Safety and immunogenicity of aerosolised Ad5-nCoV, intramuscular Ad5-nCoV, or inactivated COVID-19 vaccine CoronaVac given as the second booster following three doses of CoronaVac: a multicentre, open-label, phase 4, randomised trial

Relative effectiveness of a heterologous booster dose with adenovirus type 5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine versus three doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine in adults during a nationwide outbreak of omicron predominance, in China: a retrospective, individually matched cohort-control study

Effectiveness of heterologous booster regimes with ad5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine in a large, diverse population during the national-scale outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 omicron predominance in China has not been reported, yet. We conducted a large-scale cohort-control study in six provinces in China, and did a retrospective survey on the COVID-19 attack risk during this outbreak. Participant aged ≥18 years in five previous trials who were primed with 1 to 3 doses of ICV received heterologous booster with either intramuscular or orally inhaled ad5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine were included in the heterologous-trial cohort. We performed propensity score-matching at a ratio of 1:4 to match participants in the heterologous-trial cohort individually with the community individuals who received three-dose of ICV as a control (ICV-community cohort). From February 4 to April 10, 2023, 41504 (74.5%) of 55710 individuals completed the survey. The median time since the most recent vaccination to the onset of the symptoms of COVID-19 was 303.0 days (IQR 293.0-322.0). The attack rate of COVID-19 in the heterologous-trial cohort was 55.8%, while that in the ICV-community cohort was 64.6%, resulting in a relative effectiveness of 13.7% (95% CI 11.9 to 15.3). In addition, a higher relative effectiveness against COVID-19 associated outpatient visits, and admission to hospital was demonstrated, which was 25.1% (95% CI 18.9 to 30.9), and 48.9% (95% CI 27.0 to 64.2), respectively. The heterologous booster with ad5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine still offered some additional protection in preventing COVID-19 breakthrough infection versus homologous three-dose regimen with ICV, 10 months after vaccination.

A modified recombinant adenovirus vector containing dual rabies virus G expression cassettes confers robust and long-lasting humoral immunity in mice, cats, and dogs

During the COVID-19 epidemic, the incidence of rabies has increased in several countries, especially in remote and disadvantaged areas, due to inadequate surveillance and declining immunization coverage. Multiple vaccinations with inactivated rabies virus vaccines for pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis are considered inefficient, expensive and impractical in developing countries. Herein, three modified human recombinant adenoviruses type 5 designated Adv-RVG, Adv-E1-RVG, and Adv-RVDG, carrying rabies virus G (RVG) expression cassettes in various combinations within E1 or E3 genomic regions, were constructed to serve as rabies vaccine candidates. Adv-RVDG mediated greater RVG expression both in vitro and in vivo and induced a more robust and durable humoral immune response than the rabies vaccine strain SAD-L16, Adv-RVG, and Adv-E1-RVG by more effectively activating the dendritic cells (DCs) - follicular helper T (Tfh) cells - germinal centre (GC) / memory B cells (MBCs) - long-lived plasma cells (LLPCs) axis with 100% survival after a lethal RABV challenge in mice during the 24-week study period. Similarly, dogs and cats immunized with Adv-RVDG showed stronger and longer-lasting antibody responses than those vaccinated with a commercial inactivated rabies vaccine and showed good tolerance to Adv-RVDG. In conclusion, our study demonstrated that simultaneous insertion of protective antigens into the E1 and E3 genomic regions of adenovirus vector can significantly enhance the immunogenicity of adenoviral-vectored vaccines, providing a theoretical and practical basis for the subsequent development of multivalent and multi-conjugated vaccines using recombinant adenovirus platform. Meanwhile, our data suggest Adv-RVDG is a safe, efficient, and economical vaccine for mass-coverage immunization.

