32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated COVID-19 vaccine, BBIBP-CorV, in people younger than 18 years: a randomised, double-blind, controlled, phase 1/2 trial

      research-article
      , Prof a , , PhD c , , BSc a , , BSc c , , BSc c , , Prof, PhD d , , Prof, PhD d , , PhD d , , PhD e , , Prof, PhD f , , PhD e , , BSc d , , PhD d , , MSc c , , MSc a , , MSc c , , MSc a , , MSc c , , BSc c , , BSc a , , MSc c , , MSc c , , BSc a , , Prof, PhD b , , Prof, PhD b , , PhD f , , Prof, PhD d , , PhD d , , BSc c , , BSc c , , BSc c , , MSc c , , PhD c , , PhD c , , PhD c , , PhD c , , BSc a , * , , MSc c , **
      The Lancet. Infectious Diseases
      Elsevier Ltd.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Although SARS-CoV-2 infection often causes milder symptoms in children and adolescents, young people might still play a key part in SARS-CoV-2 transmission. An efficacious vaccine for children and adolescents could therefore assist pandemic control. For further evaluation of the inactivated COVID-19 vaccine candidate BBIBP-CorV, we assessed the safety and immunogenicity of BBIBP-CorV in participants aged 3–17 years.

          Methods

          A randomised, double-blind, controlled, phase 1/2 trial was done at Shangqiu City Liangyuan District Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Henan, China. In phases 1 and 2, healthy participants were stratified according to age (3–5 years, 6–12 years, or 13–17 years) and dose group. Individuals with a history of SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV infection were excluded. All participants were randomly assigned, using stratified block randomisation (block size eight), to receive three doses of 2 μg, 4 μg, or 8 μg of vaccine or control (1:1:1:1) 28 days apart. The primary outcome, safety, was analysed in the safety set, which consisted of participants who had received at least one vaccination after being randomly assigned, and had any safety evaluation information. The secondary outcomes were geometric meant titre (GMT) of the neutralising antibody against infectious SARS-CoV-2 and were analysed based on the full analysis set. This study is registered with www.chictr.org.cn, ChiCTR2000032459, and is ongoing.

          Findings

          Between Aug 14, 2020, and Sept 24, 2020, 445 participants were screened, and 288 eligible participants were randomly assigned to vaccine (n=216, 24 for each dose level [2/4/8 μg] in each of three age cohorts [3–5, 6–12, and 13–17 years]) or control (n=72, 24 for each age cohort [3–5, 6–12, and 13–17 years]) in phase 1. In phase 2, 810 participants were screened and 720 eligible participants were randomly assigned and allocated to vaccine (n=540, 60 for each dose level [2/4/8 μg] in each of three age cohorts [3–5, 6–12, and 13–17 years]) or control (n=180, 60 for each age cohort [3–5, 6–12, and 13–17 years]). The most common injection site adverse reaction was pain (ten [4%] 251 participants in all vaccination groups of the 3–5 years cohort; 23 [9·1%] of 252 participants in all vaccination groups and one [1·2%] of 84 in the control group of the 6–12 years cohort; 20 [7·9%] of 252 participants in all vaccination groups of the 13–17 years cohort). The most common systematic adverse reaction was fever (32 [12·7%] of 251 participants in all vaccination groups and six [7·1%] of 84 participants in the control group of the 3–5 years cohort; 13 [5·2%] of 252 participants in the vaccination groups and one [1·2%] of 84 in the control group of the 6–12 years cohort; 26 [10·3%] of 252 participants in all vaccination groups and eight [9·5%] of 84 in the control group of the 13–17 years cohort). Adverse reactions were mostly mild to moderate in severity. The neutralising antibody GMT against the SARS-CoV-2 virus ranged from 105·3 to 180·2 in the 3–5 years cohort, 84·1 to 168·6 in the 6–12 years cohort, and 88·0 to 155·7 in the 13–17 years cohort on day 28 after the second vaccination; and ranged from 143·5 to 224·4 in the 3–5 years cohort, 127 to 184·8 in the 6–12 years cohort, and 150·7 to 199 in the 13–17 years cohort on day 28 after the third vaccination.

          Interpretation

          The inactivated COVID-19 vaccine BBIBP-CorV is safe and well tolerated at all tested dose levels in participants aged 3–17 years. BBIBP-CorV also elicited robust humoral responses against SARS-CoV-2 infection after two doses. Our findings support the use of a 4 μg dose and two-shot regimen BBIBP-CorV in phase 3 trials in the population younger than 18 years to further ascertain its safety and protection efficacy against COVID-19.

          Funding

          National Program on Key Research Project of China, National Mega projects of China for Major Infectious Diseases, National Mega Projects of China for New Drug Creation, and Beijing Science and Technology Plan.

          Translation

          For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine

          Abstract Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the resulting coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have afflicted tens of millions of people in a worldwide pandemic. Safe and effective vaccines are needed urgently. Methods In an ongoing multinational, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, pivotal efficacy trial, we randomly assigned persons 16 years of age or older in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses, 21 days apart, of either placebo or the BNT162b2 vaccine candidate (30 μg per dose). BNT162b2 is a lipid nanoparticle–formulated, nucleoside-modified RNA vaccine that encodes a prefusion stabilized, membrane-anchored SARS-CoV-2 full-length spike protein. The primary end points were efficacy of the vaccine against laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 and safety. Results A total of 43,548 participants underwent randomization, of whom 43,448 received injections: 21,720 with BNT162b2 and 21,728 with placebo. There were 8 cases of Covid-19 with onset at least 7 days after the second dose among participants assigned to receive BNT162b2 and 162 cases among those assigned to placebo; BNT162b2 was 95% effective in preventing Covid-19 (95% credible interval, 90.3 to 97.6). Similar vaccine efficacy (generally 90 to 100%) was observed across subgroups defined by age, sex, race, ethnicity, baseline body-mass index, and the presence of coexisting conditions. Among 10 cases of severe Covid-19 with onset after the first dose, 9 occurred in placebo recipients and 1 in a BNT162b2 recipient. The safety profile of BNT162b2 was characterized by short-term, mild-to-moderate pain at the injection site, fatigue, and headache. The incidence of serious adverse events was low and was similar in the vaccine and placebo groups. Conclusions A two-dose regimen of BNT162b2 conferred 95% protection against Covid-19 in persons 16 years of age or older. Safety over a median of 2 months was similar to that of other viral vaccines. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04368728.)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Efficacy and Safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine

            Abstract Background Vaccines are needed to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and to protect persons who are at high risk for complications. The mRNA-1273 vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle–encapsulated mRNA-based vaccine that encodes the prefusion stabilized full-length spike protein of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes Covid-19. Methods This phase 3 randomized, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at 99 centers across the United States. Persons at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection or its complications were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive two intramuscular injections of mRNA-1273 (100 μg) or placebo 28 days apart. The primary end point was prevention of Covid-19 illness with onset at least 14 days after the second injection in participants who had not previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Results The trial enrolled 30,420 volunteers who were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either vaccine or placebo (15,210 participants in each group). More than 96% of participants received both injections, and 2.2% had evidence (serologic, virologic, or both) of SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline. Symptomatic Covid-19 illness was confirmed in 185 participants in the placebo group (56.5 per 1000 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 48.7 to 65.3) and in 11 participants in the mRNA-1273 group (3.3 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 1.7 to 6.0); vaccine efficacy was 94.1% (95% CI, 89.3 to 96.8%; P<0.001). Efficacy was similar across key secondary analyses, including assessment 14 days after the first dose, analyses that included participants who had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline, and analyses in participants 65 years of age or older. Severe Covid-19 occurred in 30 participants, with one fatality; all 30 were in the placebo group. Moderate, transient reactogenicity after vaccination occurred more frequently in the mRNA-1273 group. Serious adverse events were rare, and the incidence was similar in the two groups. Conclusions The mRNA-1273 vaccine showed 94.1% efficacy at preventing Covid-19 illness, including severe disease. Aside from transient local and systemic reactions, no safety concerns were identified. (Funded by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; COVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04470427.)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Estimated transmissibility and impact of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 in England

              Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has the capacity to generate variants with major genomic changes. The UK variant B.1.1.7 (also known as VOC 202012/01) has many mutations that alter virus attachment and entry into human cells. Using a variety of statistical and dynamic modeling approaches, Davies et al. characterized the spread of the B.1.1.7 variant in the United Kingdom. The authors found that the variant is 43 to 90% more transmissible than the predecessor lineage but saw no clear evidence for a change in disease severity, although enhanced transmission will lead to higher incidence and more hospital admissions. Large resurgences of the virus are likely to occur after the easing of control measures, and it may be necessary to greatly accelerate vaccine roll-out to control the epidemic. Science , this issue p. eabg3055 The major coronavirus variant that emerged at the end of 2020 in the UK is more transmissible than its predecessors and could spark resurgences. INTRODUCTION Several novel variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19, emerged in late 2020. One of these, Variant of Concern (VOC) 202012/01 (lineage B.1.1.7), was first detected in southeast England in September 2020 and spread to become the dominant lineage in the United Kingdom in just a few months. B.1.1.7 has since spread to at least 114 countries worldwide. RATIONALE The rapid spread of VOC 202012/01 suggests that it transmits more efficiently from person to person than preexisting variants of SARS-CoV-2. This could lead to global surges in COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths, so there is an urgent need to estimate how much more quickly VOC 202012/01 spreads, whether it is associated with greater or lesser severity of disease, and what control measures might be effective in mitigating its impact. We used social contact and mobility data, as well as demographic indicators linked to SARS-CoV-2 community testing data in England, to assess whether the spread of the new variant may be an artifact of higher baseline transmission rates in certain geographical areas or among specific demographic subpopulations. We then used a series of complementary statistical analyses and mathematical models to estimate the transmissibility of VOC 202012/01 across multiple datasets from the UK, Denmark, Switzerland, and the United States. Finally, we extended a mathematical model that has been extensively used to forecast COVID-19 dynamics in the UK to consider two competing SARS-CoV-2 lineages: VOC 202012/01 and preexisting variants. By fitting this model to a variety of data sources on infections, hospitalizations, and deaths across seven regions of England, we assessed different hypotheses for why the new variant appears to be spreading more quickly, estimated the severity of disease associated with the new variant, and evaluated control measures including vaccination and nonpharmaceutical interventions. Combining multiple lines of evidence allowed us to draw robust inferences. RESULTS The rapid spread of VOC 202012/01 is not an artifact of geographical differences in contact behavior and does not substantially differ by age, sex, or socioeconomic stratum. We estimate that the new variant has a 43 to 90% higher reproduction number (range of 95% credible intervals, 38 to 130%) than preexisting variants. Similar increases are observed in Denmark, Switzerland, and the United States. The most parsimonious explanation for this increase in the reproduction number is that people infected with VOC 202012/01 are more infectious than people infected with a preexisting variant, although there is also reasonable support for a longer infectious period and multiple mechanisms may be operating. Our estimates of severity are uncertain and are consistent with anything from a moderate decrease to a moderate increase in severity (e.g., 32% lower to 20% higher odds of death given infection). Nonetheless, our mathematical model, fitted to data up to 24 December 2020, predicted a large surge in COVID-19 cases and deaths in 2021, which has been borne out so far by the observed burden in England up to the end of March 2021. In the absence of stringent nonpharmaceutical interventions and an accelerated vaccine rollout, COVID-19 deaths in the first 6 months of 2021 were projected to exceed those in 2020 in England. CONCLUSION More than 98% of positive SARS-CoV-2 infections in England are now due to VOC 202012/01, and the spread of this new variant has led to a surge in COVID-19 cases and deaths. Other countries should prepare for potentially similar outcomes. Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern 202012/01. ( A ) Spread of VOC 202012/01 (lineage B.1.1.7) in England. ( B ) The estimated relative transmissibility of VOC 202012/01 (mean and 95% confidence interval) is similar across the United Kingdom as a whole, England, Denmark, Switzerland, and the United States. ( C ) Projected COVID-19 deaths (median and 95% confidence interval) in England, 15 December 2020 to 30 June 2021. Vaccine rollout and control measures help to mitigate the burden of VOC 202012/01. A severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant, VOC 202012/01 (lineage B.1.1.7), emerged in southeast England in September 2020 and is rapidly spreading toward fixation. Using a variety of statistical and dynamic modeling approaches, we estimate that this variant has a 43 to 90% (range of 95% credible intervals, 38 to 130%) higher reproduction number than preexisting variants. A fitted two-strain dynamic transmission model shows that VOC 202012/01 will lead to large resurgences of COVID-19 cases. Without stringent control measures, including limited closure of educational institutions and a greatly accelerated vaccine rollout, COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths across England in the first 6 months of 2021 were projected to exceed those in 2020. VOC 202012/01 has spread globally and exhibits a similar transmission increase (59 to 74%) in Denmark, Switzerland, and the United States.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Lancet Infect Dis
                Lancet Infect Dis
                The Lancet. Infectious Diseases
                Elsevier Ltd.
                1473-3099
                1474-4457
                15 September 2021
                15 September 2021
                Affiliations
                [a ]Henan Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Henan, China
                [b ]Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China
                [c ]Beijing Institute of Biological Products, Beijing, China
                [d ]Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China
                [e ]National Institute for Food and Drug Control, Beijing, China
                [f ]MOE Key Laboratory of Protein Science & Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, School of Medicine, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence to: Prof Wanshen Guo, Henan Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Henan 450018, China
                [** ]Mr Xiaoming Yang, Beijing Institute of Biological Products Company Limited, Beijing 100176, China
                Article
                S1473-3099(21)00462-X
                10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00462-X
                8443232
                34536349
                f94429eb-b599-4ffe-9214-528205855795
                © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Categories
                Articles

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                Infectious disease & Microbiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article