Search

What is this summary about? This is a summary of an article about part of a clinical study for the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine, also called the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The article was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in May 2021. This summary describes how the vaccine worked in participants 12- to 15-years old. The part of the study described in the article is ongoing and expected to finish March 2023. This means that the final results may be different from the results included in this summary. What happened in this study? The part of the study described in this summary included participants 12- to 15-years old who had no serious health issues. The BNT162b2 vaccine had already been studied in participants 16 years of age or older. In this part of the study, the researchers wanted to find out: How effective and safe the vaccine was in participants 12- to 15-years old. What the immune response to the vaccine and the vaccine safety were like in 12- to 15-year-olds compared with 16- to 25-year-olds. How well the vaccine prevented SARS-CoV-2 infections in participants who received the vaccine compared to those who did not. This is also called efficacy of the BNT162b2 vaccine Half of the participants in this study received 2 injections of the BNT162b2 vaccine and half received 2 injections of a placebo in a muscle of the upper arm. The placebo looked like the BNT162b2 vaccine but did not have any active vaccine in it. What were the results? BNT162b2 had a favorable safety profile. The most common reactions were pain at the injection site, fatigue, and headache. None of the participants had serious reactions to the vaccine. The 12- to 15-year-old participants' immune system responses to the BNT162b2 vaccine were as good as or stronger than the 16- to 25-year-old participants' immune responses. The participants who received the BNT162b2 vaccine were less likely to get COVID-19 compared with the participants who got the placebo. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04368728 ( ClinicalTrials.gov )

What is this summary about? This is a summary of an article about part of a clinical study for the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine, also called the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The article was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in September 2021. The part of the study described in the article began in July 2020 and is ongoing. This means that the final results may be different from the results included in this summary. What happened in this study? The participants in this study received 2 injections of either the BNT162b2 vaccine or a placebo, 21 days apart. The placebo looked like the BNT162b2 vaccine but had no active vaccine in it. None of the trial participants or study teams knew who received vaccine or placebo. What were the results? Most of the reactions to the injections were mild or moderate and lasted for a short period of time. The most common reactions were pain at the injection site, extreme tiredness (fatigue), and headache. These reactions usually happened in the first 7 days after receiving a vaccine dose. A small number of participants had severe reactions to the vaccine. Compared to participants who received the placebo, participants who received the BNT162b2 vaccine were much less likely to become ill if they were infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. The vaccine also had very good efficacy at preventing severe COVID-19. Participants in South Africa who received the BNT162b2 vaccine were less likely to become ill after infection with the beta variant of the virus compared to participants who received the placebo. The beta variant was very common in South Africa when the study was taking place. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04368728 ( ClinicalTrials.gov )

Background BNT162b2 is a lipid nanoparticle–formulated, nucleoside-modified RNA vaccine encoding a prefusion-stabilized, membrane-anchored severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) full-length spike protein. BNT162b2 is highly efficacious against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and is currently approved, conditionally approved, or authorized for emergency use worldwide. At the time of initial authorization, data beyond 2 months after vaccination were unavailable. Methods In an ongoing, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, multinational, pivotal efficacy trial, we randomly assigned 44,165 participants 16 years of age or older and 2264 participants 12 to 15 years of age to receive two 30-μg doses, at 21 days apart, of BNT162b2 or placebo. The trial end points were vaccine efficacy against laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 and safety, which were both evaluated through 6 months after vaccination. Results BNT162b2 continued to be safe and have an acceptable adverse-event profile. Few participants had adverse events leading to withdrawal from the trial. Vaccine efficacy against Covid-19 was 91.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.0 to 93.2) through 6 months of follow-up among the participants without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection who could be evaluated. There was a gradual decline in vaccine efficacy. Vaccine efficacy of 86 to 100% was seen across countries and in populations with diverse ages, sexes, race or ethnic groups, and risk factors for Covid-19 among participants without evidence of previous infection with SARS-CoV-2. Vaccine efficacy against severe disease was 96.7% (95% CI, 80.3 to 99.9). In South Africa, where the SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern B.1.351 (or beta) was predominant, a vaccine efficacy of 100% (95% CI, 53.5 to 100) was observed. Conclusions Through 6 months of follow-up and despite a gradual decline in vaccine efficacy, BNT162b2 had a favorable safety profile and was highly efficacious in preventing Covid-19. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04368728.)

Active immunization with the BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) has been a critical mitigation tool against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection during the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. In light of reports of waning protection occurring 6 months after the primary two-dose vaccine series, data are needed on the safety and efficacy of offering a third (booster) dose in persons 16 years of age or older.In this ongoing, placebo-controlled, randomized, phase 3 trial, we assigned participants who had received two 30-μg doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine at least 6 months earlier to be injected with a third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine or with placebo. We assessed vaccine safety and efficacy against Covid-19 starting 7 days after the third dose.A total of 5081 participants received a third BNT162b2 dose and 5044 received placebo. The median interval between dose 2 and dose 3 was 10.8 months in the vaccine group and 10.7 months in the placebo group; the median follow-up was 2.5 months. Local and systemic reactogenicity events from the third dose were generally of low grade. No new safety signals were identified, and no cases of myocarditis or pericarditis were reported. Among the participants without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection who could be evaluated, Covid-19 with onset at least 7 days after dose 3 was observed in 6 participants in the vaccine group and in 123 participants in the placebo group, which corresponded to a relative vaccine efficacy of 95.3% (95% confidence interval, 89.5 to 98.3).A third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine administered a median of 10.8 months after the second dose provided 95.3% efficacy against Covid-19 as compared with two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine during a median follow-up of 2.5 months. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; C4591031 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04955626.).

BackgroundBNT162b2 is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified RNA vaccine encoding a prefusion-stabilized, membrane-anchored SARS-CoV-2 full-length spike protein. BNT162b2 is highly efficacious against COVID-19 and is currently authorized for emergency use or conditional approval worldwide. At the time of authorization, data beyond 2 months post-vaccination were unavailable.MethodsIn an ongoing, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, multinational, pivotal efficacy study, 44,165 ≥16-year-old participants and 2,264 12-15-year-old participants were randomized to receive 2 doses, 21 days apart, of 30 µg BNT162b2 or placebo. Study endpoints reported here are vaccine efficacy (VE) against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and safety data, both up to 6 months post-vaccination.ResultsBNT162b2 continued to be safe and well tolerated. Few participants had adverse events leading to study withdrawal. VE against COVID-19 was 91% (95% CI 89.0-93.2) through up to 6 months of follow-up, among evaluable participants and irrespective of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. VE of 86%-100% was seen across countries and in populations with diverse characteristics of age, sex, race/ethnicity, and COVID-19 risk factors in participants without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. VE against severe disease was 97% (95% CI 80.3−99.9). In South Africa, where the SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern, B.1.351 (beta), was predominant, 100% (95% CI 53.5, 100.0) VE was observed.ConclusionWith up to 6 months of follow-up and despite a gradually declining trend in vaccine efficacy, BNT162b2 had a favorable safety profile and was highly efficacious in preventing COVID-19. (ClinicalTrials.govnumber,NCT04368728)

Background Until very recently, vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had not been authorized for emergency use in persons younger than 16 years of age. Safe, effective vaccines are needed to protect this population, facilitate in-person learning and socialization, and contribute to herd immunity. Methods In this ongoing multinational, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded trial, we randomly assigned participants in a 1:1 ratio to receive two injections, 21 days apart, of 30 μg of BNT162b2 or placebo. Noninferiority of the immune response to BNT162b2 in 12-to-15-year-old participants as compared with that in 16-to-25-year-old participants was an immunogenicity objective. Safety (reactogenicity and adverse events) and efficacy against confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19; onset, ≥7 days after dose 2) in the 12-to-15-year-old cohort were assessed. Results Overall, 2260 adolescents 12 to 15 years of age received injections; 1131 received BNT162b2, and 1129 received placebo. As has been found in other age groups, BNT162b2 had a favorable safety and side-effect profile, with mainly transient mild-to-moderate reactogenicity (predominantly injection-site pain [in 79 to 86% of participants], fatigue [in 60 to 66%], and headache [in 55 to 65%]); there were no vaccine-related serious adverse events and few overall severe adverse events. The geometric mean ratio of SARS-CoV-2 50% neutralizing titers after dose 2 in 12-to-15-year-old participants relative to 16-to-25-year-old participants was 1.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.47 to 2.10), which met the noninferiority criterion of a lower boundary of the two-sided 95% confidence interval greater than 0.67 and indicated a greater response in the 12-to-15-year-old cohort. Among participants without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, no Covid-19 cases with an onset of 7 or more days after dose 2 were noted among BNT162b2 recipients, and 16 cases occurred among placebo recipients. The observed vaccine efficacy was 100% (95% CI, 75.3 to 100). Conclusions The BNT162b2 vaccine in 12-to-15-year-old recipients had a favorable safety profile, produced a greater immune response than in young adults, and was highly effective against Covid-19. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; C4591001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04368728.)

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the resulting coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have afflicted tens of millions of people in a worldwide pandemic. Safe and effective vaccines are needed urgently.In an ongoing multinational, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, pivotal efficacy trial, we randomly assigned persons 16 years of age or older in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses, 21 days apart, of either placebo or the BNT162b2 vaccine candidate (30 μg per dose). BNT162b2 is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified RNA vaccine that encodes a prefusion stabilized, membrane-anchored SARS-CoV-2 full-length spike protein. The primary end points were efficacy of the vaccine against laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 and safety.A total of 43,548 participants underwent randomization, of whom 43,448 received injections: 21,720 with BNT162b2 and 21,728 with placebo. There were 8 cases of Covid-19 with onset at least 7 days after the second dose among participants assigned to receive BNT162b2 and 162 cases among those assigned to placebo; BNT162b2 was 95% effective in preventing Covid-19 (95% credible interval, 90.3 to 97.6). Similar vaccine efficacy (generally 90 to 100%) was observed across subgroups defined by age, sex, race, ethnicity, baseline body-mass index, and the presence of coexisting conditions. Among 10 cases of severe Covid-19 with onset after the first dose, 9 occurred in placebo recipients and 1 in a BNT162b2 recipient. The safety profile of BNT162b2 was characterized by short-term, mild-to-moderate pain at the injection site, fatigue, and headache. The incidence of serious adverse events was low and was similar in the vaccine and placebo groups.A two-dose regimen of BNT162b2 conferred 95% protection against Covid-19 in persons 16 years of age or older. Safety over a median of 2 months was similar to that of other viral vaccines. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04368728.).

Despite the success of vaccines in reducing the morbidity and mortality associated with infectious diseases, many infectious diseases, both newly emerging and well known, lack vaccines. The global capability for beginning-to-end vaccine development has become limited, primarily owing to a scarcity of human capital necessary to guide the development of novel vaccines from the laboratory to the marketplace. Here, we identify and discuss the gaps in human capital necessary for robust vaccine development and make recommendations to begin to address these deficiencies.

Canine parvovirus (CPV) binds to a number of cell and erythrocyte receptors, some of which are involved in cell infection, while others are used for other viral functions. Little is known about the regions of the virus capsid which bind to the cell receptors. CPV binds sialic acid through a region within or adjacent to the dimple on the surface of the capsid (Barbis, D. P., Chang, S-F., and Parrish, C. R., 1992, Virology 191, 301-308). In order to map the sialic acid binding site in more detail and to examine other regions of the capsid for cell receptor binding, a variety of mutant capsids were analyzed which bad changes in two depressions within the surface of the capsid—the "canyon" and "dimple." In most cases recombinant VP1 and VP2 proteins were stably expressed together in canine A72 cells from a plasmid expression vector. The purified empty capsids were tested for their ability to bind sialic acid and thereby hemagglutinate (HA) erythrocytes and for binding to permissive host cells. In addition, the ability of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies to block cell attachment was also examined. Mutations of amino acids on a wall of the dimple eliminated or severely decreased HA. Changing various residues within the canyon had no effect on binding to either sialic acids or other receptors on feline lymphoblastoid cells, suggesting that the canyon is not the site of cell receptor attachment. Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies against both major antigenic determinants had variable effects on cell binding, but no consistent inhibition of binding was observed by antibodies directed against either of those two major antigenic determinants of the capsid.

Human coronavirus HCV-229E and porcine transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV), both members of coronavirus group I, use aminopeptidase N (APN) as their cellular receptors. These viruses show marked species specificity in receptor utilization as they can only use APN of their respective species to initiate virus infection. Feline and canine coronaviruses are also group I coronaviruses. To determine whether feline APN could serve as a receptor for feline coronaviruses (FCoVs), we cloned the cDNA encoding feline APN (fAPN) by PCR from feline cells and stably expressed it in FCoV-resistant mouse or hamster cells. These became susceptible to infection with either of several biotypes of FCoVs. The expression of recombinant fAPN also made hamster and mouse cells susceptible to infection with other group I coronaviruses, including several canine coronavirus strains, transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV), and human coronavirus HCV-229E. Thus, fAPN served as a functional receptor for each of these coronaviruses in group I. As expected, fAPN could not serve as a receptor for mouse hepatitis virus (MHV), a group II coronavirus which uses murine biliary glycoproteins as receptors. Thus, fAPN acts as a common receptor for coronaviruses in group I, in marked contrast to human and porcine APN glycoproteins which serve as receptors only for human and porcine coronaviruses, respectively. These observations suggest that cats could serve as a “mixing vessel” in which simultaneous infection with several group I coronaviruses could lead to recombination of viral genomes.