Safety, immunogenicity, and protective effective of inhaled COVID-19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This study aimed to examine the safety, immunogenicity and protective effective of inhaled COVID-19 vaccines (ICVs). Literature research was done through EMBASE, Cochrane, PubMed, and Web of Science up to 10 March 2024. Pooled estimates with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed and compared using the random effects and common effects model. Of the 15 studies, 11 analyzed safety, 13 analyzed immunogenicity, and 3 analyzed protective effective. The results showed a favorable safety profile of ICVs for primary vaccination series, however it does not always seem to produce the expected immune response and protective effective. Meta-analysis of ICVs booster vaccinations (BVs) showed that the levels of neutralizing antibody Geometric mean titer (nAb-GMT) with aerosolised Ad5-nCoV (AAd5-nCoV) were all higher than those with inactivated vaccine (INA-nCoV) (standard mean difference (SMD) = 2.32; 95% CI: 1.96-2.69) and intramuscular Ad5-nCoV (IMAd5-nCoV) (SMD = 0.31; 95% CI: 0.14-0.48) against the original strain of SARS-CoV-2. Importantly, we also observed similar results in the omicron variant. In addition, ICV in BVs has high mucosal immunity to IgA antibodies. The risk of adverse events was comparable or lower for AAd5-nCoV compared to INA-nCoV or IMAd5-nCoV. Current evidence shows that the safety profile of ICVs were well. The booster dose of AAd5-nCoV had a high immune response (including mucosal immunity) and provided protection against COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant. Further studies are needed to investigate the long-term safety of intranasal vaccine booster protection and various types of ICVs.

Superior antibody and membrane protein-specific T-cell responses to CoronaVac by intradermal versus intramuscular routes in adolescents

BACKGROUND

Optimising the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines to improve their protection against disease is necessary. Fractional dosing by intradermal (ID) administration has been shown to be equally immunogenic as intramuscular (IM) administration for several vaccines, but the immunogenicity of ID inactivated whole severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at the full dose is unknown. This study (NCT04800133) investigated the superiority of antibody and T-cell responses of full-dose CoronaVac by ID over IM administration in adolescents.

METHODS

Participants aged 11-17 years received two doses of IM or ID vaccine, followed by the 3rd dose 13-42 days later. Humoral and cellular immunogenicity outcomes were measured post-dose 2 (IM-CC versus ID-CC) and post-dose 3 (IM-CCC versus ID-CCC). Doses 2 and 3 were administered to 173 and 104 adolescents, respectively.

RESULTS

Spike protein (S) immunoglobulin G (IgG), S-receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG, S IgG Fcγ receptor IIIa (FcγRIIIa)-binding, SNM [sum of individual (S), nucleocapsid protein (N), and membrane protein (M) peptide pool]-specific interleukin-2 (IL-2)+CD4+, SNM-specific IL-2+CD8+, S-specific IL-2+CD8+, N-specific IL-2+CD4+, N-specific IL-2+CD8+ and M-specific IL-2+CD4+ responses fulfilled the superior and non-inferior criteria for ID-CC compared to IM-CC, whereas IgG avidity was inferior. For ID-CCC, S-RBD IgG, surrogate virus neutralisation test, 90% plaque reduction neutralisation titre (PRNT90), PRNT50, S IgG avidity, S IgG FcγRIIIa-binding, M-specific IL-2+CD4+, interferon-γ+CD8+ and IL-2+CD8+ responses were superior and non-inferior to IM-CCC. The estimated vaccine efficacies were 49%, 52%, 66% and 79% for IM-CC, ID-CC, IM-CCC and ID-CCC, respectively. The ID groups reported more local, mild adverse reactions.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to demonstrate superior antibody and M-specific T-cell responses by ID inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and serves as the basis for future research to improve the immunogenicity of inactivated vaccines.

A comprehensive review on immunogen and immune-response proteins of SARS-CoV-2 and their applications in prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of COVID-19

Exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome-corona virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) prompts humoral immune responses in the human body. As the auxiliary diagnosis of a current infection, the existence of viral proteins can be checked from specific antibodies (Abs) induced by immunogenic viral proteins. For people with a weakened immune system, Ab treatment can help neutralize viral antigens to resist and treat the disease. On the other hand, highly immunogenic viral proteins can serve as effective markers for detecting prior infections. Additionally, the identification of viral particles or the presence of antibodies may help establish an immune defense against the virus. These immunogenic proteins rather than SARS-CoV-2 can be given to uninfected people as a vaccination to improve their coping ability against COVID-19 through the generation of memory plasma cells. In this work, we review immunogenic and immune-response proteins derived from SARS-CoV-2 with regard to their classification, origin, and diverse applications (e.g., prevention (vaccine development), diagnostic testing, and treatment (via neutralizing Abs)). Finally, advanced immunization strategies against COVID-19 are discussed along with the contemporary circumstances and future challenges.

