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

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

The early impact of the IDEA collaboration results: how the results changed prescribing practice

Background: Traditionally, adjuvant treatment for colon cancer has been 6 months of combination chemotherapy. Six phase III trials tested the hypothesis that 3 months is non-inferior in efficacy to 6 months and reduces long-term side effects for patients. The results were pooled in the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant therapy (IDEA) collaboration. Although this did not meet the non-inferiority endpoint, a pre-planned subgroup analysis by chemotherapy regimen did demonstrate non-inferiority for capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX). Additionally, risk stratification by T and N stage was defined. Methods: In an effort to understand the real-life impact of these results, four months after the IDEA results, an online survey was distributed to clinicians to ask their approach to the adjuvant treatment of patients with stage III colon cancer. Results: The survey was completed by 458 clinicians from 12 countries. Assuming that 6 months of treatment was the pre-trial standard of care, 89.5% of clinicians reported they had changed practice to prescribe 3 months of treatment for some patients. For patients with low-risk stage III disease, there was a preference for 3 months and for patients with high-risk stage III disease, most clinicians still prescribed 6 months at that time. Overall, CAPOX was the most popular regimen. There were important differences in responses depending on the location of respondent and T and N stage of disease. Conclusion: This survey shows that the IDEA collaboration was been practice changing but reveals important differences in the way results are interpreted by individual clinicians

The Role of Metabolite-sensing G Protein-Coupled Receptors in inflammation and metabolic disease

Significance: Great attention has been placed on the link between metabolism and immune function giving rise to the term “immunometabolism.” It is widely accepted that inflammation and oxidative stress are key processes that underlie metabolic complications during obesity, diabetes, and atherosclerosis. Therefore, identifying the mechanisms and mediators that are involved in the regulation of both inflammation and metabolic homeostasis is of high scientific and therapeutic interest. Recent Advances: G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) that signal in response to metabolites have emerged as attractive therapeutic targets in inflammatory disease. Critical Issues and Future Directions: In this review, we discuss recent findings about the physiological role of the main metabolite-sensing GPCRs, their implication in immunometabolic disorders, their principal endogenous and synthetic ligands, and their potential as drug targets in inflammation and metabolic disease

Activation of the Immune-Metabolic Receptor GPR84 Enhances Inflammation and Phagocytosis in Macrophages

GPR84 is a member of the metabolic G protein-coupled receptor family, and its expression has been described predominantly in immune cells. GPR84 activation is involved in the inflammatory response, but the mechanisms by which it modulates inflammation have been incompletely described. In this study, we investigated GPR84 expression, activation, and function in macrophages to establish the role of the receptor during the inflammatory response. We observed that GPR84 expression in murine tissues is increased by endotoxemia, hyperglycemia, and hypercholesterolemia. Ex vivo studies revealed that GPR84 mRNA expression is increased by LPS and other pro-inflammatory molecules in different murine and human macrophage populations. Likewise, high glucose concentrations and the presence of oxidized LDL increased GPR84 expression in macrophages. Activation of the GPR84 receptor with a selective agonist, 6-(octylamino) pyrimidine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione (6-n-octylaminouracil, 6-OAU), enhanced the expression of phosphorylated Akt, p-ERK, and p65 nuclear translocation under inflammatory conditions and elevated the expression levels of the inflammatory mediators TNFa, IL-6, IL-12B, CCL2, CCL5, and CXCL1. In addition, GPR84 activation triggered increased bacterial adhesion and phagocytosis in macrophages. The enhanced inflammatory response mediated by 6-OAU was not observed in GPR84-/-cells nor in macrophages treated with a selective GPR84 antagonist. Collectively, our results reveal that GPR84 functions as an enhancer of inflammatory signaling in macrophages once inflammation is established. Therefore, molecules that antagonize the GPR84 receptor may be potential therapeutic tools in inflammatory and metabolic diseases

data_sheet_1_Activation of the Immune-Metabolic Receptor GPR84 Enhances Inflammation and Phagocytosis in Macrophages.PDF

