OHPT was validated with common measures of physical function and direct-observation measures. Construct validity was assessed by comparison of the OHPT scores with other commonly used measures of other dimensions. The instrument proved to be reliable and demonstrated construct as well as concurrent validity. It appears that the OHPT can prove useful to clinicians in assessing the oral physical function of elderly patients with regard to their maintenance of oral hygiene. Because the OHPT is a direct-observation instrument, it can even elicit higher functions in elderly patients. While effective among the studied population, the instrument may still need to be validated among more diverse populations, such as various ethnic groups and demented or severely impaired populations.