Search

Vaccines protect against many infectious diseases, including some that can directly or indirectly cause nervous system damage. Serious neurological consequences of immunization are typically extremely rare, although they have the potential to jeopardize vaccination programmes, as demonstrated most recently during the COVID-19 pandemic. Neurologists have an important role in identifying safety signals at population and individual patient levels, as well as providing advice on the benefit-risk profile of vaccination in cohorts of patients with diverse neurological conditions. This article reviews the links between vaccination and neurological disease and considers how emerging signals can be evaluated and their mechanistic basis identified. We review examples of neurotropic infections with live attenuated vaccines, as well as neuroimmunological and neurovascular sequelae of other types of vaccines. We emphasize that such risks are typically dwarfed by neurological complications associated with natural infection and discuss how the risks can be further mitigated. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to rapidly identify and minimize neurological risks of vaccination, and we review the structures that need to be developed to protect public health against these risks in the future., (© 2024. Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: For pathogens which cause infections that present asymptomatically, evaluating vaccine efficacy (VE) against asymptomatic infection is important for understanding a vaccine's potential epidemiological impact. Regular testing for subclinical infections is a potentially valuable strategy but its success hinges on participant adherence and minimising false positives. This paper describes the implementation and adherence to weekly testing in a COVID-19 vaccine trial., Methods: COV002 was a phase 2/3 trial assessing the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. Asymptomatic infections were detected using weekly self-administered swabs for RT-PCR testing. We analysed adherence using mixed-effects regression models and estimated the probability of true and false positive asymptomatic infections using estimates of adherence and testing characteristics., Findings: 356,551 tests were self-administered by 10,811 participants during the 13-month follow-up. Median adherence was 75.0% (IQR 42·6-90·9), which translated to a 74·5% (IQR 50·9-78·8) probability of detecting a positive asymptomatic infection during the swabbing period, and between 21 and 96 false positives during VE evaluation. The odds of returning a swab declined by 8% per week and further after testing positive and unblinding. Adherence was higher in older age groups, females and non-healthcare workers., Interpretation: The COV002 trial demonstrated the feasibility of running a long-term regular asymptomatic testing strategy. This information could be valuable for designing future phase III vaccine trials in which infection is an outcome., 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, AstraZeneca., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest MV, MNR, KRWE and AJP are contributors to intellectual property licensed by Oxford University Innovation to AstraZeneca. MNR has been an investigator on vaccine trials outside the scope of this manuscript that have received support from and/or have been sponsored by AstraZeneca, ILiAD Biotechnologies, GSK Vaccines for Global Health and VBI Vaccines but all funding for these projects was paid directly to the University of Oxford. AJP reports unpaid work as the Chair of UK Department of Health and Social Care's Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation and a previous member of the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunisation. LRW, JPJL, NCG, JH and DJP declare no conflicts of interest. The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Lucy Williams, Nicholas Grassly, Katherine Emary reports financial support was provided by UKRI Medical Research Council. Lucy Williams reports financial support was provided by Imperial College London. Andrew Pollard reports a relationship with United Kingdom Department of Health and Social Care that includes: non-financial support. Andrew Pollard reports a relationship with World Health Organization that includes: non-financial support. Merryn Voysey, Maheshi Ramasamy, Katherine Emary, Andrew Pollard has patent licensed to AstraZeneca. The COV002 study was funded by UK Research and Innovation, National Institute 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. This report is independent research funded by the UK NIHR and UK Research and Innovation., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: AZD2816 is a variant-adapted COVID-19 vaccine that expresses the full-length SARS-CoV-2 beta variant spike protein but is otherwise similar to AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19). This study aimed to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of AZD1222 or AZD2816 (or both) primary-series vaccination in a cohort of adult participants who were previously unvaccinated., Methods: In this phase 2/3, randomised, multinational, active-controlled, non-inferiority, immunobridging study, adult participants previously unvaccinated for COVID-19 were enrolled at 16 study sites in Brazil, South Africa, Poland, and the UK. Participants were stratified by age, sex, and comorbidity and randomly assigned 5:5:5:2 to receive a primary series of AZD1222 (AZD1222 group), AZD2816 (AZD2816 [4-week] group), or AZD1222-AZD2816 (AZD1222-AZD2816 group) at 4-week dosing intervals, or AZD2816 at a 12-week interval (AZD2816 [12-week] group) and evaluated for safety and immunogenicity through 180 days after dose 2. Primary outcomes were safety (rates of solicited adverse events occurring during 7 days and unsolicited adverse events occurring during 28 days after each dose) and immunogenicity (non-inferiority of pseudovirus neutralising antibody geometric mean titre [GMT], GMT ratio margin of 0·67, and seroresponse rate, rate difference margin of -10%, recorded 28 days after dose 2 with AZD2816 [4-week interval] against beta vs AZD1222 against ancestral SARS-CoV-2) in participants who were seronegative at baseline. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04973449, and is completed., Findings: Between July 7 and Nov 12, 2021, 1449 participants were assigned to the AZD1222 group (n=413), the AZD2816 (4-week) group (n=415), the AZD1222-AZD2816 group (n=412), and the AZD2816 (12-week) group (n=209). Ten (2·6%) of 378 participants who were seronegative at baseline in the AZD1222 group, nine (2·4%) of 379 in the AZD2816 (4-week) group, eight (2·1%) of 380 in the AZD1222-AZD2816 group, and 11 (5·8%) of 191 in the AZD2816 (12-week) group had vaccine-related unsolicited adverse events. Serious adverse events were recorded in one (0·3%) participant in the AZD1222 group, one (0·3%) in the AZD2816 (4-week) group, two (0·5%) in the AZD1222-AZD2816 group, and none in the AZD2816 (12-week) group. Co-primary immunogenicity endpoints were met: neutralising antibody GMT (ratio 1·19 [95% CI 1·08-1·32]; lower bound greater than 0·67) and seroresponse rate (difference 1·7% [-3·1 to 6·5]; lower bound greater than -10%) at 28 days after dose 2 were non-inferior in the AZD2816 (4-week) group against beta versus in the AZD1222 group against ancestral SARS-CoV-2. Seroresponse rates were highest with AZD2816 against beta (12-week interval 94·3% [95% CI 89·4-97·3]; 4-week interval 85·7% [81·5-89·2]) and with AZD1222 (84·6% [80·3-88·2]) against ancestral SARS-CoV-2., Interpretation: Primary series of AZD1222 and AZD2816 were well tolerated, with no emergent safety concerns. Both vaccines elicited robust immunogenicity against beta and ancestral SARS-CoV-2 with greater responses demonstrated when testing against SARS-CoV-2 strains that matched those targeted by the respective vaccine. These findings demonstrate the continued importance of ancestral COVID-19 vaccines in protecting against severe COVID-19 and highlight the feasibility of using the ChAdOx1 platform to develop COVID-19 vaccines against future SARS-CoV-2 variants., Funding: AstraZeneca., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests SACC declares participation in the clinical development, with University of Oxford, of the vaccines described in this Article, membership on CureVac and Clover advisory boards, and institutional research grants from AstraZeneca. BJ is an employee of Cytel and is currently on assignment to AstraZeneca. QEB declares institutional funding, the provision of study materials, or both from the Wits Health Consortium, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the South African Medical Research Council, and AstraZeneca, as well as research grants or contracts from Regeneron, Novo Nordisk, Avillion, GlaxoSmithKline, Novavax, Sinovac, Johnson & Johnson, and Pfizer pharmaceuticals. PKA declares institutional grants to support the conduct of the study from AstraZeneca and the UK Vaccine Taskforce via the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). HB is an employee of Bogier consulting and is currently on assignment to AstraZeneca. EJK is an employee of Sanofi. SM is an employee of Exploristics and is currently on assignment to AstraZeneca. EPM declares no competing interests. TL declares consulting fees from Vaccitech on an unrelated project, an honorarium from Seqirus on an unrelated project, an institutional grant from the UK Vaccine Taskforce via the NIHR, work-related investments, and is a named inventor on a patent application for a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. JJL declares no competing interests. MNR declares institutional support for the study from AstraZeneca. AJP is Chair of the UK Department of Health and Social Care’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) but does not participate in the JCVI COVID-19 committee. AJP also declares membership of the WHO’s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization until January, 2022; provision of advice to Shionogi on COVID-19; and funding from the NIHR, AstraZeneca, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome, the UK Research and Innovation Medical Research Council, the Serum Institute of India, and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations. University of Oxford has entered a partnership with AstraZeneca for the development of COVID-19 vaccines; TL, MNR, SB, PKA, and AJP are contributors to the intellectual property licensed by Oxford University Innovation to AstraZeneca. AA, TA, EJK, MK, UO, SS, KS, AS, TV, and JAG are, or were, employees of and may hold (or have held) stock or stock options in AstraZeneca. MSMdOP declares no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The global public health nonprofit organization PATH hosted the third Vaccines Against Shigella and Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (VASE) Conference in Washington, DC, from November 29 to December 1, 2022. This international gathering focused on cutting-edge research related to the development of vaccines against neglected diarrheal pathogens including Shigella, enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC), Campylobacter, and non-typhoidal Salmonella. In addition to the conference's plenary content, the agenda featured ten breakout workshops on topics of importance to the enteric vaccine field. This unique aspect of VASE Conferences allows focused groups of attendees to engage in in-depth discussions on subjects of interest to the enteric vaccine development community. In 2022, the workshops covered a range of topics. Two focused on the public health value of enteric vaccines, with one examining how to translate evidence into policy and the other on the value proposition of potential combination vaccines against bacterial enteric pathogens. Two more workshops explored new tools for the development and evaluation of vaccines, with the first on integrating antigen/antibody technologies for mucosal vaccine and immunoprophylactic development, and the second on adjuvants specifically for Shigella vaccines for children in low- and middle-income countries. Another pair of workshops covered the status of vaccines against two emerging enteric pathogens, Campylobacter and invasive non-typhoidal Salmonella. The remaining four workshops examined the assessment of vaccine impact on acute and long-term morbidity. These included discussions on the nature and severity of intestinal inflammation; cellular immunity and immunological memory in ETEC and Shigella infections; clinical and microbiologic endpoints for Shigella vaccine efficacy studies in children; and intricacies of protective immunity to enteric pathogens. This article provides a brief summary of the presentations and discussions at each workshop in order to share these sessions with the broader enteric vaccine field., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Competing Interests: BR has consulted for Axcella therapeutics. MNR has been an investigator on vaccine trials outside the scope of this manuscript that have received support from or have been sponsored by AstraZeneca, ILiAD Biotechnologies, GSK Vaccines for Global Health, and Variation Biotechnologies Vaccines, but all funding for these projects was paid directly to the University of Oxford. Neither author has received any financial support for writing this Comment.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate AZD2816, a variant-updated COVID-19 vaccine expressing the full-length SARS-CoV-2 beta (B.1.351) variant spike protein that is otherwise similar to AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19), and AZD1222 as third-dose boosters., Methods: This phase 2/3, partly double-blinded, randomised, active-controlled study was done at 19 sites in the UK and four in Poland. Adult participants who had received a two-dose AZD1222 or mRNA vaccine primary series were randomly assigned by means of an Interactive Response Technology-Randomisation and Trial Supply Management system (1:1 within each primary-series cohort, stratified by age, sex, and comorbidities) to receive AZD1222 or AZD2816 (intramuscular injection; 5 × 10 10 viral particles). Participants, investigators, and all sponsor staff members involved in study conduct were masked to randomisation. AZD1222 and AZD2816 doses were prepared by unmasked study staff members. The primary objectives were to evaluate safety and humoral immunogenicity (non-inferiority of day-29 pseudovirus neutralising antibody geometric mean titre [GMT] against ancestral SARS-CoV-2: AZD1222 booster vs AZD1222 primary series [historical controls]; margin 0·67; SARS-CoV-2-seronegative participants). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04973449, and is completed., Findings: Between June 27 and Sept 30, 2021, 1394 participants of the 1741 screened were randomly assigned to AZD1222 or AZD2816 following an AZD1222 (n=373, n=377) or mRNA vaccine (n=322, n=322) primary series. In SARS-CoV-2-seronegative participants receiving AZD1222 or AZD2816, 78% and 80% (AZD1222 primary series) and 90% and 93%, respectively (mRNA vaccine primary series) reported solicited adverse events to the end of day 8; 2%, 2%, 1%, and 1% had serious adverse events and 12%, 12%, 10%, and 11% had adverse events of special interest, respectively, to the end of day 180. The primary immunogenicity non-inferiority endpoint was met: day-29 neutralising antibody GMT ratios (ancestral SARS-CoV-2) were 1·02 (95% CI 0·90-1·14) and 3·47 (3·09-3·89) with AZD1222 booster versus historical controls (AZD1222 and mRNA vaccine primary series, respectively). Responses against beta were greater with AZD2816 versus AZD1222 (GMT ratios, AZD1222, mRNA vaccine primary series 1·84 [1·63-2·08], 2·22 [1·99-2·47])., Interpretation: Both boosters were well tolerated, with immunogenicity against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 similar to AZD1222 primary-series vaccination. AZD2816 gave greater immune responses against beta versus AZD1222., Funding: AstraZeneca., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MNR declares institutional support for the study from AstraZeneca. EJK, SS, AC, MK, GTT, JV, PAS, MNP, TV, NM-A, and JAG are, or were, employees of and may hold (or have held) stock or stock options in AstraZeneca. PID declares institutional support for the study from AstraZeneca, and institutional grants from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Moderna, and Atea. RP declares institutional support for the study from AstraZeneca. MA declares support for the study from AstraZeneca and IQVIA to the Clinical Infection Research Group. PKA declares institutional grants to support the conduct of the study from AstraZeneca and the UK Vaccine Taskforce via National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). BJ is an employee of Cytel and is currently on assignment to AstraZeneca. SM is an employee of Exploristics and is currently on assignment to AstraZeneca. TL reports consulting fees from Vaccitech on an unrelated project, an honorarium from Seqirus, grant support from the Vaccine Taskforce for this trial, work-related investments, and is named as an inventor on a patent application for a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. AJP was a member of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization until January, 2022 and remains chair of the UK Department of Health and Social Care's Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) but does not participate in the JCVI COVID-19 committee; and reports providing advice to Shionogi on COVID-19, and funding from the NIHR, AstraZeneca, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome, the Medical Research Council, and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations. Oxford University has entered into a partnership with AstraZeneca for the development of COVID-19 vaccines. VL and SB declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Heterologous COVID vaccine priming schedules are immunogenic and effective. This report aims to understand the persistence of immune response to the viral vectored, mRNA and protein-based COVID-19 vaccine platforms used in homologous and heterologous priming combinations, which will inform the choice of vaccine platform in future vaccine development., Methods: Com-COV2 was a single-blinded trial in which adults ≥ 50 years, previously immunised with single dose 'ChAd' (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, AZD1222, Vaxzevria, Astrazeneca) or 'BNT' (BNT162b2, tozinameran, Comirnaty, Pfizer/BioNTech), were randomised 1:1:1 to receive a second dose 8-12 weeks later with either the homologous vaccine, or 'Mod' (mRNA-1273, Spikevax, Moderna) or 'NVX' (NVX-CoV2373, Nuvaxovid, Novavax). Immunological follow-up and the secondary objective of safety monitoring were performed over nine months. Analyses of antibody and cellular assays were performed on an intention-to-treat population without evidence of COVID-19 infection at baseline or for the trial duration., Findings: In April/May 2021, 1072 participants were enrolled at a median of 9.4 weeks after receipt of a single dose of ChAd (N = 540, 45% female) or BNT (N = 532, 39% female) as part of the national vaccination programme. In ChAd-primed participants, ChAd/Mod had the highest anti-spike IgG from day 28 through to 6 months, although the heterologous vs homologous geometric mean ratio (GMR) dropped from 9.7 (95% CI (confidence interval): 8.2, 11.5) at D28 to 6.2 (95% CI: 5.0, 7.7) at D196. The heterologous/homologous GMR for ChAd/NVX similarly dropped from 3.0 (95% CI:2.5,3.5) to 2.4 (95% CI:1.9, 3.0). In BNT-primed participants, decay was similar between heterologous and homologous schedules with BNT/Mod inducing the highest anti-spike IgG for the duration of follow-up. The adjusted GMR (aGMR) for BNT/Mod compared with BNT/BNT increased from 1.36 (95% CI: 1.17, 1.58) at D28 to 1.52 (95% CI: 1.21, 1.90) at D196, whilst for BNT/NVX this aGMR was 0.55 (95% CI: 0.47, 0.64) at day 28 and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.49, 0.78) at day 196. Heterologous ChAd-primed schedules produced and maintained the largest T-cell responses until D196. Immunisation with BNT/NVX generated a qualitatively different antibody response to BNT/BNT, with the total IgG significantly lower than BNT/BNT during all follow-up time points, but similar levels of neutralising antibodies., Interpretation: Heterologous ChAd-primed schedules remain more immunogenic over time in comparison to ChAd/ChAd. BNT-primed schedules with a second dose of either mRNA vaccine also remain more immunogenic over time in comparison to BNT/NVX. The emerging data on mixed schedules using the novel vaccine platforms deployed in the COVID-19 pandemic, suggest that heterologous priming schedules might be considered as a viable option sooner in future pandemics., Isrctn: 27841311 EudraCT:2021-001275-16., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests At the time of this study, MDS acted on behalf of the University of Oxford as an Investigator on studies funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers including AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Novavax, Janssen, Medimmune, and MCM vaccines. He received no personal financial payment for this work. Subsequent to this study MDS is employed by Moderna Biotech UK and holds equity in this company. Moderna Biotech had no role in the study design, analysis of data or interpretation of results. JSN-V-T was seconded to the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), England from October 2017 to March 2022; since leaving DHSC he reports a lecture fee from AstraZeneca. AMC and DMF are investigators on studies funded by Pfizer and Unilever. They receive no personal financial payment for this work. AF is a member of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation and chair of the WHO European Technical Advisory Group of Experts (ETAGE) on Immunisation. He is an investigator and/or provides consultative advice on clinical trials and studies of COVID-19 vaccines produced by AstraZeneca, Janssen, Valneva, Pfizer, and Sanofi, and of other vaccines from these and other manufacturers, including GlaxoSmithKline, VPI Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, and Bionet Asia. He receives no personal remuneration or benefits for any of this work. SNF acts on behalf of University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust as an investigator and/or providing consultative advice on clinical trials and studies of COVID-19 and other vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers, including Janssen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Novavax, Seqirus, Sanofi, Medimmune, Merck, and Valneva vaccines and antimicrobials. He receives no personal financial payment for this work. PTH acts on behalf of St. George's University of London as an investigator on clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers, including Janssen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novavax, and Valneva. He receives no personal financial payment for this work. CAG acts on behalf of University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust as an investigator on clinical trials and studies of COVID-19 and other vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers, including Janssen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novavax, CureVac, Moderna, and Valneva. He receives no personal financial payment for this work. VL acts on behalf of University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust as an investigator on clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers including Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Valneva. He receives no personal financial payment for this work. TL is named as an inventor on a patent application covering the ChAd vaccine and is an occasional consultant to Vaccitech, unrelated to this work. ALG is named as an inventor on a patent covering use of a particular promoter construct that is often used in -vectored vaccines and is incorporated in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine. ALG may benefit from royalty income paid to the University of Oxford from sales of this vaccine by AstraZeneca and its sublicensees under the University’s revenue sharing policy. Oxford University has entered into a partnership with AstraZeneca for further development of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. All other authors declare no competing interests. The views expressed in this manuscript are those of its authors and not necessarily those of DHSC, VTF or NIHR., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This is the first efficacy study of an oral live attenuated vaccine against Salmonella Paratyphi A using a human challenge model of paratyphoid infection. S . Paratyphi A is responsible for 3.3 million cases of enteric fever every year, with over 19 000 deaths. Although improvements to sanitation and access to clean water are vital to reduce the burden of this condition, vaccination offers a cost-effective, medium-term solution. Efficacy trials of potential S . Paratyphi vaccine candidates in the field are unlikely to be feasible given the large number of participants required. Human challenge models therefore offer a unique, cost-effective solution to test efficacy of such vaccines., Methods and Analysis: This is an observer-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial phase I/II of the oral live-attenuated vaccine against S . Paratyphi A, CVD 1902. Volunteers will be randomised 1:1 to receive two doses of CVD 1902 or placebo, 14 days apart. One month following second vaccination all volunteers will ingest S . Paratyphi A bacteria with a bicarbonate buffer solution. They will be reviewed daily in the following 14 days and diagnosed with paratyphoid infection if the predefined microbiological or clinical diagnostic criteria are met. All participants will be treated with antibiotics on diagnosis, or at day 14 postchallenge if not diagnosed. The vaccine efficacy will be determined by comparing the relative attack rate, that is, the proportion of those diagnosed with paratyphoid infection, in the vaccine and placebo groups., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval for this study has been obtained from the Berkshire Medical Research Ethics Committee (REC ref 21/SC/0330). The results will be disseminated via publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at international conferences., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN15485902., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AJP is chair of the UK Department of Health and Social Care’s (DHSC) Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), was a member of WHOs Strategic Advisory Group of Experts until 2022, receives consulting fees from Shionogi and is in receipt of grants from MRC, AstraZeneca, Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, NIHR and European Commission through the University of Oxford. MML is a coinvestigator on the MRC grant for this study, holds patents for Attenuated Salmonella Enterica Serovar Paratyphi A and Uses Thereof in the USA and UK, Germany, France, Italy and Spain, is a member of the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) and a member of the NIH Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) to review and monitor US-government-supported clinical trials of candidate COVID-19 vaccines (2020 to present). MNR works as a principal investigator on clinical vaccine trials funded by AstraZeneca and Moderna but receives no personal financial payment for this work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

The trajectory of immune responses following the primary dose series determines the decline in vaccine effectiveness over time. Here we report on maintenance of immune responses during the year following a two-dose schedule of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/AZD1222, in the absence of infection, and also explore the decay of antibody after infection. Total spike-specific IgG antibody titres were lower with two low doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines (two low doses) (P = 0.0006) than with 2 standard doses (the approved dose) or low dose followed by standard dose vaccines regimens. Longer intervals between first and second doses resulted in higher antibody titres (P < 0.0001); however, there was no evidence that the trajectory of antibody decay differed by interval or by vaccine dose, and the decay of IgG antibody titres followed a similar trajectory after a third dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Trends in post-infection samples were similar with an initial rapid decay in responses but good persistence of measurable responses thereafter. Extrapolation of antibody data, following two doses of ChAdOx1 nCov-19, demonstrates a slow rate of antibody decay with modelling, suggesting that antibody titres are well maintained for at least 2 years. These data suggest a persistent immune response after two doses of ChAdOx1 nCov-19 which will likely have a positive impact against serious disease and hospitalization., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Immunology.)

Background: People with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) on antiretroviral therapy (ART) with good CD4 T-cell counts make effective immune responses following vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). There are few data on longer term responses and the impact of a booster dose., Methods: Adults with HIV were enrolled into a single arm open label study. Two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were followed 12 months later by a third heterologous vaccine dose. Participants had undetectable viraemia on ART and CD4 counts >350 cells/µL. Immune responses to the ancestral strain and variants of concern were measured by anti-spike immunoglobulin G (IgG) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), MesoScale Discovery (MSD) anti-spike platform, ACE-2 inhibition, activation induced marker (AIM) assay, and T-cell proliferation., Findings: In total, 54 participants received 2 doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. 43 received a third dose (42 with BNT162b2; 1 with mRNA-1273) 1 year after the first dose. After the third dose, total anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG titers (MSD), ACE-2 inhibition, and IgG ELISA results were significantly higher compared to Day 182 titers (P < .0001 for all 3). SARS-CoV-2 specific CD4+ T-cell responses measured by AIM against SARS-CoV-2 S1 and S2 peptide pools were significantly increased after a third vaccine compared to 6 months after a first dose, with significant increases in proliferative CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 S1 and S2 after boosting. Responses to Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta variants were boosted, although to a lesser extent for Omicron., Conclusions: In PWH receiving a third vaccine dose, there were significant increases in B- and T-cell immunity, including to known variants of concern (VOCs)., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Background: Priming COVID-19 vaccine schedules have been deployed at variable intervals globally, which might influence immune persistence and the relative importance of third-dose booster programmes. Here, we report exploratory analyses from the Com-COV trial, assessing the effect of 4-week versus 12-week priming intervals on reactogenicity and the persistence of immune response up to 6 months after homologous and heterologous priming schedules using the vaccines BNT162b2 (tozinameran, Pfizer/BioNTech) and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca)., Methods: Com-COV was a participant-masked, randomised immunogenicity trial. For these exploratory analyses, we used the trial's general cohort, in which adults aged 50 years or older were randomly assigned to four homologous and four heterologous vaccine schedules using BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 with 4-week or 12-week priming intervals (eight groups in total). Immunogenicity analyses were done on the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, comprising participants with no evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline or for the trial duration, to assess the effect of priming interval on humoral and cellular immune response 28 days and 6 months post-second dose, in addition to the effects on reactogenicity and safety. The Com-COV trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 69254139 (EudraCT 2020-005085-33)., Findings: Between Feb 11 and 26, 2021, 730 participants were randomly assigned in the general cohort, with 77-89 per group in the ITT analysis. At 28 days and 6 months post-second dose, the geometric mean concentration of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG was significantly higher in the 12-week interval groups than in the 4-week groups for homologous schedules. In heterologous schedule groups, we observed a significant difference between intervals only for the BNT162b2-ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group at 28 days. Pseudotyped virus neutralisation titres were significantly higher in all 12-week interval groups versus 4-week groups, 28 days post-second dose, with geometric mean ratios of 1·4 (95% CI 1·1-1·8) for homologous BNT162b2, 1·5 (1·2-1·9) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19-BNT162b2, 1·6 (1·3-2·1) for BNT162b2-ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and 2·4 (1·7-3·2) for homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. At 6 months post-second dose, anti-spike IgG geometric mean concentrations fell to 0·17-0·24 of the 28-day post-second dose value across all eight study groups, with only homologous BNT162b2 showing a slightly slower decay for the 12-week versus 4-week interval in the adjusted analysis. The rank order of schedules by humoral response was unaffected by interval, with homologous BNT162b2 remaining the most immunogenic by antibody response. T-cell responses were reduced in all 12-week priming intervals compared with their 4-week counterparts. 12-week schedules for homologous BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19-BNT162b2 were up to 80% less reactogenic than 4-week schedules., Interpretation: These data support flexibility in priming interval in all studied COVID-19 vaccine schedules. Longer priming intervals might result in lower reactogenicity in schedules with BNT162b2 as a second dose and higher humoral immunogenicity in homologous schedules, but overall lower T-cell responses across all schedules. Future vaccines using these novel platforms might benefit from schedules with long intervals., Funding: UK Vaccine Taskforce and National Institute for Health and Care Research., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MDS acts on behalf of the University of Oxford as an investigator on studies funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Novavax, Janssen, Medimmune, and MCM vaccines, receiving no personal financial payment for this work. JSN-V-T was seconded to the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), England. AMC and DMF are investigators on studies funded by Pfizer and Unilever, receiving no personal financial payment for this work. AF is a member of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation and Chair of the WHO European Technical Advisory Group of Experts on immunisation; he is an investigator, provides consultative advice, or both on clinical trials and studies of COVID-19 vaccines produced by AstraZeneca, Janssen, Valneva, Pfizer, and Sanofi and of other vaccines from these and other manufacturers GlaxoSmithKline, VPI, Takeda, and Bionet Asia, receiving no personal remuneration or benefits for any of this work. SNF acts on behalf of University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust as an investigator, provider of consultative advice, or both on clinical trials and studies of COVID-19 and other vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers Janssen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Novavax, Seqirus, Sanofi, Medimmune, Merck, and Valneva vaccines and antimicrobials, receiving no personal financial payment for this work. PTH acts on behalf of St George's University of London as an investigator on clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers Janssen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novavax, and Valneva, receiving no personal financial payment for this work. CAG acts on behalf of University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust as an investigator on clinical trials and studies of COVID-19 and other vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers Janssen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novavax, CureVac, Moderna, and Valneva vaccines, receiving no personal financial payment for this work. VL acts on behalf of University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust as an investigator on clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Valneva, receiving no personal financial payment for this work. TL is named as an inventor on a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (GB2003670.3) and is an occasional consultant to Vaccitech, unrelated to this work. Oxford University has entered into a partnership with AstraZeneca for further development of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Tools to detect SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and track the ongoing evolution of the virus are necessary to support public health efforts and the design and evaluation of novel COVID-19 therapeutics and vaccines. Although next-generation sequencing (NGS) has been adopted as the gold standard method for discriminating SARS-CoV-2 lineages, alternative methods may be required when processing samples with low viral loads or low RNA quality. To this aim, an allele-specific probe PCR (ASP-PCR) targeting lineage-specific single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) was developed and used to screen 1,082 samples from two clinical trials in the United Kingdom and Brazil. Probit regression models were developed to compare ASP-PCR performance against 1,771 NGS results for the same cohorts. Individual SNPs were shown to readily identify specific variants of concern. ASP-PCR was shown to discriminate SARS-CoV-2 lineages with a higher likelihood than NGS over a wide range of viral loads. The comparative advantage for ASP-PCR over NGS was most pronounced in samples with cycle threshold ( C T ) values between 26 and 30 and in samples that showed evidence of degradation. Results for samples screened by ASP-PCR and NGS showed 99% concordant results. ASP-PCR is well suited to augment but not replace NGS. The method can differentiate SARS-CoV-2 lineages with high accuracy and would be best deployed to screen samples with lower viral loads or that may suffer from degradation. Future work should investigate further destabilization from primer-target base mismatch through altered oligonucleotide chemistry or chemical additives.

Duration of protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection in people living with HIV (PWH) following vaccination is unclear. In a substudy of the phase II/III the COV002 trial (NCT04400838), 54 HIV+ male participants on antiretroviral therapy (undetectable viral loads, CD4+ T cells > 350 cells/μL) received 2 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 Meso Scale Discovery [MSD]), neutralization, ACE-2 inhibition, IFN-γ 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 prevaccination baseline but with evidence of a decline in both humoral and cell-mediated immunity. There was, however, no significant difference compared with a cohort of HIV-uninfected individuals vaccinated with the same regimen. Responses to the variants of concern were detectable, although they were lower than WT. Preexisting cross-reactive T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike were associated with greater postvaccine immunity and correlated with prior exposure to beta coronaviruses. These data support the ongoing policy to vaccinate PWH against SARS-CoV-2, and they underpin the need for long-term monitoring of responses after vaccination.

Background: Older adults (aged ≥70 years) are at increased risk of severe disease and death if they develop COVID-19 and are therefore a priority for immunisation should an efficacious vaccine be developed. Immunogenicity of vaccines is often worse in older adults as a result of immunosenescence. We have reported the immunogenicity of a novel chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored vaccine, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), in young adults, and now describe the safety and immunogenicity of this vaccine in a wider range of participants, including adults aged 70 years and older., Methods: In this report of the phase 2 component of a single-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial (COV002), healthy adults aged 18 years and older were enrolled at two UK clinical research facilities, in an age-escalation manner, into 18-55 years, 56-69 years, and 70 years and older immunogenicity subgroups. Participants were eligible if they did not have severe or uncontrolled medical comorbidities or a high frailty score (if aged ≥65 years). First, participants were recruited to a low-dose cohort, and within each age group, participants were randomly assigned to receive either intramuscular ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (2·2 × 10 10 virus particles) or a control vaccine, MenACWY, using block randomisation and stratified by age and dose group and study site, using the following ratios: in the 18-55 years group, 1:1 to either two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or two doses of MenACWY; in the 56-69 years group, 3:1:3:1 to one dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, one dose of MenACWY, two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, or two doses of MenACWY; and in the 70 years and older, 5:1:5:1 to one dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, one dose of MenACWY, two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, or two doses of MenACWY. Prime-booster regimens were given 28 days apart. Participants were then recruited to the standard-dose cohort (3·5-6·5 × 10 10 virus particles of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) and the same randomisation procedures were followed, except the 18-55 years group was assigned in a 5:1 ratio to two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or two doses of MenACWY. Participants and investigators, but not staff administering the vaccine, were masked to vaccine allocation. The specific objectives of this report were to assess the safety and humoral and cellular immunogenicity of a single-dose and two-dose schedule in adults older than 55 years. Humoral responses at baseline and after each vaccination until 1 year after the booster were assessed using an in-house standardised ELISA, a multiplex immunoassay, and a live severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) microneutralisation assay (MNA 80 ). Cellular responses were assessed using an ex-vivo IFN-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay. The coprimary outcomes of the trial were efficacy, as measured by the number of cases of symptomatic, virologically confirmed COVID-19, and safety, as measured by the occurrence of serious adverse events. Analyses were by group allocation in participants who received the vaccine. Here, we report the preliminary findings on safety, reactogenicity, and cellular and humoral immune responses. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137., Findings: Between May 30 and Aug 8, 2020, 560 participants were enrolled: 160 aged 18-55 years (100 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 60 assigned to MenACWY), 160 aged 56-69 years (120 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19: 40 assigned to MenACWY), and 240 aged 70 years and older (200 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19: 40 assigned to MenACWY). Seven participants did not receive the boost dose of their assigned two-dose regimen, one participant received the incorrect vaccine, and three were excluded from immunogenicity analyses due to incorrectly labelled samples. 280 (50%) of 552 analysable participants were female. Local and systemic reactions were more common in participants given ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 than in those given the control vaccine, and similar in nature to those previously reported (injection-site pain, feeling feverish, muscle ache, headache), but were less common in older adults (aged ≥56 years) than younger adults. In those receiving two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, after the prime vaccination local reactions were reported in 43 (88%) of 49 participants in the 18-55 years group, 22 (73%) of 30 in the 56-69 years group, and 30 (61%) of 49 in the 70 years and older group, and systemic reactions in 42 (86%) participants in the 18-55 years group, 23 (77%) in the 56-69 years group, and 32 (65%) in the 70 years and older group. As of Oct 26, 2020, 13 serious adverse events occurred during the study period, none of which were considered to be related to either study vaccine. In participants who received two doses of vaccine, median anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 IgG responses 28 days after the boost dose were similar across the three age cohorts (standard-dose groups: 18-55 years, 20 713 arbitrary units [AU]/mL [IQR 13 898-33 550], n=39; 56-69 years, 16 170 AU/mL [10 233-40 353], n=26; and ≥70 years 17 561 AU/mL [9705-37 796], n=47; p=0·68). Neutralising antibody titres after a boost dose were similar across all age groups (median MNA 80 at day 42 in the standard-dose groups: 18-55 years, 193 [IQR 113-238], n=39; 56-69 years, 144 [119-347], n=20; and ≥70 years, 161 [73-323], n=47; p=0·40). By 14 days after the boost dose, 208 (>99%) of 209 boosted participants had neutralising antibody responses. T-cell responses peaked at day 14 after a single standard dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (18-55 years: median 1187 spot-forming cells [SFCs] per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells [IQR 841-2428], n=24; 56-69 years: 797 SFCs [383-1817], n=29; and ≥70 years: 977 SFCs [458-1914], n=48)., Interpretation: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 appears to be better tolerated in older adults than in younger adults and has similar immunogenicity across all age groups after a boost dose. Further assessment of the efficacy of this vaccine is warranted in all age groups and individuals with comorbidities., 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 Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Several COVID-19 vaccines have shown good efficacy in clinical trials, but there remains uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccines against different variants. Here, we investigate the efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) against symptomatic COVID-19 in a post-hoc exploratory analysis of a Phase 3 randomised trial in Brazil (trial registration ISRCTN89951424). Nose and throat swabs were tested by PCR in symptomatic participants. Sequencing and genotyping of swabs were performed to determine the lineages of SARS-CoV-2 circulating during the study. Protection against any symptomatic COVID-19 caused by the Zeta (P.2) variant was assessed in 153 cases with vaccine efficacy (VE) of 69% (95% CI 55, 78). 49 cases of B.1.1.28 occurred and VE was 73% (46, 86). The Gamma (P.1) variant arose later in the trial and fewer cases (N = 18) were available for analysis. VE was 64% (-2, 87). ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 provided 95% protection (95% CI 61%, 99%) against hospitalisation due to COVID-19. In summary, we report that ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 protects against emerging variants in Brazil despite the presence of the spike protein mutation E484K., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

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: COVID-19 vaccine supply shortages are causing concerns about compromised immunity in some countries as the interval between the first and second dose becomes longer. Conversely, countries with no supply constraints are considering administering a third dose. We assessed the persistence of immunogenicity after a single dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), immunity after an extended interval (44-45 weeks) between the first and second dose, and response to a third dose as a booster given 28-38 weeks after the second dose., Methods: In this substudy, volunteers aged 18-55 years who were enrolled in the phase 1/2 (COV001) controlled trial in the UK and had received either a single dose or two doses of 5 × 10 10 viral particles were invited back for vaccination. Here we report the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of a delayed second dose (44-45 weeks after first dose) or a third dose of the vaccine (28-38 weeks after second dose). Data from volunteers aged 18-55 years who were enrolled in either the phase 1/2 (COV001) or phase 2/3 (COV002), single-blinded, randomised controlled trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and who had previously received a single dose or two doses of 5 × 10 10 viral particles are used for comparison purposes. COV001 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, and ISRCTN, 15281137, and COV002 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137, and both are continuing but not recruiting., Findings: Between March 11 and 21, 2021, 90 participants were enrolled in the third-dose boost substudy, of whom 80 (89%) were assessable for reactogenicity, 75 (83%) were assessable for evaluation of antibodies, and 15 (17%) were assessable for T-cells responses. The two-dose cohort comprised 321 participants who had reactogenicity data (with prime-boost interval of 8-12 weeks: 267 [83%] of 321; 15-25 weeks: 24 [7%]; or 44-45 weeks: 30 [9%]) and 261 who had immunogenicity data (interval of 8-12 weeks: 115 [44%] of 261; 15-25 weeks: 116 [44%]; and 44-45 weeks: 30 [11%]). 480 participants from the single-dose cohort were assessable for immunogenicity up to 44-45 weeks after vaccination. Antibody titres after a single dose measured approximately 320 days after vaccination remained higher than the titres measured at baseline (geometric mean titre of 66·00 ELISA units [EUs; 95% CI 47·83-91·08] vs 1·75 EUs [1·60-1·93]). 32 participants received a late second dose of vaccine 44-45 weeks after the first dose, of whom 30 were included in immunogenicity and reactogenicity analyses. Antibody titres were higher 28 days after vaccination in those with a longer interval between first and second dose than for those with a short interval (median total IgG titre: 923 EUs [IQR 525-1764] with an 8-12 week interval; 1860 EUs [917-4934] with a 15-25 week interval; and 3738 EUs [1824-6625] with a 44-45 week interval). Among participants who received a third dose of vaccine, antibody titres (measured in 73 [81%] participants for whom samples were available) were significantly higher 28 days after a third dose (median total IgG titre: 3746 EUs [IQR 2047-6420]) than 28 days after a second dose (median 1792 EUs [IQR 899-4634]; Wilcoxon signed rank test p=0·0043). T-cell responses were also boosted after a third dose (median response increased from 200 spot forming units [SFUs] per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells [PBMCs; IQR 127-389] immediately before the third dose to 399 SFUs per milion PBMCs [314-662] by day 28 after the third dose; Wilcoxon signed rank test p=0·012). Reactogenicity after a late second dose or a third dose was lower than reactogenicity after a first dose., Interpretation: An extended interval before the second dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 leads to increased antibody titres. A third dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 induces antibodies to a level that correlates with high efficacy after second dose and boosts T-cell responses., Funding: UK Research and Innovation, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Science, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, AstraZeneca, and Wellcome., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests SCG and AVSH are cofounders of and shareholders in Vaccitech (collaborators in the early development of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) and named as inventors on a patent covering use of ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines (PCT/GB2012/000467) and a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (SCG only). TL is named as an inventor on a patent covering use of ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines (PCT/GB2012/000467) and was a consultant to Vaccitech. PMF is a consultant to Vaccitech. AJP is chair of the UK Department of Health and Social Care's Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, but does not participate in policy advice on coronavirus vaccines, and is a member of the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE). AJP is an NIHR Senior Investigator. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Use of heterologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccine schedules could facilitate mass COVID-19 immunisation. However, we have previously reported that heterologous schedules incorporating an adenoviral vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, AstraZeneca; hereafter referred to as ChAd) and an mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2, Pfizer-BioNTech; hereafter referred to as BNT) at a 4-week interval are more reactogenic than homologous schedules. Here, we report the safety and immunogenicity of heterologous schedules with the ChAd and BNT vaccines., Methods: Com-COV is a participant-blinded, randomised, non-inferiority trial evaluating vaccine safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity. Adults aged 50 years and older with no or well controlled comorbidities and no previous SARS-CoV-2 infection by laboratory confirmation were eligible and were recruited at eight sites across the UK. The majority of eligible participants were enrolled into the general cohort (28-day or 84-day prime-boost intervals), who were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1) to receive ChAd/ChAd, ChAd/BNT, BNT/BNT, or BNT/ChAd, administered at either 28-day or 84-day prime-boost intervals. A small subset of eligible participants (n=100) were enrolled into an immunology cohort, who had additional blood tests to evaluate immune responses; these participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to the four schedules (28-day interval only). Participants were masked to the vaccine received but not to the prime-boost interval. The primary endpoint was the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of serum SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG concentration (measured by ELISA) at 28 days after boost, when comparing ChAd/BNT with ChAd/ChAd, and BNT/ChAd with BNT/BNT. The heterologous schedules were considered non-inferior to the approved homologous schedules if the lower limit of the one-sided 97·5% CI of the GMR of these comparisons was greater than 0·63. The primary analysis was done in the per-protocol population, who were seronegative at baseline. Safety analyses were done among participants receiving at least one dose of a study vaccine. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 69254139., Findings: Between Feb 11 and Feb 26, 2021, 830 participants were enrolled and randomised, including 463 participants with a 28-day prime-boost interval, for whom results are reported here. The mean age of participants was 57·8 years (SD 4·7), with 212 (46%) female participants and 117 (25%) from ethnic minorities. At day 28 post boost, the geometric mean concentration of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG in ChAd/BNT recipients (12 906 ELU/mL) was non-inferior to that in ChAd/ChAd recipients (1392 ELU/mL), with a GMR of 9·2 (one-sided 97·5% CI 7·5 to ∞). In participants primed with BNT, we did not show non-inferiority of the heterologous schedule (BNT/ChAd, 7133 ELU/mL) against the homologous schedule (BNT/BNT, 14 080 ELU/mL), with a GMR of 0·51 (one-sided 97·5% CI 0·43 to ∞). Four serious adverse events occurred across all groups, none of which were considered to be related to immunisation., Interpretation: Despite the BNT/ChAd regimen not meeting non-inferiority criteria, the SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG concentrations of both heterologous schedules were higher than that of a licensed vaccine schedule (ChAd/ChAd) with proven efficacy against COVID-19 disease and hospitalisation. Along with the higher immunogenicity of ChAd/BNT compared with ChAD/ChAd, these data support flexibility in the use of heterologous prime-boost vaccination using ChAd and BNT COVID-19 vaccines., Funding: UK Vaccine Task Force and National Institute for Health Research., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MDS acts on behalf of the University of Oxford as an investigator on studies funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers, including AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Novavax, Janssen, Medimmune, and MCM. He receives no personal financial payment for this work. JSN-V-T is seconded to the Department of Health and Social Care, England. AMC and DMF are investigators on studies funded by Pfizer and Unilever. They receive no personal financial payment for this work. AF is a member of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation and chair of the WHO European Technical Advisory Group of Experts on Immunisation. He is an investigator or provides consultative advice on clinical trials and studies of COVID-19 vaccines produced by AstraZeneca, Janssen, Valneva, Pfizer, and Sanofi, and of other vaccines from these and other manufacturers, including GlaxoSmithKline, VPI Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, and Bionet Asia. He receives no personal remuneration or benefits for any of this work. SNF acts on behalf of University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust as an investigator or provides consultative advice on clinical trials and studies of COVID-19 and other vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers, including Janssen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Novavax, Seqirus, Sanofi, Medimmune, Merck, and Valneva. He receives no personal financial payment for this work. PTH acts on behalf of St George's University of London as an investigator on clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers, including Janssen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novavax, and Valneva. He receives no personal financial payment for this work. CAG acts on behalf of University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust as an investigator on clinical trials and studies of COVID-19 and other vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers, including Janssen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novavax, CureVac, Moderna, and Valneva. He receives no personal financial payment for this work. VL acts on behalf of University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust as an investigator on clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines funded or sponsored by vaccine manufacturers including Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Valneva. He receives no personal financial payment for this work. TL is named as an inventor on a patent application covering the ChAd vaccine and is an occasional consultant to Vaccitech, unrelated to this work. Oxford University has entered into a partnership with AstraZeneca for further development of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Crown Copyright © 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license.)

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 (<50 copies per mL), and CD4 counts of more than 350 cells per μL. A prime-boost regimen of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, with two doses was given 4-6 weeks apart. The primary outcomes for this substudy were safety and reactogenicity of the vaccine, as determined by serious adverse events and solicited local and systemic reactions. Humoral responses were measured by anti-spike IgG ELISA and antibody-mediated live virus neutralisation. Cell-mediated immune responses were measured by ex-vivo IFN-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay (ELISpot) and T-cell proliferation. All outcomes were compared with an HIV-uninfected group from the main COV002 study within the same age group and dosing strategy and are reported until day 56 after prime vaccination. Outcomes were analysed in all participants who received both doses and with available samples. The COV002 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and is ongoing., Findings: Between Nov 5 and Nov 24, 2020, 54 participants with HIV (all male, median age 42·5 years [IQR 37·2-49·8]) were enrolled and received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Median CD4 count at enrolment was 694·0 cells per μL (IQR 573·5-859·5). No serious adverse events occurred. Local and systemic reactions occurring during the first 7 days after prime vaccination included pain at the injection site (26 [49%] of 53 participants with available data), fatigue (25 [47%]), headache (25 [47%]), malaise (18 [34%]), chills (12 [23%]), muscle ache (19 [36%]), joint pain (five [9%]), and nausea (four [8%]), the frequencies of which were similar to the HIV-negative participants. Anti-spike IgG responses by ELISA peaked at day 42 (median 1440 ELISA units [EUs; IQR 704-2728]; n=50) and were sustained until day 56 (median 941 EUs [531-1445]; n=49). We found no correlation between the magnitude of the anti-spike IgG response at day 56 and CD4 cell count (p=0·93) or age (p=0·48). ELISpot and T-cell proliferative responses peaked at day 14 and 28 after prime dose and were sustained to day 56. Compared with participants without HIV, we found no difference in magnitude or persistence of SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific humoral or cellular responses (p>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., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests Oxford University has entered into a partnership with AstraZeneca for further development of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222). SCG is cofounder of Vaccitech (a collaborator in the early development of this vaccine candidate) and named as an inventor on a patent covering use of ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines (PCT/GB2012/000467) and a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. TL is named as an inventor on a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and was consultant to Vaccitech. PMF is a consultant to Vaccitech and has received research funding from the Brazilian Government. AJP is Chair of the UK Department of Health and Social Care's Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, but does not participate in policy advice on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, and is a member of the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts. AVSH is a cofounder of and consultant to Vaccitech and is named as an inventor on a patent covering design and use of ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines (PCT/GB2012/000467). SF is a consultant to Immunocore. GRS has received funding from Schmidt Futures and Wellcome Trust, consulting fees from GSK Vaccines Strategic Advisory Board, has patents on SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies, has leadership roles on Oxford University Council and Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, and holds stock in GSK. KP reports grants from the UK Medical Research Council UK Research and Innovation and National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Vaccine Taskforce for RNA vaccine trial, COVAC1, and honoraria for Sanofi strategic advisory boards. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: A new variant of SARS-CoV-2, B.1.1.7, emerged as the dominant cause of COVID-19 disease in the UK from November, 2020. We report a post-hoc analysis of the efficacy of the adenoviral vector vaccine, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), against this variant., Methods: Volunteers (aged ≥18 years) who were enrolled in phase 2/3 vaccine efficacy studies in the UK, and who were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or a meningococcal conjugate control (MenACWY) vaccine, provided upper airway swabs on a weekly basis and also if they developed symptoms of COVID-19 disease (a cough, a fever of 37·8°C or higher, shortness of breath, anosmia, or ageusia). Swabs were tested by nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for SARS-CoV-2 and positive samples were sequenced through the COVID-19 Genomics UK consortium. Neutralising antibody responses were measured using a live-virus microneutralisation assay against the B.1.1.7 lineage and a canonical non-B.1.1.7 lineage (Victoria). The efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a NAAT positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to vaccine received. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vs MenACWY groups) derived from a robust Poisson regression model. This study is continuing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137., Findings: Participants in efficacy cohorts were recruited between May 31 and Nov 13, 2020, and received booster doses between Aug 3 and Dec 30, 2020. Of 8534 participants in the primary efficacy cohort, 6636 (78%) were aged 18-55 years and 5065 (59%) were female. Between Oct 1, 2020, and Jan 14, 2021, 520 participants developed SARS-CoV-2 infection. 1466 NAAT positive nose and throat swabs were collected from these participants during the trial. Of these, 401 swabs from 311 participants were successfully sequenced. Laboratory virus neutralisation activity by vaccine-induced antibodies was lower against the B.1.1.7 variant than against the Victoria lineage (geometric mean ratio 8·9, 95% CI 7·2-11·0). Clinical vaccine efficacy against symptomatic NAAT positive infection was 70·4% (95% CI 43·6-84·5) for B.1.1.7 and 81·5% (67·9-89·4) for non-B.1.1.7 lineages., Interpretation: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 showed reduced neutralisation activity against the B.1.1.7 variant compared with a non-B.1.1.7 variant in vitro, but the vaccine showed efficacy against the B.1.1.7 variant of SARS-CoV-2., Funding: UK Research and Innovation, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests Oxford University has entered into a partnership with AstraZeneca for further development of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. AstraZeneca reviewed the data from the study and the final manuscript before submission but the authors retained editorial control. SCG is cofounder of Vaccitech (collaborators in the early development of this vaccine candidate) and is named as an inventor on a patent covering use of ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines (PCT/GB2012/000467) and a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. TL is named as an inventor on a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and was a consultant to Vaccitech. PMF is a consultant to Vaccitech. AJP is chair of the UK Department of Health and Social Care Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation but does not participate in policy advice on coronavirus vaccines, and is a member of the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts. AJP and SNF are NIHR senior investigators. AVSH is a cofounder of and consultant to Vaccitech and is named as an inventor on a patent covering design and use of ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines (PCT/GB2012/000467). MDS reports grants from Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Medimmune, Novavax, and MCM Vaccine, and grants and non-financial support from Pfizer outside of the submitted work. CMG reports personal fees from the Duke Human Vaccine Institute outside of the submitted work. ADD reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca outside of the submitted work. SNF reports grants from Janssen and Valneva outside of the submitted work. TLV and JV are employees of AstraZeneca. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered., Methods: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 10 10 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 10 10 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005)., Findings: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68])., Interpretation: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose., Funding: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

More than 190 vaccines are currently in development to prevent infection by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Animal studies suggest that while neutralizing antibodies against the viral spike protein may correlate with protection, additional antibody functions may also be important in preventing infection. Previously, we reported early immunogenicity and safety outcomes of a viral vector coronavirus vaccine, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), in a single-blinded phase 1/2 randomized controlled trial of healthy adults aged 18-55 years ( NCT04324606 ). Now we describe safety and exploratory humoral and cellular immunogenicity of the vaccine, from subgroups of volunteers in that trial, who were subsequently allocated to receive a homologous full-dose (SD/SD D56; n = 20) or half-dose (SD/LD D56; n = 32) ChAdOx1 booster vaccine 56 d following prime vaccination. Previously reported immunogenicity data from the open-label 28-d interval prime-boost group (SD/SD D28; n = 10) are also presented to facilitate comparison. Additionally, we describe volunteers boosted with the comparator vaccine (MenACWY; n = 10). In this interim report, we demonstrate that a booster dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 is safe and better tolerated than priming doses. Using a systems serology approach we also demonstrate that anti-spike neutralizing antibody titers, as well as Fc-mediated functional antibody responses, including antibody-dependent neutrophil/monocyte phagocytosis, complement activation and natural killer cell activation, are substantially enhanced by a booster dose of vaccine. A booster dose of vaccine induced stronger antibody responses than a dose-sparing half-dose boost, although the magnitude of T cell responses did not increase with either boost dose. These data support the two-dose vaccine regime that is now being evaluated in phase 3 clinical trials.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), has caused a global pandemic, and safe, effective vaccines are urgently needed 1 . Strong, Th1-skewed T cell responses can drive protective humoral and cell-mediated immune responses 2 and might reduce the potential for disease enhancement 3 . Cytotoxic T cells clear virus-infected host cells and contribute to control of infection 4 . Studies of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 have suggested a protective role for both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in recovery from COVID-19 (refs. 5,6 ). ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) is a candidate SARS-CoV-2 vaccine comprising a replication-deficient simian adenovirus expressing full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. We recently reported preliminary safety and immunogenicity data from a phase 1/2 trial of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (NCT04400838) 7 given as either a one- or two-dose regimen. The vaccine was tolerated, with induction of neutralizing antibodies and antigen-specific T cells against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Here we describe, in detail, exploratory analyses of the immune responses in adults, aged 18-55 years, up to 8 weeks after vaccination with a single dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in this trial, demonstrating an induction of a Th1-biased response characterized by interferon-γ and tumor necrosis factor-α cytokine secretion by CD4 + T cells and antibody production predominantly of IgG1 and IgG3 subclasses. CD8 + T cells, of monofunctional, polyfunctional and cytotoxic phenotypes, were also induced. Taken together, these results suggest a favorable immune profile induced by ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine, supporting the progression of this vaccine candidate to ongoing phase 2/3 trials to assess vaccine efficacy.

Background: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials., Methods: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 10 10 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674., Findings: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; p interaction =0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation., Interpretation: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials., Funding: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neisseria meningitidis is a globally important cause of meningitis and septicaemia. Twelve capsular groups of meningococci are known, and quadrivalent vaccines against four of these (A, C, W and Y) are available as plain-polysaccharide and protein-polysaccharide conjugate vaccines. Here we apply contemporary methods to describe B-cell responses to meningococcal polysaccharide and conjugate vaccines., Methods: Twenty adults were randomly assigned to receive either a meningococcal plain-polysaccharide or conjugate vaccine; one month later all received the conjugate vaccine. Blood samples were taken pre-vaccination and 7, 21 and 28 days after vaccination; B-cell responses were assessed by ELISpot, serum bactericidal assay, flow cytometry and gene expression microarray., Results: Seven days after an initial dose of either vaccine, a gene expression signature characteristic of plasmablasts was detectable. The frequency of newly generated plasma cells (CXCR3 + HLA-DR + ) and the expression of transcripts derived from IGKC and IGHG2 correlated with immunogenicity. Notably, using an independent dataset, the expression of glucosamine (N-acetyl)-6-sulfatase was found to reproducibly correlate with the magnitude of immune response. Transcriptomic and flow cytometric data revealed depletion of switched memory B cells following plain-polysaccharide vaccine., Conclusions: These data describe distinct gene signatures associated with the production of high-avidity antibody and a plain-polysaccharide-specific signature, possibly linked to polysaccharide-induced hyporesponsiveness.

Next-generation sequencing was used to investigate the B-cell receptor heavy chain transcript repertoire of different B-cell subsets (naive, marginal zone (MZ), immunoglobulin M (IgM) memory and IgG memory) at baseline, and of plasma cells (PCs) 7 days following administration of serogroup ACWY meningococcal polysaccharide and protein-polysaccharide conjugate vaccines. Baseline B-cell subsets could be distinguished from each other using a small number of repertoire properties (clonality, mutation from germline and complementarity-determining region 3 (CDR3) length) that were conserved between individuals. However, analyzing the CDR3 amino-acid sequence (which is particularly important for antigen binding) of the baseline subsets showed few sequences shared between individuals. In contrast, day 7 PCs demonstrated nearly 10-fold greater sequence sharing between individuals than the baseline subsets, consistent with the PCs being induced by the vaccine antigen and sharing specificity for a more limited range of epitopes. By annotating PC sequences based on IgG subclass usage and mutation, and also comparing them with the sequences of the baseline cell subsets, we were able to identify different signatures after the polysaccharide and conjugate vaccines. PCs produced after conjugate vaccination were predominantly IgG1, and most related to IgG memory cells. In contrast, after polysaccharide vaccination, the PCs were predominantly IgG2, less mutated and were equally likely to be related to MZ, IgM memory or IgG memory cells. High-throughput B-cell repertoire sequencing thus provides a unique insight into patterns of B-cell activation not possible from more conventional measures of immunogenicity.

High-throughput sequencing allows detailed study of the BCR repertoire postimmunization, but it remains unclear to what extent the de novo identification of Ag-specific sequences from the total BCR repertoire is possible. A conjugate vaccine containing Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) and group C meningococcal polysaccharides, as well as tetanus toxoid (TT), was used to investigate the BCR repertoire of adult humans following immunization and to test the hypothesis that public or convergent repertoire analysis could identify Ag-specific sequences. A number of Ag-specific BCR sequences have been reported for Hib and TT, which made a vaccine containing these two Ags an ideal immunological stimulus. Analysis of identical CDR3 amino acid sequences that were shared by individuals in the postvaccine repertoire identified a number of known Hib-specific sequences but only one previously described TT sequence. The extension of this analysis to nonidentical, but highly similar, CDR3 amino acid sequences revealed a number of other TT-related sequences. The anti-Hib avidity index postvaccination strongly correlated with the relative frequency of Hib-specific sequences, indicating that the postvaccination public BCR repertoire may be related to more conventional measures of immunogenicity correlating with disease protection. Analysis of public BCR repertoire provided evidence of convergent BCR evolution in individuals exposed to the same Ags. If this finding is confirmed, the public repertoire could be used for rapid and direct identification of protective Ag-specific BCR sequences from peripheral blood., (Copyright © 2014 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc.)

Meningococcal conjugate vaccines are today successfully deployed in universal programs for children and adolescents in different geographic regions to control meningitis and septicemia. However, in adults, the advantages of these conjugates over the older polysaccharide vaccines are less clear. In this randomized clinical trial, we demonstrated that both conjugate and polysaccharide quadrivalent meningococcal vaccines elicit protective antibody responses in adults aged 18 to 70. (This study has been registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov under registration no. NCT00901940.)., (Copyright © 2014, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.)