Dataset Information

A randomized, double-blind phase I clinical trial of two recombinant dimeric RBD COVID-19 vaccine candidates: Safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The 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).

Methods

We 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.

Results

Most 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.

Conclusions

Vaccine 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 registry

https://rpcec.sld.cu/en/trials/RPCEC00000338-En.

SUBMITTER: Perez-Rodriguez S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8823954 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description: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.).

Project description:BackgroundTo mitigate the effects of COVID-19, a vaccine is urgently needed. BBV152 is a whole-virion inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine formulated with a toll-like receptor 7/8 agonist molecule adsorbed to alum (Algel-IMDG) or alum (Algel).MethodsWe did a double-blind, multicentre, randomised, controlled phase 1 trial to assess the safety and immunogenicity of BBV152 at 11 hospitals across India. Healthy adults aged 18-55 years who were deemed healthy by the investigator were eligible. Individuals with positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid and/or serology tests were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either one of three vaccine formulations (3 μg with Algel-IMDG, 6 μg with Algel-IMDG, or 6 μg with Algel) or an Algel only control vaccine group. Block randomisation was done with a web response platform. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment group allocation. Two intramuscular doses of vaccines were administered on day 0 (the day of randomisation) and day 14. Primary outcomes were solicited local and systemic reactogenicity events at 2 h and 7 days after vaccination and throughout the full study duration, including serious adverse events. Secondary outcome was seroconversion (at least four-fold increase from baseline) based on wild-type virus neutralisation. Cell-mediated responses were evaluated by intracellular staining and ELISpot. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04471519).FindingsBetween July 13 and 30, 2020, 827 participants were screened, of whom 375 were enrolled. Among the enrolled participants, 100 each were randomly assigned to the three vaccine groups, and 75 were randomly assigned to the control group (Algel only). After both doses, solicited local and systemic adverse reactions were reported by 17 (17%; 95% CI 10·5-26·1) participants in the 3 μg with Algel-IMDG group, 21 (21%; 13·8-30·5) in the 6 μg with Algel-IMDG group, 14 (14%; 8·1-22·7) in the 6 μg with Algel group, and ten (10%; 6·9-23·6) in the Algel-only group. The most common solicited adverse events were injection site pain (17 [5%] of 375 participants), headache (13 [3%]), fatigue (11 [3%]), fever (nine [2%]), and nausea or vomiting (seven [2%]). All solicited adverse events were mild (43 [69%] of 62) or moderate (19 [31%]) and were more frequent after the first dose. One serious adverse event of viral pneumonitis was reported in the 6 μg with Algel group, unrelated to the vaccine. Seroconversion rates (%) were 87·9, 91·9, and 82·8 in the 3 μg with Algel-IMDG, 6 μg with Algel-IMDG, and 6 μg with Algel groups, respectively. CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses were detected in a subset of 16 participants from both Algel-IMDG groups.InterpretationBBV152 led to tolerable safety outcomes and enhanced immune responses. Both Algel-IMDG formulations were selected for phase 2 immunogenicity trials. Further efficacy trials are warranted.FundingBharat Biotech International.