The race for clinical trials on Omicron-based COVID-19 vaccine candidates: Updates from global databases

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused more than 6.5 million deaths globally as of June 10, 2022. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) has the greatest transmission rate and can cause hospitalization in vaccinated individuals. It has been the most distinct SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern to date. The existing inactivated vaccines made with the wild-type strain are less efficient to prevent disease and/or hospitalization associated with the Omicron variant, even after a booster dose. Hence, it is crucial to develop new vaccines that are effective against this variant. The objective of this study was to summarize the data on existing clinical trials for new COVID-19 vaccines formulated against Omicron variant. Clinical trials from the international clinical trials registry platforms were searched and analyzed. As of June 10, 2022, a total of 15 clinical trials are available consisting of six and nine clinical trials of inactivated and messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccine candidates containing the Omicron variant, respectively. Those trials are evaluating four inactivated and four mRNA-based vaccine candidates. Although Omicron-specific vaccines are highly desired, their development is challenging since the SARS-CoV-2 variant formation is still unpredictable. Although two vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna have been approved for emergency use in the US and the UK for Omicron variant, the Asian pharmaceutical companies such as CNBG (Sinopharm), Sinovac, and Shifa Pharmed also have Phase 3 clinical trials under development and almost all clinical trials are expected to be completed in 2023. These results should help guide academics and policymakers in the COVID-19 vaccine field regarding investments in updated booster doses against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant

The race for clinical trials on Omicron-based COVID-19 vaccine candidates: Updates from global databases

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused more than 6.5 million deaths globally as of June 10, 2022. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) has the greatest transmission rate and can cause hospitalization in vaccinated individuals. It has been the most distinct SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern to date. The existing inactivated vaccines made with the wild-type strain are less efficient to prevent disease and/or hospitalization associated with the Omicron variant, even after a booster dose. Hence, it is crucial to develop new vaccines that are effective against this variant. The objective of this study was to summarize the data on existing clinical trials for new COVID-19 vaccines formulated against Omicron variant. Clinical trials from the international clinical trials registry platforms were searched and analyzed. As of June 10, 2022, a total of 15 clinical trials are available consisting of six and nine clinical trials of inactivated and messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccine candidates containing the Omicron variant, respectively. Those trials are evaluating four inactivated and four mRNA-based vaccine candidates. Although Omicron-specific vaccines are highly desired, their development is challenging since the SARS-CoV-2 variant formation is still unpredictable. Although two vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna have been approved for emergency use in the US and the UK for Omicron variant, the Asian pharmaceutical companies such as CNBG (Sinopharm), Sinovac, and Shifa Pharmed also have Phase 3 clinical trials under development and almost all clinical trials are expected to be completed in 2023. These results should help guide academics and policymakers in the COVID-19 vaccine field regarding investments in updated booster doses against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant

Acceptance and willingness to purchase a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine in a region under Shariah law: A cross-sectional study in Aceh, Indonesia

Vaccines are urgently needed to control the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim of this study was to determine the acceptance of and willingness to purchase a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine in the general population of Aceh, a holistic Shariah law implementation province in Indonesia. An online cross-sectional study was conducted using a quota sampling technique between 1 to 24 September 2021. To determine hypothetical vaccine acceptance, respondents were asked if they were willing to accept vaccines with combinations of either 50% or 95% effectiveness and either 5% or 20% risk of adverse effects. Willingness to purchase was assessed by asking whether the participants would pay for such vaccines at certain price points. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the associated determinants. Out of 377 respondents included in the final analysis, 86.5% were willing to accept a COVID-19 vaccine with 95% effectiveness and 5% adverse effects. The acceptance rate dropped to 45.1% if the risk of adverse effects was 20%. Vaccines with 50% effectiveness and 5% adverse effects were acceptable to 42.2% but the acceptance went down to 17.2% if the risk of adverse effects increased to 20%. Multivariate analysis found that men were twice as likely to accept a vaccine with 95% effectiveness and 5% adverse effects compared to females (aOR: 2.01; 95% CI 1.05–3.86). We found that 156/377 (41.3%) of respondents were willing to purchase a COVID-19 vaccine and of these participants 71.1% were willing to pay between Indonesian Rupiah (IDR) 50,000–150,000 (US$ 3.33–10.00). In conclusion, the acceptance rate of a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine varied based on effectiveness and the risk of adverse effects

Acceptance and willingness to purchase a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine in a region under Shariah law: A cross-sectional study in Aceh, Indonesia

Vaccines are urgently needed to control the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim of this study was to determine the acceptance of and willingness to purchase a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine in the general population of Aceh, a holistic Shariah law implementation province in Indonesia. An online cross-sectional study was conducted using a quota sampling technique between 1 to 24 September 2021. To determine hypothetical vaccine acceptance, respondents were asked if they were willing to accept vaccines with combinations of either 50% or 95% effectiveness and either 5% or 20% risk of adverse effects. Willingness to purchase was assessed by asking whether the participants would pay for such vaccines at certain price points. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the associated determinants. Out of 377 respondents included in the final analysis, 86.5% were willing to accept a COVID-19 vaccine with 95% effectiveness and 5% adverse effects. The acceptance rate dropped to 45.1% if the risk of adverse effects was 20%. Vaccines with 50% effectiveness and 5% adverse effects were acceptable to 42.2% but the acceptance went down to 17.2% if the risk of adverse effects increased to 20%. Multivariate analysis found that men were twice as likely to accept a vaccine with 95% effectiveness and 5% adverse effects compared to females (aOR: 2.01; 95% CI 1.05–3.86). We found that 156/377 (41.3%) of respondents were willing to purchase a COVID-19 vaccine and of these participants 71.1% were willing to pay between Indonesian Rupiah (IDR) 50,000–150,000 (US$ 3.33–10.00). In conclusion, the acceptance rate of a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine varied based on effectiveness and the risk of adverse effects

Monkeypox: Immune response, vaccination and preventive efforts

Infectious threats to humans are continuously emerging. The 2022 worldwide monkeypox outbreak is the latest of these threats with the virus rapidly spreading to 106 countries by the end of September 2022. The burden of the ongoing monkeypox outbreak is manifested by 68,000 cumulative confirmed cases and 26 deaths. Although monkeypox is usually a self-limited disease, patients can suffer from extremely painful skin lesions and complications can occur with reported mortalities. The antigenic similarity between the smallpox virus (variola virus) and monkeypox virus can be utilized to prevent monkeypox using smallpox vaccines; treatment is also based on antivirals initially designed to treat smallpox. However, further studies are needed to fully decipher the immune response to monkeypox virus and the immune evasion mechanisms. In this review we provide an up-to-date discussion of the current state of knowledge regarding monkeypox virus with a special focus on innate immune response, immune evasion mechanisms and vaccination against the virus

Monkeypox: Immune response, vaccination and preventive efforts

Infectious threats to humans are continuously emerging. The 2022 worldwide monkeypox outbreak is the latest of these threats with the virus rapidly spreading to 106 countries by the end of September 2022. The burden of the ongoing monkeypox outbreak is manifested by 68,000 cumulative confirmed cases and 26 deaths. Although monkeypox is usually a self-limited disease, patients can suffer from extremely painful skin lesions and complications can occur with reported mortalities. The antigenic similarity between the smallpox virus (variola virus) and monkeypox virus can be utilized to prevent monkeypox using smallpox vaccines; treatment is also based on antivirals initially designed to treat smallpox. However, further studies are needed to fully decipher the immune response to monkeypox virus and the immune evasion mechanisms. In this review we provide an up-to-date discussion of the current state of knowledge regarding monkeypox virus with a special focus on innate immune response, immune evasion mechanisms and vaccination against the virus

Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions Reduce the Incidence, and Mortality of COVID-19: A Study based on the Survey from the International COVID-19 Research Network (ICRN).

