Search

Despite the availability of effective vaccines against COVID-19, booster vaccinations are needed to maintain vaccine-induced protection against variant strains and breakthrough infections. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine (Janssen) as primary vaccination plus a booster dose.ENSEMBLE2 is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial including crossover vaccination after emergency authorisation of COVID-19 vaccines. Adults aged at least 18 years without previous COVID-19 vaccination at public and private medical practices and hospitals in Belgium, Brazil, Colombia, France, Germany, the Philippines, South Africa, Spain, the UK, and the USA were randomly assigned 1:1 via a computer algorithm to receive intramuscularly administered Ad26.COV2.S as a primary dose plus a booster dose at 2 months or two placebo injections 2 months apart. The primary endpoint was vaccine efficacy against the first occurrence of molecularly confirmed moderate to severe-critical COVID-19 with onset at least 14 days after booster vaccination, which was assessed in participants who received two doses of vaccine or placebo, were negative for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR at baseline and on serology at baseline and day 71, had no major protocol deviations, and were at risk of COVID-19 (ie, had no PCR-positive result or discontinued the study before day 71). Safety was assessed in all participants; reactogenicity, in terms of solicited local and systemic adverse events, was assessed as a secondary endpoint in a safety subset (approximately 6000 randomly selected participants). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04614948, and is ongoing.Enrolment began on Nov 16, 2020, and the primary analysis data cutoff was June 25, 2021. From 34 571 participants screened, the double-blind phase enrolled 31 300 participants, 14 492 of whom received two doses (7484 in the Ad26.COV2.S group and 7008 in the placebo group) and 11 639 of whom were eligible for inclusion in the assessment of the primary endpoint (6024 in the Ad26.COV2.S group and 5615 in the placebo group). The median (IQR) follow-up post-booster vaccination was 36·0 (15·0-62·0) days. Vaccine efficacy was 75·2% (adjusted 95% CI 54·6-87·3) against moderate to severe-critical COVID-19 (14 cases in the Ad26.COV2.S group and 52 cases in the placebo group). Most cases were due to the variants alpha (B.1.1.7) and mu (B.1.621); endpoints for the primary analysis accrued from Nov 16, 2020, to June 25, 2021, before the global dominance of delta (B.1.617.2) or omicron (B.1.1.529). The booster vaccine exhibited an acceptable safety profile. The overall frequencies of solicited local and systemic adverse events (evaluated in the safety subset, n=6067) were higher among vaccine recipients than placebo recipients after the primary and booster doses. The frequency of solicited adverse events in the Ad26.COV2.S group were similar following the primary and booster vaccinations (local adverse events, 1676 [55·6%] of 3015 vs 896 [57·5%] of 1559, respectively; systemic adverse events, 1764 [58·5%] of 3015 vs 821 [52·7%] of 1559, respectively). Solicited adverse events were transient and mostly grade 1-2 in severity.A homologous Ad26.COV2.S booster administered 2 months after primary single-dose vaccination in adults had an acceptable safety profile and was efficacious against moderate to severe-critical COVID-19. Studies assessing efficacy against newer variants and with longer follow-up are needed.Janssen ResearchDevelopment.

Background The aim of this study was to investigate safety and immunogenicity of vaccine formulations against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) containing the stabilized prefusion conformation of RSV fusion protein (RSVPreF3). Methods This phase 1/2, randomized controlled, observer-blind study enrolled 48 young adults (YAs; aged 18–40 years) and 1005 older adults (OAs; aged 60–80 years) between January and August 2019. Participants were randomized into equally sized groups to receive 2 doses of unadjuvanted (YAs and OAs) or AS01-adjuvanted (OAs) vaccine or placebo 2 months apart. Vaccine safety and immunogenicity were assessed until 1 month (YAs) or 12 months (OAs) after second vaccination. Results The RSVPreF3 vaccines boosted humoral (RSVPreF3-specific immunoglobulin G [IgG] and RSV-A neutralizing antibody) responses, which increased in an antigen concentration-dependent manner and were highest after dose 1. Compared to prevaccination, the geometric mean frequencies of polyfunctional CD4+ T cells increased after each dose and were significantly higher in adjuvanted than unadjuvanted vaccinees. Postvaccination immune responses persisted until end of follow-up. Solicited adverse events were mostly mild to moderate and transient. Despite a higher observed reactogenicity of AS01-containing vaccines, no safety concerns were identified for any assessed formulation. Conclusions Based on safety and immunogenicity profiles, the AS01E-adjuvanted vaccine containing 120 μg of RSVPreF3 was selected for further clinical development. Clinical Trials Registration NCT03814590.

Background: The currently licensed quadrivalent MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine presentation consists of two vials (lyophilised MenA and liquid MenCWY) to be reconstituted before injection. A new fully liquid formulation in a single vial has been developed to further improve the vaccine presentation. Since the MenA structure is subject to hydrolytic degradation, this study was conducted to compare the immunogenicity and safety of the investigational MenACWY-CRM liquid vaccine with the licensed vaccine. Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, controlled, observer-blind, phase 2b study, 979 healthy adults were administered a single dose of MenACWY-CRM liquid presentation or the currently licensed MenACWY-CRM vaccine. MenA free saccharide generation was accelerated to approximately 30% in the liquid presentation and MenA polysaccharide O-acetylation was reduced to approximately 40%, according to a controlled procedure. Immunological non-inferiority of the MenACWY-CRM liquid to the licensed vaccine, as measured by human serum bactericidal assay (hSBA) geometric mean titres (GMTs) against MenA 1 month post-vaccination, was the primary study objective. Safety assessment was among the secondary objectives. Results: Immune responses against each serogroup were similar between the two vaccine groups and was non-inferior for MenA. Adjusted hSBA GMTs for MenA were 185.16 and 211.33 for the MenACWY-CRM liquid presentation and currently licensed vaccine presentation, respectively. The between-group ratio of hSBA GMTs for MenA was 0.88, with a two-sided 95% confidence interval lower limit of 0.64, greater than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 0.5, thus meeting the primary study objective. Both vaccines were well tolerated. No serious adverse events were considered related to vaccination. Conclusions: The levels of MenA free saccharide and polysaccharide O-acetylation did not affect the immunogenicity of the fully liquid presentation, which was demonstrated to be non-inferior to the immunogenicity of the currently licensed MenACWY-CRM vaccine against MenA. The immunogenicity, reactogenicity and safety profiles of the two vaccine presentations were similar. (c) 2021 GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals S.A. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Background RSV-associated acute respiratory infections (ARI), particularly lower respiratory tract diseases (LRTD), present a significant disease burden in older adults. Currently, there are no approved vaccines against RSV. We present results from an ongoing study designed to demonstrate the vaccine efficacy (VE) of the AS01E-adjuvanted RSVPreF3 OA in adults ≥ 60 YOA. Methods This ongoing, phase 3, observer-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-country study (NCT04886596) enrolled adults ≥ 60 YOA from the northern and southern hemispheres. Participants were randomized (1:1) to receive a single dose of RSVPreF3 OA or placebo before the RSV season. The primary objective was to demonstrate VE of a single dose of RSVPreF3 OA in preventing RSV-confirmed LRTD during one RSV season (criterion: lower limit of VE confidence interval [CI] > 20%). VE is reported also against severe RSV-confirmed LRTD, RSV-confirmed ARI, RSV-confirmed LRTD and RSV-confirmed ARI by RSV subtype (RSV-A and RSV-B), and RSV-confirmed LRTD by age, baseline comorbidity and frailty status. RSV-A/B was confirmed by quantitative RT-PCR. Results A total of 26,664 participants were enrolled, of whom 24,966 (RSVPreF3 OA: 12,467; placebo: 12,499) were included in the exposed set and 24,960 (RSVPreF3 OA: 12,466; placebo: 12,494) in the efficacy analysis. The mean age was 69.5 (±6.5) years and 51.7% were women. Over a median follow-up of 6.7 months (maximum 10.1 months), 47 RSV-confirmed LRTD episodes were reported (RSVPreF3 OA: 7; placebo: 40), resulting in a VE of 82.6% (96.95% CI: 57.9–94.1), thus the primary objective was met. Consistently high VE across the clinical spectrum of RSV disease, from RSV-confirmed ARI (71.7% [95% CI: 56.2–82.3]) to severe RSV-confirmed LRTD (94.1% [95% CI: 62.4–99.9]) was observed. High VE was seen in different age groups and regardless of RSV subtype, baseline comorbidity or pre-frail status (Figure 1). Cumulative incidence curves for RSV-confirmed LRTD and RSV-confirmed ARI showed persistent efficacy throughout the follow-up (Figure 2). Conclusion A single RSVPreF3 OA dose is highly efficacious against RSV-confirmed LRTD and RSV-confirmed ARI in adults ≥ 60 YOA, regardless of RSV disease severity, RSV subtype, baseline comorbidity and pre-frail status. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA. Abstract and information is also available at the following link : Efficacy results for GSK's older adult RSV vaccine (investis.com). Disclosures Michael G. Ison, MD MS, GlaxoSmithKline: Advisor/Consultant|GlaxoSmithKline: Grant/Research Support Alberto Papi, MD, CHIESI, ASTRAZENECA, GSK, BI, MENARINI, NOVARTIS, ZAMBON, MUNDIPHARMA, SANOFI, AVILLION: Honoraria|CHIESI, ASTRAZENECA, GSK, NOVARTIS, SANOFI, IQVIA, AVILLION, ELPEN PHARMACEUTICALS: Advisor/Consultant|CHIESI, ASTRAZENECA, GSK, NOVARTIS, SANOFI, IQVIA, AVILLION, ELPEN PHARMACEUTICALS: Board Member|CHIESI, ASTRAZENECA, GSK, SANOFI: Grant/Research Support Joanne M. Langley, MD, GSK, Merck, Medicago, Sanofi, VBI, VIDO, Entos, Pfizer: Grant/Research Support Isabel Leroux-Roels, PhD MD, Curevac: payment to my institution for the conduct of clinical trials|GSK: payment to my institution for the conduct of clinical trials|ICON Genetics: payment to my institution for the conduct of clinical trials|Janssen Vaccines (J&J): Board Member|Janssen Vaccines (J&J): payment to my institution for the conduct of clinical trials|Osivax: payment to my institution for the conduct of clinical trials Federico Martinon-Torres, MD, PhD, Assoc. Prof, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Sanofi, Merck, Moderna, Astra Zeneca, Biofabri, Janssen, Novavax: Advisor/Consultant|GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Sanofi, Merck, Moderna, Astra Zeneca, Biofabri, Janssen, Novavax: Grant/Research Support|GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Sanofi, Merck, Moderna, Astra Zeneca, Biofabri, Janssen, Novavax: Honoraria|GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Sanofi, Merck, Moderna, Astra Zeneca, Biofabri, Janssen, Novavax: Clínical trials fees paid to my institution Tino F. Schwarz, Prof. Dr. MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Advisor/Consultant Richard N. Van Zyl-Smit, PhD MD, MSD, Pfizer, GSK, Astra Zeneca, Roche, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cipla, J&J, Glenmark: Advisor/Consultant|MSD, Pfizer, GSK, Astra Zeneca, Roche, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cipla, J&J, Glenmark: Honoraria Nancy Dezutter, PhD, PharmD, GlaxoSmithKline: GSK employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Nathalie De Schrevel, PhD, GlaxoSmithKline: GSK employee Laurence Fissette, Master in Statistics, GlaxoSmithKline: GSK employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Marie-Pierre David, Master in Statistics, GlaxoSmithKline: GSK employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Marie Van Der Wielen, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: GSK employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Lusine Kostanyan, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: GSK employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Veronica Hulstrøm, PhD MD, GlaxoSmithKline: GSK employee.

Introduction In a first-in-human study immune responses to rabies virus glycoprotein (RABV-G)-mRNA vaccine were dependent on the route of administration, necessitating specialized devices. Following successful preclinical studies with mRNA encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles (LNP), we tested an mRNA-LNP formulation (CV7202). Methods In this phase 1, multi-center, controlled study in Belgium and Germany we enrolled 55 healthy 18–40-year-olds to receive intramuscular injections of 5 μg (n = 10), 1 μg (n = 16), or 2 μg (n = 16) CV7202 on Day 1; subsets (n = 8) of 1 μg and 2 μg groups received second doses on Day 29. Controls (n = 10) received rabies vaccine, Rabipur, on Days 1, 8 and 29. Safety and reactogenicity were assessed up to 28 days post-vaccination using diary cards; immunogenicity was measured as RABV-G-specific neutralizing titers (VNT) by RFFIT and IgG by ELISA. Results As i nitially tested doses of 5 μg CV7202 elicited unacceptably high reactogenicity we subsequently tested 1 and 2 μg doses which were better tolerated. No vaccine-related serious adverse events or withdrawals occurred. Low, dose-dependent VNT responses were detectable from Day 15 and by Day 29%, 31% and 22% of 1, 2 and 5 μg groups, respectively, had VNTs ≥ 0·5 IU/mL, considered an adequate response by the WHO. After two 1 or 2 μg doses all recipients had titers ≥ 0.5 IU/mL by Day 43. Day 57 GMTs were not significantly lower than those with Rabipur, which elicited adequate responses in all vaccinees after two doses. CV7202-elicited VNT were significantly correlated with RABV-G-specific IgG antibodies (r2 = 0.8319, p Conclusions Two 1 μg or 2 μg doses of CV7202 were well tolerated and elicited rabies neutralizing antibody responses that met WHO criteria in all recipients, but 5 μg had unacceptable reactogenicity for a prophylactic vaccine. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03713086.

The aim was to investigate safety and immunogenicity of vaccine formulations against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) containing the stabilized prefusion conformation of RSV fusion protein (RSVPreF3).This phase I/II, randomized, controlled, observer-blind study enrolled 48 young adults (YA; 18-40 years) and 1005 older adults (OA; 60-80 years) between January and August 2019. Participants were randomized into equally sized groups to receive two doses of unadjuvanted (YA and OA) or AS01-adjuvanted (OA) vaccine or placebo two months apart. Vaccine safety and immunogenicity were assessed until one (YA) or 12 months (OA) after second vaccination.The RSVPreF3 vaccines boosted humoral (RSVPreF3-specific IgG and RSV-A neutralizing antibody) responses, which increased in an antigen-concentration-dependent manner and were highest post-dose one. Compared to pre-vaccination, the geometric mean frequencies of polyfunctional CD4+ T-cells increased after each dose and were significantly higher in adjuvanted than unadjuvanted vaccinees. Post-vaccination immune responses persisted until end of follow-up. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were mostly mild-to-moderate and transient. Despite a higher observed reactogenicity of AS01-containing vaccines, no safety concerns were identified for any assessed formulation.Based on safety and immunogenicity profiles, the AS01E-adjuvanted vaccine containing 120 μg of RSVPreF3 was selected for further clinical development.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03814590; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03814590.

This first-in-human study (NCT03032588), conducted in Belgium, evaluated a new inactivated poliovirus vaccines (IPV) candidate based on Sabin poliovirus strains grown on the high-yield PER.C6 (R) cell line. Healthy adults (N = 32) were randomized (1:1) to receive a single dose of PER.C6-based Sabin-IPV (sIPV, 15:35:112.5 DU/dose) or conventional Salk-IPV (cIPV, 40:8:32 DU/dose). Reactogenicity was assessed up to 7 days after vaccination, immunogenicity 28 days after vaccination, and safety up to 6 months after vaccination. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate, no changes of concern in vital signs or safety laboratory values were observed, and no severe AEs (SAEs) or vaccine-related unsolicited AEs were reported after vaccination. A trend to more frequent solicited AEs after sIPV than after cIPV administration was observed. Most participants had preexisting neutralizing antibodies against poliovirus types (titer >= 8), which were strongly boosted by sIPV. Post-vaccination geometric mean titers were high (>= 12,000) and similar across the two vaccination groups. Only participants with very high preexisting antibody levels did not show a vaccine-induced response, defined in seropositive participants as a 4-fold titer increase. The 10 initially seronegative (titer

Background: Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) have rapidly emerged in Europe, being responsible for nosocomial outbreaks. Aim: Following an outbreak in the burn unit of Ghent University Hospital, we investigated whether CPE can spread between toilets through drain water and therefrom be transmitted to patients. Methods: In 2017, the burn centre of our hospital experienced an outbreak of OXA-48-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae that affected five patients staying in three different rooms. Environmental samples were collected from the sink, shower, shower stretcher, hand rail of the bed, nursing carts, toilets, and drain water to explore a common source. Whole-genome sequencing and phylogenetic analysis was performed on K. pneumoniae outbreak isolates and two random K. pneumoniae isolates. Findings: OXA-48-producing K. pneumoniae was detected in toilet water in four out of six rooms and drain water between two rooms. The strain persisted in two out of six rooms after two months of daily disinfection with bleach. All outbreak isolates belonged to sequence type (ST) 15 and showed isogenicity (

Most H1 influenza A viruses (IAVs) of swine are derived from past human viruses. As human population immunity against these IAVs gradually decreases, the risk of reintroduction to humans increases. We examined 549 serum samples from persons 0-97 years of age collected in Belgium during 2017-2018 for hemagglutination inhibiting and virus neutralizing antibodies against 7 major H1 swine IAV (swIAV) clades and 3 human progenitor IAVs. Seroprevalence (titers >= 40) rates were >= 50% for classical swine and European human-like swIAVs, >= 24% for North American human-like delta 1a and Asian avian-like swIAVs, and

BACKGROUND: Efficacious vaccines are urgently needed to contain the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). A candidate vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S, is a recombinant, replication-incompetent adenovirus serotype 26 (Ad26) vector encoding a full-length and stabilized SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. METHODS: In this multicenter, placebo-controlled, phase 1-2a trial, we randomly assigned healthy adults between the ages of 18 and 55 years (cohort 1) and those 65 years of age or older (cohort 3) to receive the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine at a dose of 5×1010 viral particles (low dose) or 1×1011 viral particles (high dose) per milliliter or placebo in a single-dose or two-dose schedule. Longer-term data comparing a single-dose regimen with a two-dose regimen are being collected in cohort 2; those results are not reported here. The primary end points were the safety and reactogenicity of each dose schedule. RESULTS: After the administration of the first vaccine dose in 805 participants in cohorts 1 and 3 and after the second dose in cohort 1, the most frequent solicited adverse events were fatigue, headache, myalgia, and injection-site pain. The most frequent systemic adverse event was fever. Systemic adverse events were less common in cohort 3 than in cohort 1 and in those who received the low vaccine dose than in those who received the high dose. Reactogenicity was lower after the second dose. Neutralizing-antibody titers against wild-type virus were detected in 90% or more of all participants on day 29 after the first vaccine dose (geometric mean titer [GMT], 212 to 354), regardless of vaccine dose or age group, and reached 96% by day 57 with a further increase in titers (GMT, 288 to 488) in cohort 1a. Titers remained stable until at least day 71. A second dose provided an increase in the titer by a factor of 2.6 to 2.9 (GMT, 827 to 1266). Spike-binding antibody responses were similar to neutralizing-antibody responses. On day 15, CD4+ T-cell responses were detected in 76 to 83% of the participants in cohort 1 and in 60 to 67% of those in cohort 3, with a clear skewing toward type 1 helper T cells. CD8+ T-cell responses were robust overall but lower in cohort 3. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and immunogenicity profiles of Ad26.COV2.S support further development of this vaccine candidate. (Funded by Johnson & Johnson and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority of the Department of Health and Human Services; COV1001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04436276.). ispartof: The New England Journal of Medicine vol:384 issue:19 ispartof: location:United States status: published

BACKGROUND: In a hospital setting, there is a need for rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) to guide isolation measures and targeted admission. AIM: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of five SARS-CoV-2 rapid nucleocapsid protein antigen detection (RAD) assays (Biosynex, Biotical, Orient Gene, Panbio and SD Biosensor), and describe the performance and impact of implementation of the SD Biosensor assay in an emergency department. METHODS: Sensitivity and specificity of the five RAD assays were analysed on 100 respiratory samples: 60 real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2-positive samples, 24 SARS-CoV-2 RNA-negative samples and 16 samples positive for other respiratory pathogens. The manufacturer's protocol was adapted to validate the antigen tests on transport media used for rRT-PCR in the authors' routine practice. The SD Biosensor RAD assay was implemented as a screening method for rapid diagnosis and targeted admission. FINDINGS: Sensitivity of the five RAD assays ranged from 88.9% to 100% for samples with cycle threshold values

Design A two-phase prospective intervention study. Objective The objective of this study was to determine if feedback of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) measurements decreases environmental contamination within hospitals in the Dutch/Belgian border area. Methods Standardized ATP measurements were conducted in nine hospitals on pre-defined fomites. Four different fomite groups were defined: medical devices, patient-bound materials, ward-bound materials and sanitary items. ATP results were reported in relative light unit (RLU), RLU >1000 was considered as ‘not clean.’ Two rounds of ATP measurements were conducted. After the first round of ATP measurements, results were provided to the wards and cleaning staff. The second round of ATP measurements was performed one year later. The amount of surface contamination before and after the feedback was compared. Results In total 1923 ATP measurements were performed. Before feedback 960 ATP measurements were conducted and after feedback 963 were conducted. The overall median reduction in RLU was 381 (P Conclusions Substantial reductions in RLU values were found after feedback of ATP measurements. Feedback of ATP measurement in itself was associated with a major reduction of surface contamination in hospitals.

Importance There is a need for improved immunogenicity of hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccines among young adults with risk of infection. Objectives To demonstrate manufacturing equivalence of a 3-antigen (3A) HBV vaccine, evaluate noninferiority of seroprotection rate (SPR) of 3A-HBV vs single-antigen (1A) HBV after 2 and 3 vaccine doses, and compare safety and reactogenicity between 3A-HBV and 1A-HBV vaccines. Design, Setting, and Participants This phase 3, double-blinded, randomized clinical trial included healthy adults aged 18 to 45 years randomized to 1 of three 3A-HBV groups or 1 control group receiving 1A-HBV. The trial was conducted at 37 community clinics and academic hospitals in Canada, Europe, the United Kingdom, and the United States between December 2017 and October 2019. Participants were followed up for 48 weeks after the first vaccination. Interventions Intramuscular administration of 3A-HBV (10 μg) or 1A-HBV (20 μg) on days 0, 28, and 168. Main Outcomes and Measures Geometric mean concentration (GMC) of serum hepatitis B surface antibodies (anti-HBs) and proportion of participants achieving seroprotection. Results Of 2838 participants, 1638 (57.8%) were women, 2595 (91.5%) were White, and 161 (5.7%) were Black or African American. A total of 712 participants (25.1%) were randomized to the 1A-HBV group and 2126 (74.9%) to 3A-HBV. The mean (SD) age at informed consent was 33.5 (8.0) years. The study demonstrated 3A-HBV lot-to-lot consistency, as the 2-sided 95% CIs for each pairwise comparison for the anti-HBs GMC ratios were within 0.67 and 1.50 (eg, adjusted GMC ratio, lot A vs lot B: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67-1.00; lot A vs lot C: 0.95; 95% CI, 0.78-1.15; lot B vs lot C: 1.16; 95% CI, 0.95-1.41). The SPR of the pooled 3A-HBV was noninferior to 1A-HBV and higher than 1A-HBV after 2 vaccinations at day 168 (90.4% [95% CI, 89.0%-91.8%] vs 51.6% [95% CI, 47.5%-55.6%]) and 3 vaccinations at day 196 (99.3% [95% CI, 98.7%-99.6%] vs 94.8% [95% CI, 92.7%-96.4%]). The mean GMC of anti-HBs with 3A-HBV was 7.9 times higher after 2 vaccinations at day 168 and 3.5 times higher after 3 vaccinations at day 196 compared with 1A-HBV (after 2 vaccinations, 3A-HBV: GMC, 118.7 mIU/mL; 95% CI, 108.0-129.0 mIU/mL; SE, 1.0 mIU/mL; 1A-HBV: GMC, 15.0 mIU/mL; 95% CI, 12.9-17.5 mIU/mL; SE, 1.0 mIU/mL; after 3 vaccinations, 3A-HBV: GMC, 5442.4 mIU/mL; 95% CI, 4967.0-5963.0 mIU/mL; SE, 1.0 mIU/mL; 1A-HBV: 1567.2 mIU/mL; 95% CI, 1338.0-1834.0 mIU/mL; SE, 1.0 mIU/mL). Rates of local and systemic reactogenicities were higher with 3A-HBV compared with 1A-HBV (local: 1805 of 2124 [85.0%] vs 469 of 712 [65.9%]; systemic: 1445 [68.0%] vs 428 [60.1%]). Vaccine discontinuation due to adverse events (AE) was uncommon, and serious AEs were infrequent, reported in 42 participants (2.0%) and 3 participants (0.4%) in the 3A-HBV and 1A-HBV groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, consistently higher antibody concentrations and SPRs were found with 3A-HBV after 2 and 3 doses vs 1A-HBV in adults aged 18 to 45 years old. The safety and efficacy of 3A-HBV shows its usefulness for the prevention of hepatitis B in young healthy adults. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03408730; EU Clinical Trials Number: 2017-001820-22

