Dataset Information

Safety and Immunogenicity of Two RNA-Based Covid-19 Vaccine Candidates.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections and the resulting disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), have spread to millions of persons worldwide. Multiple vaccine candidates are under development, but no vaccine is currently available. Interim safety and immunogenicity data about the vaccine candidate BNT162b1 in younger adults have been reported previously from trials in Germany and the United States. METHODS:In an ongoing, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, dose-escalation, phase 1 trial conducted in the United States, we randomly assigned healthy adults 18 to 55 years of age and those 65 to 85 years of age to receive either placebo or one of two lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified RNA vaccine candidates: BNT162b1, which encodes a secreted trimerized SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain; or BNT162b2, which encodes a membrane-anchored SARS-CoV-2 full-length spike, stabilized in the prefusion conformation. The primary outcome was safety (e.g., local and systemic reactions and adverse events); immunogenicity was a secondary outcome. Trial groups were defined according to vaccine candidate, age of the participants, and vaccine dose level (10 ?g, 20 ?g, 30 ?g, and 100 ?g). In all groups but one, participants received two doses, with a 21-day interval between doses; in one group (100 ?g of BNT162b1), participants received one dose. RESULTS:A total of 195 participants underwent randomization. In each of 13 groups of 15 participants, 12 participants received vaccine and 3 received placebo. BNT162b2 was associated with a lower incidence and severity of systemic reactions than BNT162b1, particularly in older adults. In both younger and older adults, the two vaccine candidates elicited similar dose-dependent SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing geometric mean titers, which were similar to or higher than the geometric mean titer of a panel of SARS-CoV-2 convalescent serum samples. CONCLUSIONS:The safety and immunogenicity data from this U.S. phase 1 trial of two vaccine candidates in younger and older adults, added to earlier interim safety and immunogenicity data regarding BNT162b1 in younger adults from trials in Germany and the United States, support the selection of BNT162b2 for advancement to a pivotal phase 2-3 safety and efficacy evaluation. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04368728.).

SUBMITTER: Walsh EE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7583697 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Safety and Immunogenicity of Two RNA-Based Covid-19 Vaccine Candidates.

Walsh Edward E EE Frenck Robert W RW Falsey Ann R AR Kitchin Nicholas N Absalon Judith J Gurtman Alejandra A Lockhart Stephen S Neuzil Kathleen K Mulligan Mark J MJ Bailey Ruth R Swanson Kena A KA Li Ping P Koury Kenneth K Kalina Warren W Cooper David D Fontes-Garfias Camila C Shi Pei-Yong PY Türeci Özlem Ö Tompkins Kristin R KR Lyke Kirsten E KE Raabe Vanessa V Dormitzer Philip R PR Jansen Kathrin U KU Şahin Uğur U Gruber William C WC

The New England journal of medicine 20201014 25

<h4>Background</h4>Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections and the resulting disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), have spread to millions of persons worldwide. Multiple vaccine candidates are under development, but no vaccine is currently available. Interim safety and immunogenicity data about the vaccine candidate BNT162b1 in younger adults have been reported previously from trials in Germany and the United States.<h4>Methods</h4>In an ongoing, placebo-c ...[more]

PMID: 33053279

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is the target for many COVID-19 vaccines. Here we report results for phase I clinical trial of two COVID-19 vaccine candidates based on recombinant dimeric RBD (d-RBD).MethodsWe performed a randomized, double-blind, phase I clinical trial in the National Centre of Toxicology in Havana. Sixty Cuban volunteers aged 19-59 years were randomized into three groups (20 subjects each): 1) FINLAY-FR-1 (50 µg d-RBD plus outer membrane vesicles from N. meningitidis); 2) FINLAY-FR-1A-50 (50 µg d-RBD, three doses); 3) FINLAY-FR-1A-25 (25 µg d-RDB, three doses). The FINLAY-FR-1 group was randomly divided to receive a third dose of the same vaccine candidate (homologous schedule) or FINLAY-FR-1A-50 (heterologous schedule). The primary outcomes were safety and reactogenicity. The secondary outcome was vaccine immunogenicity. Humoral response at baseline and following each vaccination was evaluated using live-virus neutralization test, anti-RBD IgG ELISA and in-vitro neutralization test of RBD:hACE2 interaction.ResultsMost adverse events were of mild intensity (63.5%), solicited (58.8%), and local (61.8%); 69.4% with causal association with vaccination. Serious adverse events were not found. The FINLAY-FR-1 group reported more subjects with adverse events than the other two groups. After the third dose, anti-RBD seroconversion was 100%, 94.4% and 90% for the FINLAY-FR-1, FINLAY-FR-1A-50 and FINLAY-FR-1A-25 respectively. The in-vitro inhibition of RBD:hACE2 interaction increased after the second dose in all formulations. The geometric mean neutralizing titres after the third dose rose significantly in the group vaccinated with FINLAY-FR-1 with respect to the other formulations and the COVID-19 Convalescent Serum Panel. No differences were found between FINLAY-FR-1 homologous or heterologous schedules.ConclusionsVaccine candidates were safe and immunogenic, and induced live-virus neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. The highest values were obtained when outer membrane vesicles were used as adjuvant.Trial registryhttps://rpcec.sld.cu/en/trials/RPCEC00000338-En.

Project description:BackgroundUntil very recently, vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had not been authorized for emergency use in persons younger than 16 years of age. Safe, effective vaccines are needed to protect this population, facilitate in-person learning and socialization, and contribute to herd immunity.MethodsIn this ongoing multinational, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded trial, we randomly assigned participants in a 1:1 ratio to receive two injections, 21 days apart, of 30 μg of BNT162b2 or placebo. Noninferiority of the immune response to BNT162b2 in 12-to-15-year-old participants as compared with that in 16-to-25-year-old participants was an immunogenicity objective. Safety (reactogenicity and adverse events) and efficacy against confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19; onset, ≥7 days after dose 2) in the 12-to-15-year-old cohort were assessed.ResultsOverall, 2260 adolescents 12 to 15 years of age received injections; 1131 received BNT162b2, and 1129 received placebo. As has been found in other age groups, BNT162b2 had a favorable safety and side-effect profile, with mainly transient mild-to-moderate reactogenicity (predominantly injection-site pain [in 79 to 86% of participants], fatigue [in 60 to 66%], and headache [in 55 to 65%]); there were no vaccine-related serious adverse events and few overall severe adverse events. The geometric mean ratio of SARS-CoV-2 50% neutralizing titers after dose 2 in 12-to-15-year-old participants relative to 16-to-25-year-old participants was 1.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.47 to 2.10), which met the noninferiority criterion of a lower boundary of the two-sided 95% confidence interval greater than 0.67 and indicated a greater response in the 12-to-15-year-old cohort. Among participants without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, no Covid-19 cases with an onset of 7 or more days after dose 2 were noted among BNT162b2 recipients, and 16 cases occurred among placebo recipients. The observed vaccine efficacy was 100% (95% CI, 75.3 to 100).ConclusionsThe BNT162b2 vaccine in 12-to-15-year-old recipients had a favorable safety profile, produced a greater immune response than in young adults, and was highly effective against Covid-19. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; C4591001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04368728.).

Project description:BackgroundLipid nanoparticle (LNP) encapsulated self-amplifying RNA (saRNA) is a novel technology formulated as a low dose vaccine against COVID-19.MethodsA phase I first-in-human dose-ranging trial of a saRNA COVID-19 vaccine candidate LNP-nCoVsaRNA, was conducted at Imperial Clinical Research Facility, and participating centres in London, UK, between 19th June to 28th October 2020. Participants received two intramuscular (IM) injections of LNP-nCoVsaRNA at six different dose levels, 0.1-10.0μg, given four weeks apart. An open-label dose escalation was followed by a dose evaluation. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were collected for one week from enrolment, with follow-up at regular intervals (1-8 weeks). The binding and neutralisation capacity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody raised in participant sera was measured by means of an anti-Spike (S) IgG ELISA, immunoblot, SARS-CoV-2 pseudoneutralisation and wild type neutralisation assays. (The trial is registered: ISRCTN17072692, EudraCT 2020-001646-20).Findings192 healthy individuals with no history or serological evidence of COVID-19, aged 18-45 years were enrolled. The vaccine was well tolerated with no serious adverse events related to vaccination. Seroconversion at week six whether measured by ELISA or immunoblot was related to dose (both p<0.001), ranging from 8% (3/39; 0.1μg) to 61% (14/23; 10.0μg) in ELISA and 46% (18/39; 0.3μg) to 87% (20/23; 5.0μg and 10.0μg) in a post-hoc immunoblot assay. Geometric mean (GM) anti-S IgG concentrations ranged from 74 (95% CI, 45-119) at 0.1μg to 1023 (468-2236) ng/mL at 5.0μg (p<0.001) and was not higher at 10.0μg. Neutralisation of SARS-CoV-2 by participant sera was measurable in 15% (6/39; 0.1μg) to 48% (11/23; 5.0μg) depending on dose level received.InterpretationEncapsulated saRNA is safe for clinical development, is immunogenic at low dose levels but failed to induce 100% seroconversion. Modifications to optimise humoral responses are required to realise its potential as an effective vaccine against SARS-CoV-2.FundingThis study was co-funded by grants and gifts from the Medical Research Council UKRI (MC_PC_19076), and the National Institute Health Research/Vaccine Task Force, Partners of Citadel and Citadel Securities, Sir Joseph Hotung Charitable Settlement, Jon Moulton Charity Trust, Pierre Andurand, Restore the Earth.

Project description:BackgroundWe developed a heterologous COVID-19 vaccine consisting of two components, a recombinant adenovirus type 26 (rAd26) vector and a recombinant adenovirus type 5 (rAd5) vector, both carrying the gene for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike glycoprotein (rAd26-S and rAd5-S). We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of two formulations (frozen and lyophilised) of this vaccine.MethodsWe did two open, non-randomised phase 1/2 studies at two hospitals in Russia. We enrolled healthy adult volunteers (men and women) aged 18-60 years to both studies. In phase 1 of each study, we administered intramuscularly on day 0 either one dose of rAd26-S or one dose of rAd5-S and assessed the safety of the two components for 28 days. In phase 2 of the study, which began no earlier than 5 days after phase 1 vaccination, we administered intramuscularly a prime-boost vaccination, with rAd26-S given on day 0 and rAd5-S on day 21. Primary outcome measures were antigen-specific humoral immunity (SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies measured by ELISA on days 0, 14, 21, 28, and 42) and safety (number of participants with adverse events monitored throughout the study). Secondary outcome measures were antigen-specific cellular immunity (T-cell responses and interferon-? concentration) and change in neutralising antibodies (detected with a SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation assay). These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04436471 and NCT04437875.FindingsBetween June 18 and Aug 3, 2020, we enrolled 76 participants to the two studies (38 in each study). In each study, nine volunteers received rAd26-S in phase 1, nine received rAd5-S in phase 1, and 20 received rAd26-S and rAd5-S in phase 2. Both vaccine formulations were safe and well tolerated. The most common adverse events were pain at injection site (44 [58%]), hyperthermia (38 [50%]), headache (32 [42%]), asthenia (21 [28%]), and muscle and joint pain (18 [24%]). Most adverse events were mild and no serious adverse events were detected. All participants produced antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 glycoprotein. At day 42, receptor binding domain-specific IgG titres were 14?703 with the frozen formulation and 11?143 with the lyophilised formulation, and neutralising antibodies were 49·25 with the frozen formulation and 45·95 with the lyophilised formulation, with a seroconversion rate of 100%. Cell-mediated responses were detected in all participants at day 28, with median cell proliferation of 2·5% CD4+ and 1·3% CD8+ with the frozen formulation, and a median cell proliferation of 1·3% CD4+ and 1·1% CD8+ with the lyophilised formulation.InterpretationThe heterologous rAd26 and rAd5 vector-based COVID-19 vaccine has a good safety profile and induced strong humoral and cellular immune responses in participants. Further investigation is needed of the effectiveness of this vaccine for prevention of COVID-19.FundingMinistry of Health of the Russian Federation.

Dataset Information

Safety and Immunogenicity of Two RNA-Based Covid-19 Vaccine Candidates.

Publications

Safety and Immunogenicity of Two RNA-Based Covid-19 Vaccine Candidates.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets