Live Attenuated Varicella-Zoster Vaccine in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Recipients

AbstractHematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients are at risk for varicella-zoster virus (VZV) reactivation. Vaccination may help restore VZV immunity; however, the available live attenuated VZV vaccine (Zostavax) is contraindicated in immunocompromised hosts. We report our experience with using a single dose of VZV vaccine in 110 adult autologous and allogeneic HSCT recipients who were about 2 years after transplantation, free of graft-versus-host disease, and not receiving immunosuppression. One hundred eight vaccine recipients (98.2%) had no clinically apparent adverse events with a median follow-up period of 9.5 months (interquartile range, 6 to 16; range, 2 to 28). Two vaccine recipients (1.8%) developed a skin rash (one zoster-like rash with associated pain, one varicella-like) within 42 days post-vaccination that resolved with antiviral therapy. We could not confirm if these rashes were due to vaccine (Oka) or wild-type VZV. No other possible cases of VZV reactivation have occurred with about 1178 months of follow-up. Live attenuated zoster vaccine appears generally safe in this population when vaccinated as noted; the overall vaccination risk needs to be weighed against the risk of wild-type VZV disease in this high-risk population

US201 Study: A Phase 2, Randomized Proof-of-Concept Trial of Favipiravir for the Treatment of COVID-19

Background: Favipiravir is used to treat influenza, and studies demonstrate that it has antiviral activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods: We performed a randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 2 proof-of-concept trial of favipiravir in hospitalized adult patients with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients were randomized to standard of care (SOC) or favipiravir treatment (1800mg per os twice a day [b.i.d.] on day 1, followed by 1000mg b.i.d. for 13 days). The primary end point was time to viral clearance on day 29. Results: Fifty patients were enrolled and stratified by disease severity (critical disease, severe disease, or mild to moderate disease). Nineteen patients were censored from the event of viral clearance based on being SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative at the study outset, being PCR-positive at day 29, or because of loss to follow-up. Data from the 31 remaining patients who achieved viral clearance show enhanced viral clearance in the favipiravir group compared with the SOC group by day 29, with 72% of the favipiravir group and 52% of the SOC group being evaluable for viral clearance through day 29. The median time to viral clearance was 16.0 days (90% CI, 12.0 to 29.0) in the favipiravir group and 30.0 days (90% CI, 12.0 to 31.0) in the SOC group. A post hoc analysis revealed an effect in the subgroup of patients who were neutralizing antibody-negative at randomization. Treatment-emergent adverse events were equally distributed between the groups. Conclusions: We demonstrate that favipiravir can be safely administered to hospitalized adults with COVID-19 and believe that further studies are warranted. ClinicalTrialsgov registration: NCT04358549

An Avid Imitator

We present a case of disseminated cryptococcal disease, coexisting with and mimicking lymphoma. Determination of serum cryptococcal antigen should be considered for lymphopenic patients with hematologic malignancies, presenting with unexplained fever, and/or lymphadenopathy and/or pulmonary findings. Patients with hematologic malignancies treated with chemotherapy regimens are susceptible to diverse opportunistic infections. Therefore, in this patient population, it is often necessary to obtain a definitive pathologic diagnosis, to diagnose uncommon syndromes and guide management

Molecular Methods To Improve Diagnosis and Identification of Mucormycosis

Mucormycosis is difficult to diagnose. Samples from suspected cases often fail to grow Mucorales in microbiologic cultures. We identified all hematologic malignancy and stem cell transplant patients diagnosed with proven mucormycosis between 2001 and 2009 at Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Seminested PCR targeting Mucorales 18S ribosomal DNA and sequencing were performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples. Of 29 cases of mucormycosis, 27 had tissue samples available for PCR and sequencing. Mucorales PCR was positive in 22. Among 12 culture-positive cases, 10 were PCR positive and sequencing was concordant with culture results to the genus level in 9. Among 15 culture-negative cases, PCR was positive and sequencing allowed genus identification in 12. Mucorales PCR is useful for confirmation of the diagnosis of mucormycosis and for further characterization of the infection in cases where cultures are negative

Pharmacokinetics of Ganciclovir after Oral Valganciclovir versus Intravenous Ganciclovir in Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant Patients with Graft-versus-Host Disease of the Gastrointestinal Tract

AbstractThe pharmacokinetics of ganciclovir after oral valganciclovir versus intravenous ganciclovir were compared in allogeneic stem cell transplant recipients with stable graft-versus-host disease of the gastrointestinal tract. Twenty-two evaluable adult patients were randomized to receive a single dose of open-label study drug (900 mg of oral valganciclovir or 5 mg/kg of intravenous ganciclovir). After a washout period of 2 to 7 days, patients were crossed over to receive the alternate study drug. Ganciclovir and valganciclovir concentrations in plasma were measured over 24 hours after dosing. Noninferiority of 900 mg of valganciclovir relative to intravenous ganciclovir was concluded if the lower limit of the 1-sided 95% confidence interval of the ratio of least-square means of the ganciclovir area under the curve (AUC) for the 2 study drugs was >80%. Valganciclovir was found to be rapidly absorbed and converted into ganciclovir. The ganciclovir exposure after 900 mg of valganciclovir noninferior to that of intravenous ganciclovir (AUC0-∞, 52.1 and 53.8 μg·h/mL, respectively; 95% confidence interval of the ratio of least square means of AUC0-∞, 82.48%-118.02%). Oral valganciclovir could be a useful alternative to intravenous ganciclovir in certain stable stem cell transplant patients who require prophylaxis or preemptive therapy for cytomegalovirus infection

Protein Dose-Sparing Effect of AS01B Adjuvant in a Randomized Preventive HIV Vaccine Trial of ALVAC-HIV (vCP2438) and Adjuvanted Bivalent Subtype C gp120.

BACKGROUND: HVTN 120 is a phase 1/2a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) vaccine trial that evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of ALVAC-HIV (vCP2438) and MF59- or AS01B-adjuvanted bivalent subtype C gp120 Env protein at 2 dose levels in healthy HIV-uninfected adults. METHODS: Participants received ALVAC-HIV (vCP2438) alone or placebo at months 0 and 1. At months 3 and 6, participants received either placebo, ALVAC-HIV (vCP2438) with 200 μg of bivalent subtype C gp120 adjuvanted with MF59 or AS01B, or ALVAC-HIV (vCP2438) with 40 μg of bivalent subtype C gp120 adjuvanted with AS01B. Primary outcomes were safety and immune responses. RESULTS: We enrolled 160 participants, 55% women, 18-40 years old (median age 24 years) of whom 150 received vaccine and 10 placebo. Vaccines were generally safe and well tolerated. At months 6.5 and 12, CD4+ T-cell response rates and magnitudes were higher in the AS01B-adjuvanted groups than in the MF59-adjuvanted group. At month 12, HIV-specific Env-gp120 binding antibody response magnitudes in the 40 μg gp120/AS01B group were higher than in either of the 200 μg gp120 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The 40 μg dose gp120/AS01B regimen elicited the highest CD4+ T-cell and binding antibody responses. Clinical Trials Registration . NCT03122223

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccination

BACKGROUND: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. METHODS: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 \u3e7-15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. FINDINGS: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05-0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01-0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. INTERPRETATION: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health

Clinical and Demographic Factors Associated With COVID-19, Severe COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Adults: A Secondary Cross-Protocol Analysis of 4 Randomized Clinical Trials

IMPORTANCE: Current data identifying COVID-19 risk factors lack standardized outcomes and insufficiently control for confounders. OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors associated with COVID-19, severe COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This secondary cross-protocol analysis included 4 multicenter, international, randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled, COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials with harmonized protocols established by the COVID-19 Prevention Network. Individual-level data from participants randomized to receive placebo within each trial were combined and analyzed. Enrollment began July 2020 and the last data cutoff was in July 2021. Participants included adults in stable health, at risk for SARS-CoV-2, and assigned to the placebo group within each vaccine trial. Data were analyzed from April 2022 to February 2023. EXPOSURES: Comorbid conditions, demographic factors, and SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk at the time of enrollment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Coprimary outcomes were COVID-19 and severe COVID-19. Multivariate Cox proportional regression models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CIs for baseline covariates, accounting for trial, region, and calendar time. Secondary outcomes included severe COVID-19 among people with COVID-19, subclinical SARS-CoV-2 infection, and SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: A total of 57 692 participants (median [range] age, 51 [18-95] years; 11 720 participants [20.3%] aged ≥65 years; 31 058 participants [53.8%] assigned male at birth) were included. The analysis population included 3270 American Indian or Alaska Native participants (5.7%), 7849 Black or African American participants (13.6%), 17 678 Hispanic or Latino participants (30.6%), and 40 745 White participants (70.6%). Annualized incidence was 13.9% (95% CI, 13.3%-14.4%) for COVID-19 and 2.0% (95% CI, 1.8%-2.2%) for severe COVID-19. Factors associated with increased rates of COVID-19 included workplace exposure (high vs low: aHR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.16-1.58]; medium vs low: aHR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.21-1.65]; P \u3c .001) and living condition risk (very high vs low risk: aHR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.21-1.66]; medium vs low risk: aHR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.08-1.32]; P \u3c .001). Factors associated with decreased rates of COVID-19 included previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.09-0.19]; P \u3c .001), age 65 years or older (aHR vs age CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this secondary cross-protocol analysis of 4 randomized clinical trials, exposure and demographic factors had the strongest associations with outcomes; results could inform mitigation strategies for SARS-CoV-2 and viruses with comparable epidemiological characteristics