Background Two novel type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV2) candidates, novel OPV2-c1 and novel OPV2-c2, designed to be more genetically stable than the licensed Sabin monovalent OPV2, have been developed to respond to ongoing polio outbreaks due to circulating vaccine-derived type 2 polioviruses. Methods We did two randomised studies at two centres in Belgium. The first was a phase 4 historical control study of monovalent OPV2 in Antwerp, done before global withdrawal of OPV2, and the second was a phase 2 study in Antwerp and Ghent with novel OPV2-c1 and novel OPV2-c2. Eligible participants were healthy adults aged 18-50 years with documented history of at least three polio vaccinations, including OPV in the phase 4 study and either OPV or inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) in the novel OPV2 phase 2 study, with no dose within 12 months of study start. In the historical control trial, participants were randomly assigned to either one dose or two doses of monovalent OPV2. In the novel OPV2 trial, participants with previous OPV vaccinations were randomly assigned to either one or two doses of novel OPV2-c1 or to one or two doses of novel OPV2-c2. IPV-vaccinated participants were randomly assigned to receive two doses of either novel OPV2-c1, novel OPV2-c2, or placebo. Vaccine administrators were unmasked to treatment; medical staff performing safety and reactogenicity assessments or blood draws for immunogenicity assessments were masked. Participants received the first vaccine dose on day 0, and a second dose on day 28 if assigned to receive a second dose. Primary objectives were assessments and comparisons of safety up to 28 days after each dose, including solicited adverse events and serious adverse events, and immunogenicity (seroprotection rates on day 28 after the first vaccine dose) between monovalent OPV2 and the two novel OPV2 candidates. Primary immunogenicity analyses were done in the per-protocol population. Safety was assessed in the total vaccinated population-ie, all participants who received at least one dose of their assigned vaccine. The phase 4 control study is registered with EudraCT (2015-003325-33) and the phase 2 novel OPV2 study is registered with EudraCT (2018-001684-22) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04544787). Findings In the historical control study, between Jan 25 and March 18, 2016, 100 volunteers were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive one or two doses of monovalent OPV2 (n= 50 in each group). In the novel OPV2 study, between Oct 15, 2018, and Feb 27, 2019, 200 previously OPV-vaccinated volunteers were assigned to the four groups to receive one or two doses of novel OPV2-c1 or novel OPV2-c2 (n=50 per group); a further 50 participants, previously vaccinated with IPV, were assigned to novel OPV2-c1 (n=17), novel OPV2-c2 (n=16), or placebo (n=17). All participants received the first dose of assigned vaccine or placebo and were included in the total vaccinated population. All vaccines appeared safe; no definitely vaccine-related withdrawals or serious adverse events were reported. After first doses in previously OPV-vaccinated participants, 62 (62%) of 100 monovalent OPV2 recipients, 71 (71%) of 100 recipients of novel OPV2-c1, and 74 (74%) of 100 recipients of novel OPV2-c2 reported solicited systemic adverse events, four (monovalent OPV2), three (novel OPV2-c1), and two (novel OPV2-c2) of which were considered severe. In IPV-vaccinated participants, solicited adverse events occurred in 16 (94%) of 17 who received novel OPV2-c1 (including one severe) and 13 (81%) of 16 who received novel OPV2-c2 (including one severe), compared with 15 (88%) of 17 placebo recipients (including two severe). In previously OPV-vaccinated participants, 286 (97%) of 296 were seropositive at baseline; after one dose, 100% of novel OPV2 vaccinees and 97 (97%) of monovalent OPV2 vaccinees were seropositive. Interpretation Novel OPV2 candidates were as safe, well tolerated, and immunogenic as monovalent OPV2 in previously OPV-vaccinated and IPV-vaccinated adults. These data supported the further assessment of the vaccine candidates in children and infants.

Background: Additional safe and effective vaccines are needed to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: HERALD is an ongoing phase 2b/3 randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial in ten countries in Europe and Latin America. SARS-CoV-2 naive adults were randomised 1:1 to receive two doses of CVnCoV mRNA vaccine candidate or placebo 28 days apart. Primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 more than 14 days after second dose. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were assessed in phase 2b participants and unsolicited AEs in all participants. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04652102). Findings: Between 11 December 2020 and 12 April 2021, 39 680 participants were randomised and 39 529 received CVnCoV (19 783) or placebo (19 746). Overall VE was 48·2% (95% CI: 31·0–61·4; 83/12 851 vs. 145/12 221 in CVnCoV and placebo recipients, respectively). Overall VE against moderate-to-severe COVID-19 was 70·7% (95% CI: 42·5–86·1; 12/12 851 vs. 37/12 211, respectively). In participants aged 18–60 years VE was 52·5% (95% CI: 36·2–64·8; 71/11 532 vs. 136/11 031, respectively). Too few cases occurred in participants aged ≥61 years (CVnCoV: 12, placebo: 9) precluding VE evaluation. Wild type SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 7/204 (3%) sequenced cases, with 14 variants being responsible for the other cases. Solicited adverse events, mostly systemic, were more common in CVnCoV recipients; 542/2002 CVnCoV recipients and 61/1980 placebo recipients reported grade 3 events. Unsolicited serious AEs were reported for 82/19 746 CVnCoV recipients and 66/19 746 placebo recipients; 8 and 2 SAEs, respectively were considered related to vaccination. Fatal SAEs were reported for 8 and 6 CVnCoV and placebo recipients. Interpretation: CVnCoV is efficacious in the prevention of COVID-19 of any severity and has an acceptable safety profile. Trial Registration: Study number: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04652102. Funding: This trial was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (grant 01KI20703), and CureVac AG. Declaration of Interest: MB declares institutional funding from CureVac during the conduct of this study, from Janssen Vaccines, molecular partners, and Merck outside of the submitted work, and consulting fees from Janssen Vaccines. EJLDB, and MFMR, TO and XSL declare institutional funding from CureVac during the conduct of this study. LE, and LG declare institutional funding from CureVac during the conduct of this study and outside of the submitted work. CFL declares institutional funding from CureVac during the conduct of this study, and outside of the submitted work, and is a member of WHO Covid-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Working Group and WHO Product Development for Vaccines Advisory Committee (PDVAC). CL declares institutional funding from CureVac during the conduct of this study, and is a member of the of German Society of Infection board. ILR declares institutional funding from CureVac during the conduct of this study and from J &J, and OSE Immunotherapeutics outside of the submitted work. PGK declares institutional funding from CureVac during the conduct of this study, and is a member of the scientific advisory board for the HERALD clinical trial. VVRH declares institutional funding from CureVac during the conduct of this study, and speakers fees from Gilead outside of the submitted work. HJ declares consultant fees from CureVac, is the Medical Responsible Person for the HERALD clinical trial, and is co-chair of DSMB for the HERALD clinical trial. AK and PM are employed by CureVac, and hold stock options. OSK declares consultant fees from CureVac during the conduct of this study, and is a member of the DSMB for a CVnCoV phase 1 trial. TV declares consultant fees from CureVac during the conduct of this study, and consultant fees from CureVac, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Johnson&Johnson, and Moderna outside of the submitted work. LO is employed by CureVac, and holds stock options, and is the holder of a pending patent. The other authors declare no competing interests. Ethical Approval: The trial protocol and amendments have been approved by the appropriate independent ethics committee or institutional review board at each study centre

There is an urgent need for vaccines to counter the COVID-19 pandemic due to infections with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Evidence from convalescent sera and preclinical studies has identified the viral Spike (S) protein as a key antigenic target for protective immune responses. We have applied an mRNA-based technology platform, RNActive®, to develop CVnCoV which contains sequence optimized mRNA coding for a stabilized form of S protein encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles (LNP). Following demonstration of protective immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 in animal models we performed a dose-escalation phase 1 study in healthy 18-60 year-old volunteers.This interim analysis shows that two doses of CVnCoV ranging from 2 μg to 12 μg per dose, administered 28 days apart were safe. No vaccine-related serious adverse events were reported. There were dose-dependent increases in frequency and severity of solicited systemic adverse events, and to a lesser extent of local reactions, but the majority were mild or moderate and transient in duration. Immune responses when measured as IgG antibodies against S protein or its receptor-binding domain (RBD) by ELISA, and SARS-CoV-2-virus neutralizing antibodies measured by micro-neutralization, displayed dose-dependent increases. Median titers measured in these assays two weeks after the second 12 μg dose were comparable to the median titers observed in convalescent sera from COVID-19 patients. Seroconversion (defined as a 4-fold increase over baseline titer) of virus neutralizing antibodies two weeks after the second vaccination occurred in all participants who received 12 μg doses.Preliminary results in the subset of subjects who were enrolled with known SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity at baseline show that CVnCoV is also safe and well tolerated in this population, and is able to boost the pre-existing immune response even at low dose levels.Based on these results, the 12 μg dose is selected for further clinical investigation, including a phase 2b/3 study that will investigate the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of the candidate vaccine CVnCoV.

BACKGROUNDThe ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) might be controlled by an efficacious vaccine. Multiple vaccines are in development, but no efficacious vaccine is currently available.METHODSWe designed a multi-center phase 1/2a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical study to assesses the safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity of Ad26.COV2.S, a non-replicating adenovirus 26 based vector expressing the stabilized pre-fusion spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2. Ad26.COV2.S was administered at a dose level of 5×1010 or 1×1011 viral particles (vp) per vaccination, either as a single dose or as a two-dose schedule spaced by 56 days in healthy adults (18-55 years old; cohort 1a & 1b; n= 402 and healthy elderly ≥65 years old; cohort 3; n=394). Vaccine elicited S specific antibody levels were measured by ELISA and neutralizing titers were measured in a wild-type virus neutralization assay (wtVNA). CD4+ T-helper (Th)1 and Th2, and CD8+ immune responses were assessed by intracellular cytokine staining (ICS).RESULTSWe here report interim analyses after the first dose of blinded safety data from cohorts 1a, 1b and 3 and group unblinded immunogenicity data from cohort 1a and 3. In cohorts 1 and 3 solicited local adverse events were observed in 58% and 27% of participants, respectively. Solicited systemic adverse events were reported in 64% and 36% of participants, respectively. Fevers occurred in both cohorts 1 and 3 in 19% (5% grade 3) and 4% (0% grade 3), respectively, were mostly mild or moderate, and resolved within 1 to 2 days after vaccination. The most frequent local adverse event (AE) was injection site pain and the most frequent solicited AEs were fatigue, headache and myalgia. After only a single dose, seroconversion rate in wtVNA (50% inhibitory concentration - IC50) at day 29 after immunization in cohort 1a already reached 92% with GMTs of 214 (95% CI: 177; 259) and 92% with GMTs of 243 (95% CI: 200; 295) for the 5×1010 and 1×1011vp dose levels, respectively. A similar immunogenicity profile was observed in the first 15 participants in cohort 3, where 100% seroconversion (6/6) (GMTs of 196 [95%CI: 69; 560]) and 83% seroconversion (5/6) (GMTs of 127 [95% CI: 10 or 1×1011 vp dose level, respectively. Seroconversion for S antibodies as measured by ELISA (ELISA Units/mL) was observed in 99% of cohort 1a participants (GMTs of 528 [95% CI: 442; 630) and 695 (95% CI: 596; 810]), for the 5×1010 or 1×1011 vp dose level, respectively, and in 100% (6/6 for both dose levels) of cohort 3 with GMTs of 507 (95% CI: 181; 1418) and 248 (95% CI: 122; 506), respectively. On day 14 post immunization, Th1 cytokine producing S-specific CD4+ T cell responses were measured in 80% and 83% of a subset of participants in cohort 1a and 3, respectively, with no or very low Th2 responses, indicative of a Th1-skewed phenotype in both cohorts. CD8+ T cell responses were also robust in both cohort 1a and 3, for both dose levels.CONCLUSIONSThe safety profile and immunogenicity after only a single dose are supportive for further clinical development of Ad26.COV2.S at a dose level of 5×1010 vp, as a potentially protective vaccine against COVID-19.Trial registration numberNCT04436276

Summary Background The seroprotection rate (SPR) of hepatitis B vaccination in adults is suboptimal. The aim of this study was to compare the SPR of a tri-antigenic hepatitis B vaccine (TAV), with a mono-antigenic vaccine (MAV) in adults of all ages. Methods This was a multicentre, double-blind, phase 3, randomised controlled trial (PROTECT) comparing the immunogenicity and safety of TAV with MAV in 28 community and hospital sites in the USA, Finland, Canada, and Belgium. Adults (aged ≥18 years) seronegative for hepatitis B virus (HBV), including those with well-controlled common chronic conditions, were randomly assigned (1:1) and stratified by study centre and age according to a web-based permuted blocked randomisation. Participants received either TAV or MAV which were administered as an intramuscular dose (1 mL) of TAV (10 μg; Sci-B-Vac, VBI Vaccines [SciVac, Rehovot, Israel]) or MAV (20 μg; Engerix-B [GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium]) on days 0, 28, and 168 with six study visits and 24 weeks of follow-up after the third vaccination. Participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were masked to group assignment. The co-primary outcomes were to show non-inferiority of the SPRs 4 weeks after the third vaccination with TAV versus MAV in adults aged 18 years and older, as well as superiority in adults aged 45 years and older. SPR was defined as the percentage of participants attaining anti-HBs titres of 10 mIU/mL or higher. Non-inferiority of TAV to MAV was concluded if the lower limit of the 95% CI for the between-group difference was greater than −5%. Non-inferiority was assessed in the per-protocol set of participants (aged ≥18 years) and superiority was assessed in all participants (aged ≥45 years) who received at least one vaccination and had at least one evaluable immunogenicity sample after baseline (full analysis set). Safety analyses were a secondary outcome and included all participants who received at least one injection. This trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03393754 ) and EudraCT (2017–001819–36) and is closed to new participants. Findings Between Dec 13, 2017, and April 8, 2019, 1607 participants (796 allocated to TAV and 811 allocated to MAV) were randomly assigned and distributed across age cohorts of 18–44 years (299 of 1607; 18·6%), 45–64 years (716 of 1607; 44·6%), and 65 years and older (592 of 1607; 36·8%). In participants aged 18 years and older, SPR was 91·4% (656 of 718) in the TAV group versus 76·5% (553 of 723) in the MAV group (difference 14·9%, 95% CI 11·2–18·6), showing non-inferiority in the per-protocol set. In participants aged 45 years and older, SPR was 89·4% (559 of 625) in the TAV group versus 73·1% (458 of 627) in the MAV group (difference 16·4%, 95% CI 12·2–20·7), showing superiority in the full analysis set. TAV was associated with higher rates of mild or moderate injection site pain (63·2% [503 of 796] in TAV vs 36·3% [294 of 811] in MAV), tenderness (60·8% [484 of 796] in TAV vs 34·8% [282 of 811] in MAV), and myalgia (34·7% [276 of 796] vs 24·3% [197 of 811] in MAV). Otherwise, the safety profile of TAV was similar to that of MAV. Interpretation The safety and efficacy of TAV shows its usefulness for the prevention of HBV infection in adults, including those with stable and controlled chronic conditions. Funding VBI Vaccines.