An Observational Prospective Cohort Study of Vaccine Effectiveness Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection of an Aerosolized, Inhaled Adenovirus Type 5-Vectored Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine Given as a Second Booster Dose in Guangzhou City, China

Using a prospective, observational cohort study during the post-"dynamic COVID-zero" wave in China, we estimated short-term relative effectiveness against Omicron BA.5 infection of inhaled aerosolized adenovirus type 5-vectored ancestral strain coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine as a second booster dose approximately 1 year after homologous boosted primary series of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine compared with no second booster. Participants reported nucleic acid or antigen test results weekly until they tested positive or completed predesignated follow-up. After excluding participants infected <14 days after study entry, relative effectiveness among the 6576 participants was 61% in 18- to 59-year-olds and 38% in ≥60-year-olds and was sustained for 12 weeks.

Progress and challenges in the clinical evaluation of immune responses to respiratory mucosal vaccines

INTRODUCTION

Following the coronavirus disease pandemic, respiratory mucosal vaccines that elicit both mucosal and systemic immune responses have garnered increasing attention. However, human physiological characteristics pose significant challenges in the evaluation of mucosal immunity, which directly impedes the development and application of respiratory mucosal vaccines.

AREAS COVERED

This study summarizes the characteristics of immune responses in the respiratory mucosa and reviews the current status and challenges in evaluating immune response to respiratory mucosal vaccines.

EXPERT OPINION

Secretory Immunoglobulin A (S-IgA) is a major effector molecule at mucosal sites and a commonly used indicator for evaluating respiratory mucosal vaccines. However, the unique physiological structure of the respiratory tract pose significant challenges for the clinical collection and detection of S-IgA. Therefore, it is imperative to develop a sampling method with high collection efficiency and acceptance, a sensitive detection method, reference materials for mucosal antibodies, and to establish a threshold for S-IgA that correlates with clinical protection. Sample collection is even more challenging when evaluating mucosal cell immunity. Therefore, a mucosal cell sampling method with high operability and high tolerance should be established. Targets of the circulatory system capable of reflecting mucosal cellular immunity should also be explored.

Analysis of the protective efficacy of approved COVID-19 vaccines against Omicron variants and the prospects for universal vaccines

By the end of 2022, different variants of Omicron had rapidly spread worldwide, causing a significant impact on the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic situation. Compared with previous variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), these new variants of Omicron exhibited a noticeable degree of mutation. The currently developed platforms to design COVID-19 vaccines include inactivated vaccines, mRNA vaccines, DNA vaccines, recombinant protein vaccines, virus-like particle vaccines, and viral vector vaccines. Many of these platforms have obtained approval from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or the WHO. However, the Omicron variants have spread in countries where vaccination has taken place; therefore, the number of cases has rapidly increased, causing concerns about the effectiveness of these vaccines. This article first discusses the epidemiological trends of the Omicron variant and reviews the latest research progress on available vaccines. Additionally, we discuss progress in the development progress and practical significance of universal vaccines. Next, we analyze the neutralizing antibody effectiveness of approved vaccines against different variants of Omicron, heterologous vaccination, and the effectiveness of multivalent vaccines in preclinical trials. We hope that this review will provide a theoretical basis for the design, development, production, and vaccination strategies of novel coronavirus vaccines, thus helping to end the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Towards a comprehensive view of the herpes B virus

