Changes in attitudes to vaccination as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study of older adults in the UK

BACKGROUND

The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines has brought an unprecedented focus on public attitudes to vaccines, with intention to accept a COVID-19 vaccine fluctuating during the pandemic. However, it is unclear how the pandemic may influence attitudes and behaviour in relation to vaccines in general. The aim of the current study is to examine older adults' changes in vaccination attitudes and behaviour over the first year of the pandemic.

METHODS

In February-March 2020 (before the first COVID-19 national lockdown in the UK), 372 older adults (aged 65+) provided sociodemographic information, self-reported influenza vaccine uptake, and completed two measures of vaccination attitudes: the 5C scale and the Vaccination Attitudes Examination Scale. One-year later, following rollout of COVID-19 vaccines to older adults, participants provided information on their COVID-19 and influenza vaccine uptake in the previous 12 months, and completed the 5C and VAX scales again. Paired samples t-tests were used to examine changes in vaccination attitudes over time.

RESULTS

Almost all participants (98.7%) had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, and a significant increase in influenza uptake was identified (83.6% in 2020 to 91.6% in 2021). Complacency, mistrust of vaccine benefit, concerns about commercial profiteering, and constraints to vaccination had significantly decreased between Time 1 and Time 2, and collective responsibility had significant increased. However, calculation and worries about unforeseen future effects had increased, indicating that participants now perceived higher risks related to vaccination and were taking a more deliberative information-seeking approach.

CONCLUSION

The results show significant changes in vaccination attitudes across the pandemic. These changes suggest that while older adults became less complacent about the importance of vaccines, concerns about potential risks associated with vaccination increased. It will be important for public health communication to address these concerns for all vaccines offered to this group.

Safety and immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine administered in a prime-boost regimen in young and old adults (COV002): a single-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial

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 × 1010 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 × 1010 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 (MNA80). 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 MNA80 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.

Protein-Based Nanoparticle Vaccines for SARS-CoV-2

The pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has upended healthcare systems and economies around the world. Rapid understanding of the structural biology and pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 has allowed the development of emergency use or FDA-approved vaccines and various candidate vaccines. Among the recently developed SARS-CoV-2 candidate vaccines, natural protein-based nanoparticles well suited for multivalent antigen presentation and enhanced immune stimulation to elicit potent humoral and cellular immune responses are currently being investigated. This mini-review presents recent innovations in protein-based nanoparticle vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. The design and strategy of displaying antigenic domains, including spike protein, receptor-binding domain (RBD), and other domains on the surface of various protein-based nanoparticles and the performance of the developed nanoparticle-based vaccines are highlighted. In the final part of this review, we summarize and discuss recent advances in clinical trials and provide an outlook on protein-based nanoparticle vaccines.

Iota-Carrageenan Inhibits Replication of SARS-CoV-2 and the Respective Variants of Concern Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread around the world and remains a major public health threat. Vaccine inefficiency, vaccination breakthroughs and lack of supply, especially in developing countries, as well as the fact that a non-negligible part of the population either refuse vaccination or cannot be vaccinated due to age, pre-existing illness or non-response to existing vaccines intensify this issue. This might also contribute to the emergence of new variants, being more efficiently transmitted, more virulent and more capable of escaping naturally acquired and vaccine-induced immunity. Hence, the need of effective and viable prevention options to reduce viral transmission is of outmost importance. In this study, we investigated the antiviral effect of iota-, lambda- and kappa-carrageenan, sulfated polysaccharides extracted from red seaweed, on SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan type and the spreading variants of concern (VOCs) Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta. Carrageenans as part of broadly used nasal and mouth sprays as well as lozenges have the potential of first line defense to inhibit the infection and transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Here, we demonstrate by using a SARS-CoV-2 spike pseudotyped lentivirus particles (SSPL) system and patient-isolated SARS-CoV-2 VOCs to infect transgenic A549ACE2/TMPRSS2 and Calu-3 human lung cells that all three carrageenan types exert antiviral activity. Iota-carrageenan exhibits antiviral activity with comparable IC₅₀ values against the SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan type and the VOCs. Altogether, these results indicate that iota-carrageenan might be effective for prophylaxis and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infections independent of the present and potentially future variants.