BackgroundEarly 2020, a COVID-19 epidemic became a public health emergency of international concern. To address this pandemic broad testing with an easy, comfortable and reliable testing method is of utmost concern. The nasopharyngeal (NP) swab sampling is the reference method though hampered by international supply shortages. A new oropharyngeal/nasal (OP/N) sampling method was investigated using the more readily available throat swab.MethodsIn this prospective observational study 36 COVID-19 patients were tested with both a NP and combined OP/N swab for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by PCR. In hospitalized suspect patients, who tested negative on both swabs, extensive retesting was performed. The sensitivity of NP versus combined OP/N swab sampling on admission and the correlation between viral RNA loads recovered was investigated.Results35 patients were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 by means of either NP or OP/N sampling. The paired swabs were both positive in 31 patients. The one patient who tested negative on both NP and OP/N swab on admission, was ultimately diagnosed on bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. A strong correlation was found between the viral RNA loads of the paired swabs (r = 0.76; P < 0.05). The sensitivity of NP and OP/N analysis in hospitalized patients (n = 28) was 89.3% and 92.7% respectively.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates equivalence of NP and OP/N sampling for detection of SARS-CoV-2 by means of rRT-PCR. Sensitivity of both NP and OP/N sampling is very high in hospitalized patients.

Home nursing is evolving towards more invasive care. Nevertheless, no national data are available on the prevalence of HAI in this setting. The aim of this pilot study is to explore the Flemish home care setting as a first step toward a national surveillance program. A survey, focused on patient characteristics and HAI, was conducted between 7 May and 20 July 2018 on 711 Flemish patients. Most of the patients (74%) are 65 years or older and half of them had a form of comorbidity. Assisting with personal hygiene and wound care were the most frequent services delivered by home care nurses. A comparison of the prevalence of infections diagnosed by a physician or applying uniform criteria (ECDC), revealed a similar prevalence of skin and soft tissue infections (9% vs. 8.5%) and urinary tract infections (4% vs. 4.5%). A positive MDRO-screening was found in 6% of the patients. This pilot study is a first step towards a standardized national surveillance in home care to collect information on the prevalence of HAI and it reveals several interesting facts and study pitfalls for this setting.

Purpose of review Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is increasing in ICUs around the world, but the prevalence is variable. We will review recent literature and try to answer the question whether this is a myth or a new reality, as well as discuss challenges and potential solutions. Recent findings AMR is diverse, and currently Gram-negative multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) are the main challenge in ICUs worldwide. Geographical variation in prevalence of MDROs is substantial, and local epidemiology should be considered to assess the current threat of AMR. ICU patients are at a high risk of infection with MDRO because often multiple risk factors are present. Solutions should focus on reducing the risk of cross-transmission in the ICU through strict infection prevention and control practices and reducing exposure to antimicrobials as the major contributor to the development of AMR. Summary AMR is a reality in most ICUs around the world, but the extent of the problem is clearly highly variable. Infection prevention and control as well as appropriate antimicrobial use are the cornerstones to turn the tide.

Background Vaccines eliciting protective and persistent immune responses against multiple human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) clades are needed. This study evaluated the persistence of immune responses induced by an investigational, AS01-adjuvanted HIV-1 vaccine as long as 14 years after vaccination. Methods This phase I, open-label, descriptive, mono-centric, extension study with a single group (NCT03368053) was conducted in adults who received ≥3 doses of the clade B gp120-NefTat/AS01B vaccine candidate 14 years earlier in a previous clinical trial (NCT00434512). Binding responses of serum antibodies targeting a panel of envelope glycoproteins, including gp120, gp140 and V1V2-scaffold antigens and representative of the antigenic diversity of HIV-1, were measured by binding antibody multiplex assay (BAMA). The gp120-specific CD4+/CD8+ T-cell responses were assessed by intracellular cytokine staining assay. Results At Year 14, positive IgG binding antibody responses were detected in 15 out of the 16 antigens from the BAMA V1V2 breadth panel, with positive response rates ranging from 7.1% to 60.7%. The highest response rates were observed for clade B strain V1V2 antigens, with some level of binding antibodies against clade C strains. Anti-V1V2 IgG3 response magnitude breadth, which correlated with decreased risk of infection in a previous efficacy trial, was of limited amplitude. Response rates to the antigens from the gp120 and gp140 breadth panels ranged from 7.7% to 94.1% and from 15.4% to 96.2% at Year 14, respectively. Following stimulation with gp120 peptide pool, highly polyfunctional gp120-specific CD4+ T-cells persisted up to Year 14, with high frequencies of CD40L tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), CD40L interleukin-2 (IL-2), CD40L TNF-α IL-2 and CD40L interferon gamma (IFN-γ) TNF-α IL-2 CD4+ T-cells, but no CD8+ T-cells detected. Conclusions Persistent antibodies binding to HIV-1 envelope glycoproteins, including the V1V2-scaffold, and gp120-specific cellular immunity were observed in volunteers vaccinated 14 years earlier with the gp120-NefTat/AS01B vaccine candidate.

Background RSV is a common cause of respiratory acute illness in older adults (OA). We evaluated safety and reactogenicity of RSVPreF3 candidate vaccine in young adults (YA) and OA. Methods In this phase I/II, placebo-controlled, multi-country trial (NCT03814590), YA aged 18–40 years were randomized 1:1:1:1 and received 2 doses of Low-, Medium- or High-dose of RSVPreF3 non-adjuvanted vaccine, or placebo, 2 months apart. Following favorable safety evaluation, a staggered enrolment with 2 steps followed in OA aged 60–80 years, who were randomized 1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1 to receive 1 of the 9 RSV vaccine formulations containing Low-, Medium- or High-dose of RSVPreF3 non-adjuvanted or adjuvanted with AS01E or AS01B, or placebo (same schedule). Safety/reactogenicity up to 1 month post-dose 1 are reported here. Results Exposed set was comprised of 48 YA and 1005 OA. Within 7 days post-dose 1, any solicited/unsolicited adverse event (AE) ranged from 58.3% to 83.3% across YA vaccinees (placebo YA: 58.3%) and from 29.9% to 84.2% across OA vaccinees (placebo OA: 33.7%) (Fig 1). Pain was the most common solicited local AE, being reported in ≤ 58.3% of YA (placebo YA: 0.0%) and at higher rates in the adjuvanted groups (≤ 75.7%) vs non-adjuvanted groups of OA (≤ 14.1%) and placebo OA (4.1%) (Fig 2A). Of solicited general AEs, fatigue (YA: ≤ 41.7% in vaccinees vs 50.0% in placebo; OA: ≤ 48.5% in vaccinees vs 16.3% in placebo) and headache (YA: ≤ 33.3% in vaccinees vs 16.7% in placebo; OA: ≤ 27.7% in vaccinees vs 8.2% in placebo) were most commonly reported (Fig 2B), while fever ≥ 38.0 °C was observed in ≤ 3.0% of OA vaccinees (placebo OA: 0.0%). Grade 3 solicited local and general AEs were observed in OA only, with erythema (≤ 4.9% in vaccinees vs 0.0% in placebo) and fatigue (≤ 2.0% in vaccinees vs 1.0% in placebo) being most common (Fig 2). No serious AEs (SAEs) were reported in YA. A number of 11 OA reported a SAE within 1 month post-dose 1, but none was fatal or assessed as vaccine-related. No clinically significant abnormalities occurred in hematological/biochemical parameters in any group. Figure 1. Percentage of participants presenting at least one type of solicited/unsolicited adverse event (AE) within 7 days post-dose 1 Figure 2. Percentage of participants with at least one type of solicited adverse event (AE) within 7 days post-dose 1 Conclusion First dose of RSVPreF3 candidate vaccine is well tolerated. AE rates tended to be higher after AS01B-adjuvanted formulations compared to other vaccine formulations. No safety concerns were raised. Funding GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA Disclosures Jelena Tica, PhD, GSK group of companies (Employee, Shareholder) Javier Ruiz Guiñazú, MD MSc, GSK group of companies (Employee, Shareholder) Charles P. Andrews, MD, GSK group of companies (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Charles Fogarty, MD, GSK group of companies (Grant/Research Support) Edward Kerwin, MD, Amphastar (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau)AstraZeneca (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau)Boehringer Ingelheim (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau)Chiesi (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau)Cipla (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau)GSK group of companies (Employee, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau)Mylan (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau)Novartis (Employee, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker’s Bureau)other around 40 pharmaceutical companies (Other Financial or Material Support, conducted multicenter clinical research trials)Pearl (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau)Sunovion (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau)Theravance (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau) Isabel Leroux-Roels, MD PhD, GSK group of companies (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Corinne Vandermeulen, MD PhD, GSK group of companies (Other Financial or Material Support, My university only received Grant/Research Support) Marie-Pierre David, MSc, GSK group of companies (Employee, Shareholder) Nancy Dezutter, PhD, PharmD, RPh, GSK group of companies (Employee, Shareholder) Laurence Fissette, MSc, GSK group of companies (Employee) Juliane Koch, MD, GSK group of companies (Employee, Shareholder) Narcisa Mesaros, MD, MSc, GSK group of companies (Employee)

Background We report a recurrent outbreak of postoperative infections with extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)–producing E. cloacae complex in cardiac surgery patients, describe the outbreak investigation and highlight the infection control measures. Methods Cases were defined as cardiac surgery patients in Ghent University Hospital who were not known preoperatively to carry ESBL-producing E. cloacae complex and who postoperatively had a positive culture for this multiresistant organism between May 2017 and January 2018. An epidemiological investigation, including a case-control study, and environmental investigation were conducted to identify the source of the outbreak. Clonal relatedness of ESBL-producing E. cloacae complex isolates collected from case patients was assessed using whole-genome sequencing–based studies. Results Three separate outbreak episodes occurred over the course of 9 months. A total of 8, 4 and 6 patients met the case definition, respectively. All but one patients developed a clinical infection with ESBL-producing E. cloacae complex, most typically postoperative pneumonia. Overall mortality was 22% (4/18). Environmental cultures were negative, but epidemiological investigation pointed to transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) as the outbreak source. Of note, four TEE probes showed a similar pattern of damage, which very likely impeded adequate disinfection. The first and second outbreak episode were caused by the same clone, whereas a different strain was responsible for the third episode. Conclusions Health professionals caring for cardiac surgery patients and infection control specialists should be aware of TEE as possible infection source. Caution must be exercised to prevent and detect damage of TEE probes.

Vaccines eliciting protective and persistent immune responses against multiple human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) clades are needed. This study evaluated the persistence of immune responses induced by an investigational, AS01-adjuvanted HIV-1 vaccine as long as 14 years after vaccination.This phase I, open-label, descriptive, mono-centric, extension study with a single group (NCT03368053) was conducted in adults who received ≥3 doses of the clade B gp120-NefTat/AS01At Year 14, positive IgG binding antibody responses were detected in 15 out of the 16 antigens from the BAMA V1V2 breadth panel, with positive response rates ranging from 7.1% to 60.7%. The highest response rates were observed for clade B strain V1V2 antigens, with some level of binding antibodies against clade C strains. Anti-V1V2 IgG3 response magnitude breadth, which correlated with decreased risk of infection in a previous efficacy trial, was of limited amplitude. Response rates to the antigens from the gp120 and gp140 breadth panels ranged from 7.7% to 94.1% and from 15.4% to 96.2% at Year 14, respectively. Following stimulation with gp120 peptide pool, highly polyfunctional gp120-specific CD4+ T-cells persisted up to Year 14, with high frequencies of CD40L tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), CD40L interleukin-2 (IL-2), CD40L TNF-α IL-2 and CD40L interferon gamma (IFN-γ) TNF-α IL-2 CD4+ T-cells, but no CD8+ T-cells detected.Persistent antibodies binding to HIV-1 envelope glycoproteins, including the V1V2-scaffold, and gp120-specific cellular immunity were observed in volunteers vaccinated 14 years earlier with the gp120-NefTat/AS01

Summary Background Enterobacteriaceae are recognized as leading pathogens of healthcare-associated infections. Aim To report the investigation of a nosocomial outbreak of extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacter cloacae affecting cardiothoracic surgery patients in a Belgian academic hospital. Methods Cases were defined based on epidemiological and microbiological investigations, including molecular typing using repetitive element-based polymerase chain reaction and multi-locus sequence typing. Case–control studies followed by field evaluations allowed the identification of a possible reservoir, and the retrospective assessment of human and financial consequences. Findings Over a three-month period, 42 patients were infected or colonized by CTX-M-15-producing E. cloacae strains that belonged to the same clonal lineage. Acquisition mainly occurred in the intensive care unit (N = 23) and in the cardiothoracic surgery ward (N = 16). All but one patient had, prior to acquisition, undergone a cardiothoracic surgical procedure, monitored by the same transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) probe in the operating room. Despite negative microbiological culture results, the exclusion of the suspected probe resulted in rapid termination of the outbreak. Overall, the outbreak was associated with a high mortality rate among infected patients (40%) as well as significant costs (€266,550). Conclusion The outbreak was indirectly shown to be associated with the contamination of a manually disinfected TOE probe used per-operatively during cardiothoracic surgery procedures, because withdrawal of the putative device led to rapid termination of the outbreak.