BACKGROUND: The recently emerged novel coronavirus, "severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)", caused a highly contagious disease called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has severely damaged the world's most developed countries and has turned into a major threat for low- and middle-income countries. Since its emergence in late 2019, medical interventions have been substantial, and most countries relied on public health measures collectively known as nonpharmaceutical interventions. AIMS: To centralize the accumulative knowledge on non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) against COVID-19 for each country under one worldwide consortium. METHODS: International COVID-19 Research Network collaborators developed a cross-sectional online-survey to assess the implications of NPIs and sanitary supply on incidence and mortality of COVID-19. Survey was conducted between January 1 and February 1, 2021, and participants from 92 countries/territories completed it. The association between NPIs, sanitation supplies and incidence and mortality were examined by multivariate regression, with log-transformed value of population as an offset value. RESULTS: Majority of countries/territories applied several preventive strategies including social distancing (100.0%), quarantine (100.0%), isolation (98.9%), and school closure (97.8%). Individual-level preventive measures such as personal hygiene (100.0%) and wearing facial mask (94.6% at hospital; 93.5% at mass transportation; 91.3% in mass gathering facilities) were also frequently applied. Quarantine at a designated place was negatively associated with incidence and mortality compared to home quarantine. Isolation at a designated place was also associated with reduced mortality compared to home isolation. Recommendations to use sanitizer for personal hygiene reduced incidence compared to recommendation to use soap did. Deprivation of mask was associated with increased incidence. Higher incidence and mortality were found in countries/territories with higher economic level. Mask deprivation was pervasive regardless of economic level. CONCLUSION: NPIs against COVID-19 such as using sanitizer, quarantine, and isolation can decrease incidence and mortality of COVID-19. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Nonpharmaceutical interventions reduce the incidence and mortality of COVID‐19: a study based on the survey from the International COVID‐19 Research Network (ICRN)

The recently emerged novel coronavirus, “severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2),” caused a highly contagious disease called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has severely damaged the world's most developed countries and has turned into a major threat for low- and middle-income countries. Since its emergence in late 2019, medical interventions have been substantial, and most countries relied on public health measures collectively known as nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). We aimed to centralize the accumulative knowledge of NPIs against COVID-19 for each country under one worldwide consortium. International COVID-19 Research Network collaborators developed a cross-sectional online survey to assess the implications of NPIs and sanitary supply on the incidence and mortality of COVID-19. The survey was conducted between January 1 and February 1, 2021, and participants from 92 countries/territories completed it. The association between NPIs, sanitation supplies, and incidence and mortality were examined by multivariate regression, with the log-transformed value of population as an offset value. The majority of countries/territories applied several preventive strategies, including social distancing (100.0%), quarantine (100.0%), isolation (98.9%), and school closure (97.8%). Individual-level preventive measures such as personal hygiene (100.0%) and wearing facial masks (94.6% at hospitals; 93.5% at mass transportation; 91.3% in mass gathering facilities) were also frequently applied. Quarantine at a designated place was negatively associated with incidence and mortality compared to home quarantine. Isolation at a designated place was also associated with reduced mortality compared to home isolation. Recommendations to use sanitizer for personal hygiene reduced incidence compared to the recommendation to use soap. Deprivation of masks was associated with increased incidence. Higher incidence and mortality were found in countries/territories with higher economic levels. Mask deprivation was pervasive regardless of economic level. NPIs against COVID-19 such as using sanitizer, quarantine, and isolation can decrease the incidence and mortality of COVID-19

Nonpharmaceutical interventions reduce the incidence and mortality of COVID-19: A study based on the survey from the International COVID-19 Research Network (ICRN)

The recently emerged novel coronavirus, “severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2),” caused a highly contagious disease called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has severely damaged the world's most developed countries and has turned into a major threat for low- and middle-income countries. Since its emergence in late 2019, medical interventions have been substantial, and most countries relied on public health measures collectively known as nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). We aimed to centralize the accumulative knowledge of NPIs against COVID-19 for each country under one worldwide consortium. International COVID-19 Research Network collaborators developed a cross-sectional online survey to assess the implications of NPIs and sanitary supply on the incidence and mortality of COVID-19. The survey was conducted between January 1 and February 1, 2021, and participants from 92 countries/territories completed it. The association between NPIs, sanitation supplies, and incidence and mortality were examined by multivariate regression, with the log-transformed value of population as an offset value. The majority of countries/territories applied several preventive strategies, including social distancing (100.0%), quarantine (100.0%), isolation (98.9%), and school closure (97.8%). Individual-level preventive measures such as personal hygiene (100.0%) and wearing facial masks (94.6% at hospitals; 93.5% at mass transportation; 91.3% in mass gathering facilities) were also frequently applied. Quarantine at a designated place was negatively associated with incidence and mortality compared to home quarantine. Isolation at a designated place was also associated with reduced mortality compared to home isolation. Recommendations to use sanitizer for personal hygiene reduced incidence compared to the recommendation to use soap. Deprivation of masks was associated with increased incidence. Higher incidence and mortality were found in countries/territories with higher economic levels. Mask deprivation was pervasive regardless of economic level. NPIs against COVID-19 such as using sanitizer, quarantine, and isolation can decrease the incidence and mortality of COVID-19