Herpes B virus is a biosafety level 4 pathogen and widespread in its natural host species, macaques. Although most infected monkeys show asymptomatic or mild symptoms, human infections with this virus can cause serious neurological symptoms or fatal encephalomyelitis with a high mortality rate. Herpes B virus can be latent in the sensory ganglia of monkeys and humans, often leading to missed diagnoses. Furthermore, the herpes B virus has extensive antigen crossover with HSV, SA8, and HVP-2, causing false-positive results frequently. Timely diagnosis, along with methods with sensitivity and specificity, are urgent for research on the herpes B virus. The lack of a clear understanding of the host invasion and life cycle of the herpes B virus has led to slow progress in the development of effective vaccines and drugs. This review discusses the research progress and problems of the epidemiology of herpes B virus, detection methods and therapy, hoping to inspire further investigation into important factors associated with transmission of herpes B virus in macaques and humans, and arouse the development of effective vaccines or drugs, to promote the establishment of specific pathogen-free (SPF) monkeys and protect humans to effectively avoid herpes B virus infection.

Inhalation of vaccines and antiviral drugs to fight respiratory virus infections: reasons to prioritize the pulmonary route of administration

Many of the current pandemic threats are caused by viruses that infect the respiratory tract. Remarkably though, the majority of vaccines and antiviral drugs are administered via alternative routes. In this perspective, we argue that the pulmonary route of administration deserves more attention in the search for novel therapeutic strategies against respiratory virus infections. Firstly, vaccines administered at the viral portal of entry can induce a broader immune response, employing the mucosal arm of the immune system; secondly, direct administration of antiviral drugs at the target site leads to superior bioavailability, enabling lower dosing and reducing the chance of side effects. We further elaborate on why the pulmonary route may induce a superior effect compared to the intranasal route of administration and provide reasons why dry powder formulations for inhalation have significant advantages over standard liquid formulations.

Next Generation Mucosal Vaccine Strategy for Respiratory Pathogens

Inducing humoral and cytotoxic mucosal immunity at the sites of pathogen entry has the potential to prevent the infection from getting established. This is different from systemic vaccination, which protects against the development of systemic symptoms. The field of mucosal vaccination has seen fewer technological advances compared to nucleic acid and subunit vaccine advances for injectable vaccine platforms. The advent of the next-generation adenoviral vectors has given a boost to mucosal vaccine research. Basic research into the mechanisms regulating innate and adaptive mucosal immunity and the discovery of effective and safe mucosal vaccine adjuvants will continue to improve mucosal vaccine design. The results from clinical trials of inhaled COVID-19 vaccines demonstrate their ability to induce the proliferation of cytotoxic T cells and the production of secreted IgA and IgG antibodies locally, unlike intramuscular vaccinations. However, these mucosal vaccines induce systemic immune responses at par with systemic vaccinations. This review summarizes the function of the respiratory mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue and the advantages that the adenoviral vectors provide as inhaled vaccine platforms.

Immune-Boosting Effect of the COVID-19 Vaccine: Real-World Bidirectional Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

As the SARS-CoV-2 attenuates and antibodies from the COVID-19 vaccine decline, long-term attention should be paid to the durability of primary booster administration and the preventive effect of the second or multiple booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccine.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the durability of primary booster administration and the preventive effect of second or multiple booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccine.

METHODS

We established a bidirectional cohort in Guizhou Province, China. Eligible participants who had received the primary booster dose were enrolled for blood sample collection and administration of the second booster dose. A retrospective cohort for the time of administration was constructed to evaluate antibody attenuation 6-12 months after the primary booster dose, while a prospective cohort on the vaccine effect of the second booster dose was constructed for 4 months after the second administration.

RESULTS

Between September 21, 2022, and January 30, 2023, a total of 327 participants were included in the final statistical analysis plan. The retrospective cohort revealed that approximately 6-12 months after receiving the primary booster, immunoglobulin G (IgG) slowly declined with time, while immunoglobulin A (IgA) remained almost constant. The prospective cohort showed that 28 days after receiving the second booster, the antibody levels were significantly improved. Higher levels of IgG and IgA were associated with better protection against COVID-19 infection for vaccine recipients. Regarding the protection of antibody levels against post-COVID-19 symptoms, the increase of the IgG had a protective effect on brain fog and sleep quality, while IgA had a protective effect on shortness of breath, brain fog, impaired coordination, and physical pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The IgG and IgA produced by the second booster dose of COVID-19 vaccines can protect against SARS-CoV-2 infection and may alleviate some post-COVID-19 symptoms. Further data and studies on secondary booster administration are required to confirm these conclusions.