A Comprehensive Review of COVID-19 Virology, Vaccines, Variants, and Therapeutics

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative pathogen of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has caused more than 179 million infections and 3.8 million deaths worldwide. Throughout the past year, multiple vaccines have already been developed and used, while some others are in the process of being developed. However, the emergence of new mutant strains of SARS-CoV-2 that have demonstrated immune-evading characteristics and an increase in infective capabilities leads to potential ineffectiveness of the vaccines against these variants. The purpose of this review article is to highlight the current understanding of the immunological mechanisms of the virus and vaccines, as well as to investigate some key variants and mutations of the virus driving the current pandemic and their impacts on current management guidelines. We also discussed new technologies being developed for the prevention, treatment, and detection of SARS-CoV-2. In this paper, we thoroughly reviewed and provided crucial information on SARS-CoV-2 virology, vaccines and drugs being used and developed for its prevention and treatment, as well as important variant strains. Our review paper will be beneficial to health care professionals and researchers so they can have a better understanding of the basic sciences, prevention, and clinical treatment of COVID-19 during the pandemic. This paper consists of the most updated information that has been available as of June 21, 2021.

Comparing the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

New Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are available to prevent the ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. We compared the efficacy of new COVID-19 vaccines to prevent symptomatic and severe disease in the adult population and to prevent symptomatic COVID-19 among the elderly. Leading medical databases were searched until August 30, 2021. Published phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated efficacy of the vaccine to prevent symptomatic and sever COVID-19 in adults were included. Two reviewers independently evaluated the literature search results and independently extracted summary data. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) according to PRISMA-NMA 2015 to pool indirect comparisons between different vaccines regarding their relative efficacy. The primary outcomes were the efficacy of the vaccine against symptomatic COVID-19 in adults (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021235364). Above 200,000 adult participants from eight phase 3 RCTs were included in NMA, of whom 52% received the intervention (active COVID-19 vaccine). While each of nine vaccines was tested in the unique clinical trial as compared to control, based on indirect comparison, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines were ranked with the highest probability of efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 (P-scores 0.952 and 0.843, respectively), followed by Gam-COVID-Vac (P-score 0.782), NVX-CoV23730 (P-score 0.700), CoronaVac (P-score 0.570), BN02 (P-score 0.428), WIV04 (P-score 0.327), and Ad26.COV2.S (P-score 0.198). No statistically significant difference was seen in the ability of the vaccines to prevent symptomatic disease in the elderly population. No vaccine was statistically significantly associated with a decreased risk for severe COVID-19 than other vaccines, although mRNA-1273 and Gam-COVID-Vac have the highest P-scores (0.899 and 0.816, respectively), indicating greater protection against severe disease than other vaccines. In our indirect comparison, the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines, which use mRNA technology, were associated with the highest efficacy to prevent symptomatic COVID-19 compared to other vaccines. This finding may have importance when deciding which vaccine to use, together with other important factors as availability of the vaccines, costs, logistics, side effects, and patient acceptability.

Human IgM and IgG Responses to an Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine

Objective

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic warrants accelerated efforts to test vaccine candidates. To explore the influencing factors on vaccine-induced effects, antibody responses to an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in healthy individuals who were not previously infected by COVID-19 were assessed.

Methods

All subjects aged 18–60 years who did not have SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time of screening from June 19, 2021, to July 02, 2021, were approached for inclusion. All participants received two doses of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Serum IgM and IgG antibodies were detected using a commercial kit after the second dose of vaccination. A positive result was defined as 10 AU/mL or more and a negative result as less than 10 AU/mL. This retrospective study included 97 infection-naïve individuals (mean age 35.6 years; 37.1% male, 62.9% female).

Results

The seropositive rates of IgM and IgG antibody responses elicited after the second dose of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine were 3.1% and 74.2%, respectively. IgG antibody levels were significantly higher than IgM levels (P<0.0001). Sex had no effect on IgM and IgG antibody response after the second dose. The mean anti-IgG level in older persons (⩾42 years) was significantly lower than that of younger recipients. There was a significantly lower antibody level at > 42 days compared to that at 0–20 days (P<0.05) and 21–31 days (P<0.05) after the second dose.

Conclusion

IgG antibody response could be induced by inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in healthy individuals (>18 years), which can be influenced by age and detection time after the second dose of vaccination.

Novel suction-based in vivo cutaneous DNA transfection platform

This work reports a suction-based cutaneous delivery method for in vivo DNA transfection. Following intradermal Mantoux injection of plasmid DNA in a rat model, a moderate negative pressure is applied to the injection site, a technique similar to Chinese báguàn and Middle Eastern hijama cupping therapies. Strong GFP expression was demonstrated with pEGFP-N1 plasmids where fluorescence was observed as early as 1 hour after dosing. Modeling indicates a strong correlation between focal strain/stress and expression patterns. The absence of visible and/or histological tissue injury contrasts with current in vivo transfection systems such as electroporation. Specific utility was demonstrated with a synthetic SARS-CoV-2 DNA vaccine, which generated host humoral immune response in rats with notable antibody production. This method enables an easy-to-use, cost-effective, and highly scalable platform for both laboratorial transfection needs and clinical applications for nucleic acid–based therapeutics and vaccines.

Recent advances in management of COVID-19: A review

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused and is still causing significant mortality and economic consequences all over the globe. As of today, there are three U.S Food and Drug administration (FDA) approved vaccines, Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Janssen COVID-19 vaccine. Also, the antiviral drug remdesivir and two combinations of monoclonal antibodies are authorized for Emergency use (EUA) in certain patients. Furthermore, baricitinib was approved in Japan (April 23, 2021). Despite available vaccines and EUA, pharmacological therapy for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 is still highly required. There are several ongoing clinical trials investigating the efficacy of clinically available drugs in treating COVID-19. In this study, selected novel pharmacological agents for the possible treatment of COVID-19 will be discussed. Point of discussion will cover mechanism of action, supporting evidence for safety and efficacy and reached stage in development. Drugs were classified into three classes according to the phase of viral life cycle they target. Phase I, the early infective phase, relies on supportive care and symptomatic treatment as needed. In phase II, the pulmonary phase, treatment aims at inhibiting viral entry or replication. Drugs used during this phase are famotidine, monoclonal antibodies, nanobodies, ivermectin, remdesivir, camostat mesylate and other antiviral agents. Finally, phase III, the hyper-inflammatory phase, tocilizumab, dexamethasone, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), and melatonin are used. The aim of this study is to summarize current findings and suggest gaps in knowledge that can influence future COVID-19 treatment study design.

SARS-CoV-2 new variants: Characteristic features and impact on the efficacy of different vaccines

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its new variants reported in different countries have posed a serious threat to human health and social fabrics worldwide. In addition, these new variants hindered the efforts of vaccines and other therapeutic developments. In this review article, we explained the emergence of new variants of SARS-CoV-2, their transmission risk, mortality rate, and, more importantly, the impact of each new variant on the efficacy of the developed vaccines reported in different literature and findings. The literature reported that with the emergence of new variants, the efficacy of different vaccines is declined, hospitalization and the risk of reinfection is increased. The reports concluded that the emergence of a variant that entirely evades the immune response triggered by the vaccine is improbable. The emergence of new variants and reports of re-infections are creating a more distressing situation and therefore demands further investigation to formulate an effective therapeutic strategy.

Analysis of COVID-19 vaccine non-intent by essential vs non-essential worker, demographic, and socioeconomic status among 101,048 US adults

As of May 2021, over 286 million coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine doses have been administered across the country. This data is promising, however there are still populations that, despite availability, are declining vaccination. We reviewed vaccine likelihood and receptiveness to recommendation from a doctor or nurse survey responses from 101,048 adults (≥18 years old) presenting to 442 primary care clinics in 8 states and the District of Columbia. Occupation was self-reported and demographic information extracted from the medical record, with 58.3% (n = 58,873) responding they were likely to receive the vaccine, 23.6% (n = 23,845) unlikely, and 18.1% (n = 18,330) uncertain. We found that essential workers were 18% less likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccination. Of those who indicated they were not already “very likely” to receive the vaccine, a recommendation from a nurse or doctor resulted in 16% of respondents becoming more likely to receive the vaccine, although certain occupations were less likely than others to be receptive to recommendations. To our knowledge, this is the first study to look at vaccine intent and receptiveness to recommendations from a doctor or nurse across specific essential worker occupations, and may help inform future early phase, vaccine rollouts and public health measure implementations.

Sex Workers Should Be Included in COVID-19 Vaccination Efforts

As the COVID-19 pandemic takes its toll on citizens across the globe, more people turn to sex work for survival. Because sex work is inherently physical and intimate, sex workers become defenseless against the virus and act as a bridge for transmitting the virus to their clients and society. Often, sex workers are the victims of violence and homelessness, and are devoid of health-care facilities, including HIV treatment, and are frequently exposed to a large number of individuals as dictated by the nature of their work. Their survival instincts would drive them to take part in their usual job to earn money, despite added health risks, to survive and feed their families. Worldwide, sex workers do not fully benefit from the COVID-19 responses, particularly in health, social, and economic aid assistance and services. Hence, it is essential to include this vulnerable population in the COVID-19 vaccination programs to halt the further spread of the virus.

Attenuated activation of pulmonary immune cells in mRNA-1273-vaccinated hamsters after SARS-CoV-2 infection

The mRNA-1273 vaccine is effective against SARS-CoV-2 and was granted emergency use authorization by the FDA. Clinical studies, however, cannot provide the controlled response to infection and complex immunological insight that are only possible with preclinical studies. Hamsters are the only model that reliably exhibits severe SARS-CoV-2 disease similar to that in hospitalized patients, making them pertinent for vaccine evaluation. We demonstrate that prime or prime-boost administration of mRNA-1273 in hamsters elicited robust neutralizing antibodies, ameliorated weight loss, suppressed SARS-CoV-2 replication in the airways, and better protected against disease at the highest prime-boost dose. Unlike in mice and nonhuman primates, low-level virus replication in mRNA-1273-vaccinated hamsters coincided with an anamnestic response. Single-cell RNA sequencing of lung tissue permitted high-resolution analysis that is not possible in vaccinated humans. mRNA-1273 prevented inflammatory cell infiltration and the reduction of lymphocyte proportions, but enabled antiviral responses conducive to lung homeostasis. Surprisingly, infection triggered transcriptome programs in some types of immune cells from vaccinated hamsters that were shared, albeit attenuated, with mock-vaccinated hamsters. Our results support the use of mRNA-1273 in a 2-dose schedule and provide insight into the potential responses within the lungs of vaccinated humans who are exposed to SARS-CoV-2.

Adaptive immune determinants of viral clearance and protection in mouse models of SARS-CoV-2

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused more than 160 million infections and more than 3 million deaths worldwide. Although effective vaccines are currently being deployed, the adaptive immune determinants that promote viral clearance and confer protection remain poorly defined. Using mouse models of SARS-CoV-2, we demonstrate that both humoral and cellular adaptive immunity contribute to viral clearance in the setting of primary infection. Furthermore, we find that either convalescent mice or mice that receive mRNA vaccination are protected from both homologous infection and infection with a variant of concern, B.1.351. In addition, we find that this protection is largely mediated by antibody response and not cellular immunity. These results highlight the in vivo protective capacity of antibodies generated to both vaccine and natural infection.

mRNA vaccine-induced T cells respond identically to SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern but differ in longevity and homing properties depending on prior infection status

While mRNA vaccines are proving highly efficacious against SARS-CoV-2, it is important to determine how booster doses and prior infection influence the immune defense they elicit, and whether they protect against variants. Focusing on the T cell response, we conducted a longitudinal study of infection-naïve and COVID-19 convalescent donors before vaccination and after their first and second vaccine doses, using a high-parameter CyTOF analysis to phenotype their SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells. Vaccine-elicited spike-specific T cells responded similarly to stimulation by spike epitopes from the ancestral, B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variant strains, both in terms of cell numbers and phenotypes. In infection-naïve individuals, the second dose boosted the quantity and altered the phenotypic properties of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells, while in convalescents the second dose changed neither. Spike-specific T cells from convalescent vaccinees differed strikingly from those of infection-naïve vaccinees, with phenotypic features suggesting superior long-term persistence and ability to home to the respiratory tract including the nasopharynx. These results provide reassurance that vaccine-elicited T cells respond robustly to emerging viral variants, confirm that convalescents may not need a second vaccine dose, and suggest that vaccinated convalescents may have more persistent nasopharynx-homing SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells compared to their infection-naïve counterparts.

Time since SARS-CoV-2 infection and humoral immune response following BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination

BACKGROUND

To optimise the use of available SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, some advocate delaying second vaccination for individuals infected within six months. We studied whether post-vaccination immune response is equally potent in individuals infected over six months prior to vaccination.

METHODS

We tested serum IgG binding to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and neutralising capacity in 110 healthcare workers, before and after both BNT162b2 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccinations. We compared outcomes between participants with more recent infection (n = 18, median two months, IQR 2-3), with infection-vaccination interval over six months (n = 19, median nine months, IQR 9-10), and to those not previously infected (n = 73).

FINDINGS

Both recently and earlier infected participants showed comparable humoral immune responses after a single mRNA vaccination, while exceeding those of previously uninfected persons after two vaccinations with 2.5 fold (p = 0.003) and 3.4 fold (p < 0.001) for binding antibody levels, and 6.4 and 7.2 fold for neutralisation titres, respectively (both p < 0.001). The second vaccine dose yielded no further substantial improvement of the humoral response in the previously infected participants (0.97 fold, p = 0.92), while it was associated with a 4 fold increase in antibody binding levels and 18 fold increase in neutralisation titres in previously uninfected participants (both p < 0.001). Adjustment for potential confounding of sex and age did not affect these findings.

INTERPRETATION

Delaying the second vaccination in individuals infected up to ten months prior may constitute a more efficient use of limited vaccine supplies.

FUNDING

Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development ZonMw; Corona Research Fund Amsterdam UMC; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Development of a Platform for Producing Recombinant Protein Components of Epitope Vaccines for the Prevention of COVID-19

A new platform for creating anti-coronavirus epitope vaccines has been developed. Two loop-like epitopes with lengths of 22 and 42 amino acid residues were selected from the receptor-binding motif of the Spike protein from the SARS‑CoV‑2 virus that participate in a large number of protein-protein interactions in the complexes with ACE2 and neutralizing antibodies. Two types of hybrid proteins, including one of the two selected epitopes, were constructed. To fix conformation of the selected epitopes, an approach using protein scaffolds was used. The homologue of Rop protein from the Escherichia coli ColE1 plasmid containing helix-turn-helix motif was used as an epitope scaffold for the convergence of C- and N-termini of the loop-like epitopes. Loop epitopes were inserted into the turn region. The conformation was additionally fixed by a disulfide bond formed between the cysteine residues present within the epitopes. For the purpose of multimerization, either aldolase from Thermotogamaritima, which forms a trimer in solution, or alpha-helical trimerizer of the Spike protein from SARS‑CoV‑2, was attached to the epitopes incorporated into the Rop-like protein. To enable purification on the heparin-containing sorbents, a short fragment from the heparin-binding hemagglutinin of Mycobacterium tuberculosis was inserted at the C-terminus of the hybrid proteins. All the obtained proteins demonstrated high level of immunogenicity after triplicate parenteral administration to mice. Sera from the mice immunized with both aldolase-based hybrid proteins and the Spike protein SARS‑CoV‑2 trimerizer-based protein with a longer epitope interacted with both the inactivated SARS‑CoV‑2 virus and the Spike protein receptor-binding domain at high titers.

Controversy surrounding the Sputnik V vaccine

The Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine is a member of the so-called vector vaccines and uses two different vectors (Ad26 priming and Ad5 boost) to reduce the risk of a reduction in the effectiveness of the vaccination. Real life data indicate an efficacy of the vaccine above 97%. Low cost and no need for ultra-cold storage temperature temperatures are other pluses of the Sputnik V vaccine. However, there are also several important shortcomings that must be considered such as the possible reduction of its immunogenicity in the presence of very high Ad5 neutralizing antibody titres and the decrease with age of the antibody titres neutralizing the virus. Furthermore, there is emerging documentation that Sputnik V has a reduced neutralizing capacity against the Beta variant and all variants with the spike protein carrying the E484K substitution. Nevertheless, due to its characteristics, Sputnik V could be another useful means of satisfying the need for mass vaccination. However, it is imperative to document the efficacy and safety of the Sputnik V vaccine in individuals with high pre-existing anti-Ad26 and Ad5-neutralizing antibody titres and in those under the age of 18 or older than 60 years and be certain that Sputnik V does not cause the rare development of immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia. It is hoped that the now widespread use of this vaccine will generate a large pragmatic real-world study with data accessible to anyone interested in verifying them.

Early clinical trial data and real-world assessment of COVID-19 vaccines: Insights from the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists

As of August 2021, there were three COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States for the prevention of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). The purpose of this narrative review is to examine the early experience from the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of BNT162b2 (Pfizer, Inc./BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna, Inc.), and Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson and Johnson/Janssen Global Services, LLC) through July 2021. The EUA data from the clinical trials have largely been corroborated by real-world effectiveness investigations post-authorization. These studies indicate that immunity is obtained within 2 weeks post-vaccination and may endure for 6 months. The immunity conferred by the vaccines may also be effective against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. Additionally, populations not included in the emergency use authorization studies may also benefit from vaccination. This look back at the initial clinical experience can be used by the global community to inform and develop COVID-19 vaccine programs.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination modelling for safe surgery to save lives: data from an international prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could support safer elective surgery. Vaccine numbers are limited so this study aimed to inform their prioritization by modelling.

METHODS

The primary outcome was the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-related death in 1 year. NNVs were based on postoperative SARS-CoV-2 rates and mortality in an international cohort study (surgical patients), and community SARS-CoV-2 incidence and case fatality data (general population). NNV estimates were stratified by age (18-49, 50-69, 70 or more years) and type of surgery. Best- and worst-case scenarios were used to describe uncertainty.

RESULTS

NNVs were more favourable in surgical patients than the general population. The most favourable NNVs were in patients aged 70 years or more needing cancer surgery (351; best case 196, worst case 816) or non-cancer surgery (733; best case 407, worst case 1664). Both exceeded the NNV in the general population (1840; best case 1196, worst case 3066). NNVs for surgical patients remained favourable at a range of SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates in sensitivity analysis modelling. Globally, prioritizing preoperative vaccination of patients needing elective surgery ahead of the general population could prevent an additional 58 687 (best case 115 007, worst case 20 177) COVID-19-related deaths in 1 year.

CONCLUSION

As global roll out of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination proceeds, patients needing elective surgery should be prioritized ahead of the general population.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination modelling for safe surgery to save lives: data from an international prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could support safer elective surgery. Vaccine numbers are limited so this study aimed to inform their prioritization by modelling.

METHODS

The primary outcome was the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-related death in 1 year. NNVs were based on postoperative SARS-CoV-2 rates and mortality in an international cohort study (surgical patients), and community SARS-CoV-2 incidence and case fatality data (general population). NNV estimates were stratified by age (18-49, 50-69, 70 or more years) and type of surgery. Best- and worst-case scenarios were used to describe uncertainty.

RESULTS

NNVs were more favourable in surgical patients than the general population. The most favourable NNVs were in patients aged 70 years or more needing cancer surgery (351; best case 196, worst case 816) or non-cancer surgery (733; best case 407, worst case 1664). Both exceeded the NNV in the general population (1840; best case 1196, worst case 3066). NNVs for surgical patients remained favourable at a range of SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates in sensitivity analysis modelling. Globally, prioritizing preoperative vaccination of patients needing elective surgery ahead of the general population could prevent an additional 58 687 (best case 115 007, worst case 20 177) COVID-19-related deaths in 1 year.

CONCLUSION

As global roll out of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination proceeds, patients needing elective surgery should be prioritized ahead of the general population.

Mathematical Modeling of Vaccines That Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Transmission

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine clinical trials assess efficacy against disease (VEDIS), the ability to block symptomatic COVID-19. They only partially discriminate whether VEDIS is mediated by preventing infection completely, which is defined as detection of virus in the airways (VESUSC), or by preventing symptoms despite infection (VESYMP). Vaccine efficacy against transmissibility given infection (VEINF), the decrease in secondary transmissions from infected vaccine recipients, is also not measured. Using mathematical modeling of data from King County Washington, we demonstrate that if the Moderna (mRNA-1273QS) and Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) vaccines, which demonstrated VEDIS > 90% in clinical trials, mediate VEDIS by VESUSC, then a limited fourth epidemic wave of infections with the highly infectious B.1.1.7 variant would have been predicted in spring 2021 assuming rapid vaccine roll out. If high VEDIS is explained by VESYMP, then high VEINF would have also been necessary to limit the extent of this fourth wave. Vaccines which completely protect against infection or secondary transmission also substantially lower the number of people who must be vaccinated before the herd immunity threshold is reached. The limited extent of the fourth wave suggests that the vaccines have either high VESUSC or both high VESYMP and high VEINF against B.1.1.7. Finally, using a separate intra-host mathematical model of viral kinetics, we demonstrate that a 0.6 log vaccine-mediated reduction in average peak viral load might be sufficient to achieve 50% VEINF, which suggests that human challenge studies with a relatively low number of infected participants could be employed to estimate all three vaccine efficacy metrics.

Development of a model-inference system for estimating epidemiological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern

To support COVID-19 pandemic planning, we develop a model-inference system to estimate epidemiological properties of new SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern using case and mortality data while accounting for under-ascertainment, disease seasonality, non-pharmaceutical interventions, and mass-vaccination. Applying this system to study three variants of concern, we estimate that B.1.1.7 has a 46.6% (95% CI: 32.3-54.6%) transmissibility increase but nominal immune escape from protection induced by prior wild-type infection; B.1.351 has a 32.4% (95% CI: 14.6-48.0%) transmissibility increase and 61.3% (95% CI: 42.6-85.8%) immune escape; and P.1 has a 43.3% (95% CI: 30.3-65.3%) transmissibility increase and 52.5% (95% CI: 0-75.8%) immune escape. Model simulations indicate that B.1.351 and P.1 could outcompete B.1.1.7 and lead to increased infections. Our findings highlight the importance of preventing the spread of variants of concern, via continued preventive measures, prompt mass-vaccination, continued vaccine efficacy monitoring, and possible updating of vaccine formulations to ensure high efficacy.