A tale of two vaccines: lessons from polio that could inform the development of an HIV vaccine

Immunological evaluation of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in rhesus macaques

Because of the relatively limited understanding of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pathogenesis, immunological analysis for vaccine development is needed. Mice and macaques were immunized with an inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine prepared by two inactivators. Various immunological indexes were tested, and viral challenges were performed on day 7 or 150 after booster immunization in monkeys. This inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was produced by sequential inactivation with formaldehyde followed by propiolactone. The various antibody responses and specific T cell responses to different viral antigens elicited in immunized animals were maintained for longer than 150 days. This comprehensive immune response could effectively protect vaccinated macaques by inhibiting viral replication in macaques and substantially alleviating immunopathological damage, and no clinical manifestation of immunopathogenicity was observed in immunized individuals during viral challenge. This candidate inactivated vaccine was identified as being effective against SARS-CoV-2 challenge in rhesus macaques.

The 5th Annual One Mind Summit: Lessons Learned About "Science Informing Brain Health Policies and Practice"

Advances in science frequently precede changes in clinical care by several years or even decades. To better understand the path to translation, we invited experts to share their perspectives at the 5th Annual One Mind Summit: "Science Informing Brain Health Policies and Practice," which was held on May 24-25, 2016, in Crystal City, VA. While the translation of brain research throughout the pipeline-from basic science research to patient care-was discussed, the focus was on the implementation of "best evidence" into patient care. The Summit identified key steps, including the need for professional endorsement and clinical guidelines or policies, acceptance by regulators and payers, dissemination and training for clinicians, patient advocacy, and learning healthcare models. The path to implementation was discussed broadly, as well as in the context of a specific project to implement concussion screening in emergency and urgent care centers throughout the United States.

What Has 30 Years of HIV Vaccine Research Taught Us?

When HIV was discovered and established as the cause of AIDS in 1983-1984, many people believed that a vaccine would be rapidly developed. However, 30 years have passed and we are still struggling to develop an elusive vaccine. In trying to achieve that goal, different scientific paradigms have been explored. Although major progress has been made in understanding the scientific basis for HIV vaccine development, efficacy trials have been critical in moving the field forward. Major lessons learned are: the development of an HIV vaccine is an extremely difficult challenge; the temptation of just following the fashion should be avoided; clinical trials are critical, especially large-scale efficacy trials; HIV vaccine research will require long-term commitment; and sustainable collaborations are needed to accelerate the development of an HIV vaccine. Concrete actions must be implemented with the sense of urgency imposed by the severity of the AIDS epidemic.

A brief history of the global effort to develop a preventive HIV vaccine

Soon after HIV was discovered as the cause of AIDS in 1983-1984, there was an expectation that a preventive vaccine would be rapidly developed. In trying to achieve that goal, three successive scientific paradigms have been explored: induction of neutralizing antibodies, induction of cell mediated immunity, and exploration of combination approaches and novel concepts. Although major progress has been made in understanding the scientific basis for HIV vaccine development, efficacy trials have been critical in moving the field forward. In 2009, the field was reinvigorated with the modest results obtained from the RV144 trial conducted in Thailand. Here, we review those vaccine development efforts, with an emphasis on events that occurred during the earlier years. The goal is to provide younger generations of scientists with information and inspiration to continue the search for an HIV vaccine.

Progress in the development of an adenovirus 26 vector platform for HIV vaccines

Evaluation of: Baden LR, Walsh SR, Seaman MS et al. First-in-human evaluation of the safety and immunogenicity of a recombinant adenovirus serotype 26 HIV-1 Env Vaccine (IPCAVD 001). J. Infect. Dis. 207(2), 240-247 (2013). A novel replication-deficient recombinant adenovirus serotype 26 vector expressing the envelope protein of a clade A HIV type 1 was evaluated in a group of 60 healthy human volunteers. Three different doses of the recombinant adenovirus vector were used to assess its safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was found to be generally safe, with no vaccine-related serious adverse events. Although all vaccinated subjects developed neutralizing antibodies against the adenovirus 26 vector, these antibodies did not interfere with the boosting of immune responses against the expressed HIV envelope protein. HIV envelope-specific binding antibodies as well as cellular immune responses were detected in the majority of individuals, persisting for at least 1 year. These results are discussed in the context of previously published protection data in nonhuman primates and of recently published immunological findings with this new vector. Options to proceed to vaccine efficacy trials with this vaccine are reviewed.