Determining immunological correlates of protection against group B streptococcus colonization in pregnant women

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Johannesburg, 2016Introduction: Maternal recto-vaginal colonization with Group B Streptococcus (GBS) is the major risk factor for invasive GBS disease in newborn’s. Maternal vaccination against GBS during pregnancy may prevent or reduce subsequent recto-vaginal colonization in women, which could lower fetal/newborn exposure to GBS and contribute to reducing GBS associated infections during early infancy. In this study we determined the immunological correlates of protection against GBS colonization in black African pregnant women. Methods: We compared GBS serotype-specific serum IgG, mucosal IgG, mucosal IgA and cellular immune responses in relation to GBS rectovaginal acquisition and clearance in pregnant women from 20 to 37+ weeks of gestational age. Furthermore, we also evaluated different media for isolation of GBS from vaginal and rectal swabs. Results: The prevalence of recto-vaginal GBS colonization was 33.0%, 32.7%, 28.7% and 28.4% at 20-25 weeks, 26-30 weeks, 31-35 weeks and 37+ weeks of gestational age, respectively. The most common identified serotypes were Ia (39.2%), III (32.8%) and V (12.4%). The cumulative overall recto-vaginal acquisition rate of new serotypes during the study was 27.9%, including 11.2%, 8.2% and 4.3% for serotypes Ia, III and V, respectively. The recovery of GBS from rectal swabs was significantly higher from direct plating on chromogenic medium (p<0.0001) than from selective broth method. New-acquisition of GBS was inversely correlated with serotype-specific serum IgG concentration for serotype III (p=0.009) and OPA titer for serotype Ia and III (p<0.001 for both) at time of enrolment. Serum IgG concentration significantly associated with protection against recto-vaginal acquisition of the homotypic serotype was ≥1 μg/ml for serotype V (p=0.039), ≥3 μg/ml for serotype Ia (p=0.043) and III (p=0.023). Mucosal IgG correlated significantly with serum IgG with Rho values of 0.839, 0.621 and 0.426 (all p<0.001) for serotype Ia, III and V, respectively. The clearance of serotype-specific GBS recto-vaginal colonization during pregnancy was positively associated with presence of homotypic capsular ELISpot IFN-γ positivity for serotype III (p=0.008) Conclusion: Maternal GBS colonization could be used as end point to evaluate efficacy of GBS vaccine. A serotype-specific capsular polysaccharide based GBS vaccine able to elicit both humoral and cell-mediated capsular immune responses could confer protection against EOD by reducing the exposure of the newborn’s to GBS colonization during the peri-partum period.MT201

Estimated SARS-CoV-2 infection rate and fatality risk in Gauteng Province, South Africa : a population-based seroepidemiological survey

DATA AVAILABILITY : De-identified individual-level data and data sets generated during the current study are available for researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal. If approved, the requestor must sign a data-use agreement. Additionally, the study protocol is available on request. All requests must be addressed to the corresponding author. Data will be available 3 months after publication of this manuscript.BACKGROUND : Limitations in laboratory testing capacity undermine the ability to quantify the overall burden of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. METHODS : We undertook a population-based serosurvey for SARS-CoV-2 infection in 26 subdistricts, Gauteng Province (population 15.9 million), South Africa, to estimate SARS-CoV-2 infection, infection fatality rate (IFR) triangulating seroprevalence, recorded COVID-19 deaths and excess-mortality data. We employed three-stage random household sampling with a selection probability proportional to the subdistrict size, stratifying the subdistrict census-sampling frame by housing type and then selecting households from selected clusters. The survey started on 4 November 2020, 8 weeks after the end of the first wave (SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test positivity had declined to <10% for the first wave) and coincided with the peak of the second wave. The last sampling was performed on 22 January 2021, which was 9 weeks after the SARS-CoV-2 resurgence. Serum SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) immunoglobulin-G (IgG) was measured using a quantitative assay on the Luminex platform. RESULTS : From 6332 individuals in 3453 households, the overall RBD IgG seroprevalence was 19.1% [95% confidence interval (CI): 18.1–20.1%] and similar in children and adults. The seroprevalence varied from 5.5% to 43.2% across subdistricts. Conservatively, there were 2 897 120 (95% CI: 2 743 907–3 056 866) SARS-CoV-2 infections, yielding an infection rate of 19 090 per 100 000 until 9 January 2021, when 330 336 COVID-19 cases were recorded. The estimated IFR using recorded COVID-19 deaths (n = 8198) was 0.28% (95% CI: 0.27–0.30) and 0.67% (95% CI: 0.64–0.71) assuming 90% of modelled natural excess deaths were due to COVID-19 (n = 21 582). Notably, 53.8% (65/122) of individuals with previous self-reported confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were RBD IgG seronegative. CONCLUSIONS : The calculated number of SARS-CoV-2 infections was 7.8-fold greater than the recorded COVID-19 cases. The calculated SARS-CoV-2 IFR varied 2.39-fold when calculated using reported COVID-19 deaths (0.28%) compared with excess-mortality-derived COVID-19-attributable deaths (0.67%). Waning RBD IgG may have inadvertently underestimated the number of SARS-CoV-2 infections and conversely overestimated the mortality risk. Epidemic preparedness and response planning for future COVID-19 waves will need to consider the true magnitude of infections, paying close attention to excess-mortality trends rather than absolute reported COVID-19 deaths.The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.https://academic.oup.com/ijehj2023Family Medicin

Combinatorial multimer staining and spectral flow cytometry facilitate quantification and characterization of polysaccharide-specific B cell immunity

Bacterial capsular polysaccharides are important vaccine immunogens. However, the study of polysaccharide-specific immune responses has been hindered by technical restrictions. Here, we developed and validated a high-throughput method to analyse antigen-specific B cells using combinatorial staining with fluorescently-labelled capsular polysaccharide multimers. Concurrent staining of 25 cellular markers further enables the in-depth characterization of polysaccharide-specific cells. We used this assay to simultaneously analyse 14 Streptococcus pneumoniae or 5 Streptococcus agalactiae serotype-specific B cell populations. The phenotype of polysaccharide-specific B cells was associated with serotype specificity, vaccination history and donor population. For example, we observed a link between non-class switched (IgM+) memory B cells and vaccine-inefficient S. pneumoniae serotypes 1 and 3. Moreover, B cells had increased activation in donors from South Africa, which has high-incidence of S. agalactiae invasive disease, compared to Dutch donors. This assay allows for the characterization of heterogeneity in B cell immunity that may underlie immunization efficacy

Systematic review of Group B Streptococcal capsular types, sequence types and surface proteins as potential vaccine candidates.

BACKGROUND: 21 million pregnant women worldwide (18%) are estimated to carry Group B Streptococcus (GBS), which is a risk for invasive disease in newborns, pregnant women, and stillbirths. Adults ≥ 60 years or with underlying health conditions are also vulnerable to invasive GBS disease. We undertook systematic reviews on GBS organism characteristics including: capsular polysaccharide (serotype), sequence type (multi-locus sequence types (MLST)), and virulence proteins. We synthesised data by at-risk populations, to inform vaccine development. METHODS: We conducted systematic reviews and meta-analyses to estimate proportions of GBS serotypes for at risk populations: maternal colonisation, invasive disease in pregnant women, stillbirths, infants 0-90 days age, and older adults (≥60 years). We considered regional variation and time trends (2001-2018). For these at-risk population groups, we summarised reported MLST and surface proteins. RESULTS: Based on 198 studies (29247isolates), 93-99% of GBS isolates were serotypes Ia, Ib, II, III, IV and V. Regional variation is likely, but data gaps are apparent, even for maternal colonisation which has most data. Serotype III dominates for infant invasive disease (60%) and GBS-associated stillbirths (41%). ST17 accounted for a high proportion of infant invasive disease (41%; 95%CI: 35-47) and was found almost exclusively in serotype III strains, less present in maternal colonisation (9%; 95%CI:6-13),(4%; 95%CI:0-11) infant colonisation, and adult invasive disease (4%, 95%CI:2-6). Percentages of strains with at least one of alp 1, alp2/3, alpha C or Rib surface protein targets were 87% of maternal colonisation, 97% infant colonisation, 93% infant disease and 99% adult invasive disease. At least one of three pilus islands proteins were reported in all strains. DISCUSSION: A hexavalent vaccine (serotypes Ia, Ib, II, III, IV and V) might provide comprehensive cover for all at-risk populations. Surveillance of circulating, disease-causing target proteins is useful to inform vaccines not targeting capsular polysaccharide. Addressing data gaps especially by world region and some at-risk populations (notably stillbirths) is fundamental to evidence-based decision-making during vaccine design

Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in people living with and without HIV in South Africa: an interim analysis of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1B/2A trial.

BACKGROUND: People living with HIV are at an increased risk of fatal outcome when admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19 compared with HIV-negative individuals. We aimed to assess safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in people with HIV and HIV-negative individuals in South Africa. METHODS: In this ongoing, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1B/2A trial (COV005), people with HIV and HIV-negative participants aged 18-65 years were enrolled at seven South African locations and were randomly allocated (1:1) with full allocation concealment to receive a prime-boost regimen of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, with two doses given 28 days apart. Eligibility criteria for people with HIV included being on antiretroviral therapy for at least 3 months, with a plasma HIV viral load of less than 1000 copies per mL. In this interim analysis, safety and reactogenicity was assessed in all individuals who received at least one dose of ChAdOx1 nCov 19 between enrolment and Jan 15, 2021. Primary immunogenicity analyses included participants who received two doses of trial intervention and were SARS-CoV-2 seronegative at baseline. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04444674, and the Pan African Clinicals Trials Registry, PACTR202006922165132. FINDINGS: Between June 24 and Nov 12, 2020, 104 people with HIV and 70 HIV-negative individuals were enrolled. 102 people with HIV (52 vaccine; 50 placebo) and 56 HIV-negative participants (28 vaccine; 28 placebo) received the priming dose, 100 people with HIV (51 vaccine; 49 placebo) and 46 HIV-negative participants (24 vaccine; 22 placebo) received two doses (priming and booster). In participants seronegative for SARS-CoV-2 at baseline, there were 164 adverse events in those with HIV (86 vaccine; 78 placebo) and 237 in HIV-negative participants (95 vaccine; 142 placebo). Of seven serious adverse events, one severe fever in a HIV-negative participant was definitely related to trial intervention and one severely elevated alanine aminotranferase in a participant with HIV was unlikely related; five others were deemed unrelated. One person with HIV died (unlikely related). People with HIV and HIV-negative participants showed vaccine-induced serum IgG responses against wild-type Wuhan-1 Asp614Gly (also known as D614G). For participants seronegative for SARS-CoV-2 antigens at baseline, full-length spike geometric mean concentration (GMC) at day 28 was 163·7 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL (95% CI 89·9-298·1) for people with HIV (n=36) and 112·3 BAU/mL (61·7-204·4) for HIV-negative participants (n=23), with a rising day 42 GMC booster response in both groups. Baseline SARS-CoV-2 seropositive people with HIV demonstrated higher antibody responses after each vaccine dose than did people with HIV who were seronegative at baseline. High-level binding antibody cross-reactivity for the full-length spike and receptor-binding domain of the beta variant (B.1.351) was seen regardless of HIV status. In people with HIV who developed high titre responses, predominantly those who were receptor-binding domain seropositive at enrolment, neutralising activity against beta was retained. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 was well tolerated, showing favourable safety and immunogenicity in people with HIV, including heightened immunogenicity in SARS-CoV-2 baseline-seropositive participants. People with HIV showed cross-reactive binding antibodies to the beta variant and Asp614Gly wild-type, and high responders retained neutralisation against beta. FUNDING: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, South African Medical Research Council, UK Research and Innovation, UK National Institute for Health Research, and the South African Medical Research Council

Efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Covid-19 Vaccine against the B.1.351 Variant.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of the safety and efficacy of vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in different populations is essential, as is investigation of the efficacy of the vaccines against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including the B.1.351 (501Y.V2) variant first identified in South Africa. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial to assess the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) in people not infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in South Africa. Participants 18 to less than 65 years of age were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses of vaccine containing 5×1010 viral particles or placebo (0.9% sodium chloride solution) 21 to 35 days apart. Serum samples obtained from 25 participants after the second dose were tested by pseudovirus and live-virus neutralization assays against the original D614G virus and the B.1.351 variant. The primary end points were safety and efficacy of the vaccine against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic coronavirus 2019 illness (Covid-19) more than 14 days after the second dose. RESULTS: Between June 24 and November 9, 2020, we enrolled 2026 HIV-negative adults (median age, 30 years); 1010 and 1011 participants received at least one dose of placebo or vaccine, respectively. Both the pseudovirus and the live-virus neutralization assays showed greater resistance to the B.1.351 variant in serum samples obtained from vaccine recipients than in samples from placebo recipients. In the primary end-point analysis, mild-to-moderate Covid-19 developed in 23 of 717 placebo recipients (3.2%) and in 19 of 750 vaccine recipients (2.5%), for an efficacy of 21.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], -49.9 to 59.8). Among the 42 participants with Covid-19, 39 cases (95.1% of 41 with sequencing data) were caused by the B.1.351 variant; vaccine efficacy against this variant, analyzed as a secondary end point, was 10.4% (95% CI, -76.8 to 54.8). The incidence of serious adverse events was balanced between the vaccine and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: A two-dose regimen of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine did not show protection against mild-to-moderate Covid-19 due to the B.1.351 variant. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04444674; Pan African Clinical Trials Registry number, PACTR202006922165132)

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

BackgroundA safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials.MethodsThis analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674.FindingsBetween April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation.InterpretationChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials.FundingUK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D’Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. Funding: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D’Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials