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

Novel null mutations in the EYS gene are a frequent cause of autosomal recessive retinitis pigmentosa in the Israeli population.

Contains fulltext : 87206_pre.pdf (preprint version ) (Open Access) Contains fulltext : 87206_pub.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)PURPOSE: To characterize the role of EYS, a recently identified retinal disease gene, in families with inherited retinal degenerations in the Israeli and Palestinian populations. METHODS: Clinical and molecular analyses included family history, ocular examination, full-field electroretinography (ERG), perimetry, autozygosity mapping, mutation detection, and estimation of mutation age. RESULTS: Autozygosity mapping was performed in 171 consanguineous Israeli and Palestinian families with inherited retinal degenerations. Large homozygous regions, harboring the EYS gene, were identified in 15 of the families. EYS mutation analysis in the 15 index cases, followed by genotyping of specific mutations in an additional 121 cases of inherited retinal degenerations, revealed five novel null mutations, two of which are founder mutations, in 10 Israeli and Palestinian families with autosomal recessive retinitis pigmentosa (arRP). The most common mutation identified was a founder mutation in the Moroccan Jewish subpopulation. The ESTIAGE program produced an estimate that the age of the most recent common ancestor was 26 generations. The retinal phenotype in most patients was typical yet relatively severe RP, with an early age of onset and nonrecordable ERGs on presentation. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that EYS is currently the most commonly mutated arRP gene in the Israeli population, mainly due to founder mutations. EYS mutations were associated with an RP phenotype in all patients. The authors concluded that the gene plays only a minor role in causing other retinal phenotypes.01 september 201

Mutations in <em>CRB1</em> are a relatively common cause of autosomal recessive early-onset retinal degeneration in the Israeli and Palestinian populations.

PURPOSE. We evaluated the role of Crumbs homolog 1 (CRB1) in autosomal recessive (AR) retinal diseases in the Israeli and Palestinian populations using homozygosity mapping. METHODS. Clinical analysis included family history, ocular examination, full-field electroretinography (ERG), and funduscopy. Molecular analysis included homozygosity mapping using whole genome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays and mutation analysis of CRB1. RESULTS. We recruited over 400 families with AR nonsyndromic retinal degenerations, including retinitis pigmentosa (RP) and Leber congenital amaurosis (LCA). SNP array analysis was performed on 175 index cases, eight of whom carried a homozygous region on chromosome 1 harboring CRB1. A subsequent CRB1 mutation analysis of the eight families, followed by screening of candidate founder mutations in the whole cohort of patients, revealed a total of 13 mutations, six of which are novel, in 15 families. Nine mutations were family-specific, and four were founder mutations identified in patients of Arab-Muslim origin, and Jews originated from Iraq and Kurdistan. Interestingly, a null mutation on at least one of the two mutated CRB1 alleles results in the LCA diagnosis, whereas patients carrying missense mutations were diagnosed with either RP or LCA. The average age at which CRB1 patients were referred to ERG testing was young (11 years). Of the 30 identified CRB1 patients, five had Coats-like exudative vasculopathy. CONCLUSIONS. Our data show that CRB1 mutations are a relatively frequent cause of AR early-onset retinal degeneration in the Israeli and Palestinian populations (10% of LCA families), and causes severe retinal degeneration at an early age

Identification of mutations causing inherited retinal degenerations in the Israeli and Palestinian populations using homozygosity mapping.

Methods. Clinical analysis included family history, ocular examination, full-field electroretinography (ERG), and funduscopy. Molecular analysis included homozygosity mapping and mutation analysis of candidate genes. Results. We recruited for the study families with AR nonsyndromic retinal degenerations, including mainly retinitis pigmentosa (RP), cone-rod degeneration (CRD), and Leber congenital amaurosis (LCA). With the aim to identify the causative genes in these families, we performed homozygosity mapping using whole genome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays in 125 families. The analysis revealed the identification of 14 mutations, 5 of which are novel, in 16 of the families. The mutations were identified in the following eight genes: RDH12, PROM1, MFRP, TULP1, LCA5, CEP290, NR2E3, and EYS. While most patients had a retinal disease that is compatible with the causing gene, in some cases new clinical features are evident. Conclusions. Homozygosity mapping is a powerful tool to identify genetic defects underlying heterogeneous AR disorders, such as RP and LCA, in consanguineous and nonconsanguineous patients. The identification of significant and large homozygous regions, which do not include any known retinal disease genes, may be a useful tool to identify novel disease-causing genes, using next generation sequencing

Halting ErbB-2 isoforms retrograde transport to the nucleus as a new theragnostic approach for triple-negative breast cancer

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is clinically defined by the absence of estrogen and progesterone receptors and the lack of membrane overexpression or gene amplification of receptor tyrosine kinase ErbB-2/HER2. Due to TNBC heterogeneity, clinical biomarkers and targeted therapies for this disease remain elusive. We demonstrated that ErbB-2 is localized in the nucleus (NErbB-2) of TNBC cells and primary tumors, from where it drives growth. We also discovered that TNBC expresses both wild-type ErbB-2 (WTErbB-2) and alternative ErbB-2 isoform c (ErbB-2c). Here, we revealed that the inhibitors of the retrograde transport Retro-2 and its cyclic derivative Retro-2.1 evict both WTErbB-2 and ErbB-2c from the nucleus of BC cells and tumors. Using BC cells from several molecular subtypes, as well as normal breast cells, we demonstrated that Retro-2 specifically blocks proliferation of BC cells expressing NErbB-2. Importantly, Retro-2 eviction of both ErbB-2 isoforms from the nucleus resulted in a striking growth abrogation in multiple TNBC preclinical models, including tumor explants and xenografts. Our mechanistic studies in TNBC cells revealed that Retro-2 induces a differential accumulation of WTErbB-2 at the early endosomes and the plasma membrane, and of ErbB-2c at the Golgi, shedding new light both on Retro-2 action on endogenous protein cargoes undergoing retrograde transport, and on the biology of ErbB-2 splicing variants. In addition, we revealed that the presence of a functional signal peptide and a nuclear export signal (NES), both located at the N-terminus of WTErbB-2, and absent in ErbB-2c, accounts for the differential subcellular distribution of ErbB-2 isoforms upon Retro-2 treatment. Our present discoveries provide evidence for the rational repurposing of Retro-2 as a novel therapeutic agent for TNBC.Fil: Madera, Santiago. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Izzo, Franco. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Chervo, María Florencia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Dupont, Agustina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Chiauzzi, Violeta Alicia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Bruni, Sofia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Petrillo, Ezequiel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Fisiología, Biología Molecular y Neurociencias. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Fisiología, Biología Molecular y Neurociencias; ArgentinaFil: Merin, Sharon S.. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: de Martino, Mara. Cornell University. Weil Cornell Medicine; Estados Unidos. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Montero, Diego. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Levit, Claudio. Sanatorio Sagrado Corazón; ArgentinaFil: Lebersztein, Gabriel. Sanatorio Sagrado Corazón; ArgentinaFil: Anfuso, Fabiana. Sanatorio Sagrado Corazón; ArgentinaFil: Roldán Deamicis, Agustina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Mercogliano, María Florencia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Proietti Anastasi, Cecilia Jazmín. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Schillaci, Roxana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Elizalde, Patricia Virginia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Cordo Russo, Rosalia Ines. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; Argentin

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