<p>GPR84 is a member of the metabolic G protein-coupled receptor family, and its expression has been described predominantly in immune cells. GPR84 activation is involved in the inflammatory response, but the mechanisms by which it modulates inflammation have been incompletely described. In this study, we investigated GPR84 expression, activation, and function in macrophages to establish the role of the receptor during the inflammatory response. We observed that GPR84 expression in murine tissues is increased by endotoxemia, hyperglycemia, and hypercholesterolemia. Ex vivo studies revealed that GPR84 mRNA expression is increased by LPS and other pro-inflammatory molecules in different murine and human macrophage populations. Likewise, high glucose concentrations and the presence of oxidized LDL increased GPR84 expression in macrophages. Activation of the GPR84 receptor with a selective agonist, 6-(octylamino) pyrimidine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione (6-n-octylaminouracil, 6-OAU), enhanced the expression of phosphorylated Akt, p-ERK, and p65 nuclear translocation under inflammatory conditions and elevated the expression levels of the inflammatory mediators TNFα, IL-6, IL-12B, CCL2, CCL5, and CXCL1. In addition, GPR84 activation triggered increased bacterial adhesion and phagocytosis in macrophages. The enhanced inflammatory response mediated by 6-OAU was not observed in GPR84^−/− cells nor in macrophages treated with a selective GPR84 antagonist. Collectively, our results reveal that GPR84 functions as an enhancer of inflammatory signaling in macrophages once inflammation is established. Therefore, molecules that antagonize the GPR84 receptor may be potential therapeutic tools in inflammatory and metabolic diseases.</p

Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2: a preliminary report of a phase 1/2, single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) might be curtailed by vaccination. We assessed the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of a viral vectored coronavirus vaccine that expresses the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We did a phase 1/2, single-blind, randomised controlled trial in five trial sites in the UK of a chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) expressing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein compared with a meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MenACWY) as control. Healthy adults aged 18-55 years with no history of laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection or of COVID-19-like symptoms were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 at a dose of 5 × 1010 viral particles or MenACWY as a single intramuscular injection. A protocol amendment in two of the five sites allowed prophylactic paracetamol to be administered before vaccination. Ten participants assigned to a non-randomised, unblinded ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 prime-boost group received a two-dose schedule, with the booster vaccine administered 28 days after the first dose. Humoral responses at baseline and following vaccination were assessed using a standardised total IgG ELISA against trimeric SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, a muliplexed immunoassay, three live SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation assays (a 50% plaque reduction neutralisation assay [PRNT50]; a microneutralisation assay [MNA50, MNA80, and MNA90]; and Marburg VN), and a pseudovirus neutralisation assay. Cellular responses were assessed using an ex-vivo interferon-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay. The co-primary outcomes are to assess efficacy, as measured by cases of symptomatic virologically confirmed COVID-19, and safety, as measured by the occurrence of serious adverse events. Analyses were done by group allocation in participants who received the vaccine. Safety was assessed over 28 days after vaccination. Here, we report the preliminary findings on safety, reactogenicity, and cellular and humoral immune responses. The study is ongoing, and was registered at ISRCTN, 15281137, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and May 21, 2020, 1077 participants were enrolled and assigned to receive either ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (n=543) or MenACWY (n=534), ten of whom were enrolled in the non-randomised ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 prime-boost group. Local and systemic reactions were more common in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and many were reduced by use of prophylactic paracetamol, including pain, feeling feverish, chills, muscle ache, headache, and malaise (all p<0·05). There were no serious adverse events related to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. In the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, spike-specific T-cell responses peaked on day 14 (median 856 spot-forming cells per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells, IQR 493-1802; n=43). Anti-spike IgG responses rose by day 28 (median 157 ELISA units [EU], 96-317; n=127), and were boosted following a second dose (639 EU, 360-792; n=10). Neutralising antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 were detected in 32 (91%) of 35 participants after a single dose when measured in MNA80 and in 35 (100%) participants when measured in PRNT50. After a booster dose, all participants had neutralising activity (nine of nine in MNA80 at day 42 and ten of ten in Marburg VN on day 56). Neutralising antibody responses correlated strongly with antibody levels measured by ELISA (R2=0·67 by Marburg VN; p<0·001). INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 showed an acceptable safety profile, and homologous boosting increased antibody responses. These results, together with the induction of both humoral and cellular immune responses, support large-scale evaluation of this candidate vaccine in an ongoing phase 3 programme. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and the German Center for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner site Gießen-Marburg-Langen