The Antiviral Action of Common Household Disinfectants and Antiseptics Against Murine Hepatitis Virus

The 2003 outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) infected over 8,000 people and killed 784 leaving many questions concerning the effectiveness of common household disinfectants and antiseptics at preventing viral transmission. In order to determine how well standard disinfectants and detergents were at eliminating viral particles from surfaces, the antiviral action of triclosan, pine oil, bleach, chloroxylenol and quaternary ammonium compound/ethanol based products were assayed against Murine Hepatitis Virus (MHV), a virus genetically similar to SARS. Using the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines for the virucidal assay, it was determined that alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium saccharinate in 79% ethanol (Lysol Disinfectant Spray®), chloroxylenol (Dettol Liquid Antiseptic -Disinfectant®), sodium hypochlorite (household bleach), triclosan (Clean & Smooth Soap®) and pine oil (Pine- Sol®) were effective against MHV when used at the recommended concentrations. Products were then diluted outside of the recommended range and were assayed to determine the efficacy of these products when used incorrectly. Three of these products, alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium saccharinate in 79% ethanol (Lysol Disinfectant Spray®), triclosan (Clean & Smooth Soap®), and sodium hypochlorite (household bleach), when used incorrectly, did not demonstrate complete inactivation of MHV and the presence of MHV infection was detectable after product treatment

The Antiviral Action of Common Household Disinfectants and Antiseptics Against Murine Hepatitis Virus, a Potential Surrogate for SARS Coronavirus

Background: The 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) infected over 8000 people and killed 774. Transmission of SARS occurred through direct and indirect contact and large droplet nuclei. The World Health Organization recommended the use of household disinfectants, which have not been previously tested against SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV), to disinfect potentially contaminated environmental surfaces. There is a need for a surrogate test system given the limited availability of the SARS-CoV for testing and biosafety requirements necessary to safely handle it. In this study, the antiviral activity of standard household products was assayed against murine hepatitis virus (MHV), as a potential surrogate for SARS-CoV. Methods: A surface test method, which involves drying an amount of virus on a surface and then applying the product for a specific contact time, was used to determine the virucidal activity. The virus titers and log reductions were determined by the Reed and Muench tissue culture infective dose (TCID)50 end point method. Results: When tested as directed, common household disinfectants or antiseptics, containing either 0.050% of triclosan, 0.12% of PCMX, 0.21% of sodium hypochlorite, 0.23% of pine oil, or 0.10% of a quaternary compound with 79% of ethanol, demonstrated a 3-log reduction or better against MHV without any virus recovered in a 30-second contact time. Conclusion: Common household disinfectants and antiseptics were effective at inactivating MHV, a possible surrogate for SARS-CoV, from surfaces when used as directed. In an outbreak caused by novel agents, it is important to know the effectiveness of disinfectants and antiseptics to prevent or reduce the possibility of human-to-human transmission via surfaces

Safety and immunogenicity of a variant-adapted SARS-CoV-2 recombinant protein vaccine with AS03 adjuvant as a booster in adults primed with authorized vaccines: a phase 3, parallel-group studyResearch in context

Summary: Background: In a parallel-group, international, phase 3 study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04762680), we evaluated prototype (D614) and Beta (B.1.351) variant recombinant spike protein booster vaccines with AS03-adjuvant (CoV2 preS dTM-AS03). Methods: Adults, previously primed with mRNA (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273), adenovirus-vectored (Ad26.CoV2.S, ChAdOx1nCoV-19) or protein (CoV2 preS dTM-AS03 [monovalent D614; MV(D614)]) vaccines were enrolled between 29 July 2021 and 22 February 2022. Participants were stratified by age (18–55 and ≥ 56 years) and received one of the following CoV2 preS dTM-AS03 booster formulations: MV(D614) (n = 1285), MV(B.1.351) (n = 707) or bivalent D614 + B.1.351 (BiV; n = 625). Unvaccinated adults who tested negative on a SARS-CoV-2 rapid diagnostic test (control group, n = 479) received two primary doses, 21 days apart, of MV(D614). Anti-D614G and anti-B.1.351 antibodies were evaluated using validated pseudovirus (lentivirus) neutralization (PsVN) assay 14 days post-booster (day [D]15) in 18–55-year-old BNT162b2-primed participants and compared with those pre-booster (D1) and on D36 in 18–55-year-old controls (primary immunogenicity endpoints). PsVN titers to Omicron BA.1, BA.2 and BA.4/5 subvariants were also evaluated. Safety was evaluated over a 12-month follow-up period. Planned interim analyses are presented up to 14 days post-last vaccination for immunogenicity and over a median duration of 5 months for safety. Findings: All three boosters elicited robust anti-D614G or -B.1.351 PsVN responses for mRNA, adenovirus-vectored and protein vaccine-primed groups. Among BNT162b2-primed adults (18–55 years), geometric means of the individual post-booster versus pre-booster titer ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) were: for MV (D614), 23.37 (18.58–29.38) (anti-D614G); for MV(B.1.351), 35.41 (26.71–46.95) (anti-B.1.351); and for BiV, 14.39 (11.39–18.28) (anti-D614G) and 34.18 (25.84–45.22 (anti-B.1.351). GMT ratios (98.3% CI) versus post-primary vaccination GMTs in controls, were: for MV(D614) booster, 2.16 (1.69; 2.75) [anti-D614G]; for MV(B.1.351), 1.96 (1.54; 2.50) [anti-B.1.351]; and for BiV, 2.34 (1.84; 2.96) [anti-D614G] and 1.39 (1.09; 1.77) [anti-B.1.351]. All booster formulations elicited cross-neutralizing antibodies against Omicron BA.2 (across priming vaccine subgroups), Omicron BA.1 (BNT162b2-primed participants) and Omicron BA.4/5 (BNT162b2-primed participants and MV D614-primed participants). Similar patterns in antibody responses were observed for participants aged ≥56 years. Reactogenicity tended to be transient and mild-to-moderate severity in all booster groups. No safety concerns were identified. Interpretation: CoV2 preS dTM-AS03 boosters demonstrated acceptable safety and elicited robust neutralizing antibodies against multiple variants, regardless of priming vaccine. Funding: Sanofi and Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA)