Search

The ability of a third dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine to stimulate immune responses against subvariants, including Omicron BA.1, has not been assessed in New Zealand populations. Unlike many overseas populations, New Zealanders were largely infection naïve at the time they were boosted. This adult cohort of 298 participants, oversampled for at-risk populations, was composed of 29% Māori and 28% Pacific peoples, with 40% of the population aged 55+. A significant proportion of the cohort was obese and presented with at least one comorbidity. Sera were collected 28 days and 6 months post second vaccination and 28 days post third vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 anti-S IgG titres and neutralising capacity using surrogate viral neutralisation assays against variants of concern, including Omicron BA.1, were investigated. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, within our cohort, prior to third vaccination was very low (

BackgroundThere is very little known about SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immune responses in New Zealand populations at greatest risk for serious COVID-19 disease.MethodsThis prospective cohort study assessed immunogenicity in BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine recipients in New Zealand without previous COVID-19, with enrichment for Māori, Pacific peoples, older adults ≥ 65 years of age, and those with co-morbidities. Serum samples were analysed at baseline and 28 days after second dose for presence of quantitative anti-S IgG by chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay and for neutralizing capacity against Wuhan, Beta, Delta, and Omicron BA.1 strains using a surrogate viral neutralisation assay.Results285 adults with median age of 52 years were included. 55% were female, 30% were Māori, 28% were Pacific peoples, and 26% were ≥65 years of age. Obesity, cardiac and pulmonary disease and diabetes were more common than in the general population. All participants received 2 doses of BNT162b2 vaccine. At 28 days after second vaccination, 99.6% seroconverted to the vaccine, and anti-S IgG and neutralising antibody levels were high across gender and ethnic groups. IgG and neutralising responses declined with age. Lower responses were associated with age ≥75 and diabetes, but not BMI. The ability to neutralise the Omicron BA.1 variant in vitro was severely diminished but maintained against other variants of concern.ConclusionsVaccine antibody responses to BNT162b2 were generally robust and consistent with international data in this COVID-19 naïve cohort with representation of key populations at risk for COVID-19 morbidity. Subsequent data on response to boosters, durability of responses and cellular immune responses should be assessed with attention to elderly adults and diabetics.

Background The safety and immunogenicity of the MRK adenovirus type 5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 clade B gag/pol/nef vaccine, a replication-incompetent adenovirus type 5-vectored vaccine designed to elicit cell-mediated immunity against conserved human immunodeficiency virus proteins, was assessed in a phase 1 trial. Methods Healthy adults not infected with human immunodeficiency virus were enrolled in a multicenter, dose-escalating, blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate a 3-dose homologous prime-boost regimen of the trivalent MRK adenovirus type 5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 vaccine containing from 3 x 10(6) to 1 x 10(11) viral particles per 1-mL dose administered on day 1, during week 4 and during week 26. Adverse events were recorded for 29 days after each intradeltoid injection. The primary immunogenicity end point was the proportion of study participants with a positive unfractionated Gag-, Pol-, or Nef-specific interferon-gamma enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot response measured 4 weeks after administration of the last dose. Results Of 259 randomized individuals, 257 (99%) received > or = 1 dose of vaccine or placebo and were included in the safety analyses. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot results were available for 217 study participants (84%) at week 30. No serious vaccine-related adverse events occurred. No study participant discontinued participation because of vaccine-related adverse events. The frequency of injection-site reactions was dose dependent. Vaccine doses of > or = 3 x 10(9) viral particles elicited positive enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot responses to > or = 1 vaccine component in > 60% of recipients. High baseline antibody titers against adenovirus type 5 diminished enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot responses at all doses except the 3 x 10(10) viral particle dose. Conclusions The vaccine was generally well tolerated and induced cell-mediated immune responses against human immunodeficiency virus type 1 peptides in most healthy adults. Despite these findings, vaccination in a proof-of-concept trial with use of this vaccine was discontinued because of lack of efficacy.

Background: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published recommendations for clinicians on the management of pelvic inflammatory disease, but it is unknown if providers are aware of the guidelines or follow them. Goal: To compare pelvic inflammatory disease screening, diagnosis, treatment, and reporting practices among primary care physicians with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for pelvic inflammatory disease. Study Design: A weighted random sample of California primary care physicians surveyed in November 1992 and January 1993. Results: Of the 1,165 physicians surveyed, 553 (48%) returned completed questionnaires. Among respondents, 302 (55%) reported having treated a case of pelvic inflammatory disease during the last 12 months, and of these, 52% answered that they were unsure of or do not follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for pelvic inflammatory disease. Pediatricians and those with more years since residency were less likely to deviate from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for pelvic inflammatory disease, and family practitioners were more likely to deviate from the guidelines. Conclusions: Pelvic inflammatory disease is commonly encountered by primary care physicians in California. Training and experience were important predictors of compliance with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations; however, substantial divergence from the guidelines occurs.