Safety, immunogenicity and protection of heterologous boost with an aerosolised Ad5-nCoV after two-dose inactivated COVID-19 vaccines in adults: a multicentre, open-label phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Aerosolised Ad5-nCoV is one of the first licensed mucosal respiratory vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in the world; however, the safety profile of this vaccine has not been reported in a large population yet.

METHODS

This multicentre, open-label phase 3 trial, done in 15 centres in six provinces (Jiangsu, Hunan, Anhui, Chongqing, Yunnan, Shandong) in China, aimed to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of aerosolised Ad5-nCoV in healthy adults (members of the general population with no acute febrile disorders, infectious disease, serious cardiovascular diseases, serious chronic diseases or progressive diseases that cannot be controlled) at least 18 years old, who had received two doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine as their primary regimen. This study contained a non-randomly assigned safety cohort and a centrally randomly assigned (1:1) immunogenicity subcohort. The patients in the immunogenicity subcohort received aerosolised Ad5-nCov (aerosolised Ad5-nCoV group) or inactivated vaccine (inactivated COVID-19 group) The primary endpoints were the incidence of adverse reactions within 28 days following the booster vaccination with aerosolised Ad5-nCoV in the safety population (collected through a daily record of any solicited or unsolicited adverse events filled by each participant) and the geometric mean titre of neutralising antibodies at day 28 after the booster dose in the immunogenicity subcohort (measured with a pseudovirus neutralisation test). This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05204589.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 22, 2022, and March 12, 2022, we recruited 11 410 participants who were screened for eligibility, of whom 10 267 (99·8%) participants (5738 [55·9%] men, 4529 [44·1%] women; median age 53 years [18-92]) received the study drugs: 9847 (95·9%) participants in the open-label cohort to receive aerosolised Ad5-nCoV, and 420 (4·1%) in the immunogenicity subcohort (212 in the aerosolised Ad5-nCoV group and 208 in the inactivated vaccine group). Adverse reactions were reported by 1299 (13%) of 10 059 participants within 28 days after receiving the booster vaccination with aerosolised Ad5-nCoV, but most of the adverse reactions reported were mild to moderate in severity. Participants in the aerosolised Ad5-nCoV group had a significantly higher level of the neutralising antibodies against omicron BA.4/5 (GMT 107·7 [95% CI 88·8-130·7]) than did those in the inactivated vaccine group (17·2 [16·3-18·2]) at day 28.

INTERPRETATION

The heterologous booster regimen with aerosolised Ad5-nCoV is safe and highly immunogenic, boosting both systemic and mucosal immunity against omicron subvariants.

FUNDING

National Natural Science Foundation of China, Jiangsu Provincial Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars, and Jiangsu Provincial Key Project of Science and Technology Plan.

TRANSLATION

For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Study of efficacy and antibody duration to fourth-dose booster of Ad5-nCoV or inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in Chinese adults: a prospective cohort study

Introduction

China experienced a record surge of coronavirus disease 2019 cases in December 2022, during the pandemic.

Methods

We conducted a randomized, parallel-controlled prospective cohort study to evaluate efficacy and antibody duration after a fourth-dose booster with Ad5-nCoV or inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine.

Results

A total of 191 participants aged ≥18 years who had completed a three-dose regimen of the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine 6 months earlier were recruited to receive the intramuscular Ad5-nCoV booster or the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. The Ad5-nCoV group had significantly higher antibody levels compared with the inactivated vaccine group at 6 months after the fourth vaccination dose. After the pandemic, the breakthrough infection rate for the Ad5-nCoV and the inactivated vaccine groups was 77.89% and 78.13%, respectively. Survival curve analysis (p = 0.872) and multivariable logistic regression analysis (p = 0.956) showed no statistically significant differences in breakthrough infection between the two groups.

Discussion

Compared with a homologous fourth dose, a heterologous fourth dose of Ad5-nCoV elicited a higher immunogenic response in healthy adults who had been immunized with three doses of inactivated vaccine. Nevertheless, the efficacy of the two vaccine types was equivalent after the pandemic.