Tag: Novavax

Categories : COVID Immune SystemTags :

Existing COVID Vaccines Trigger Lasting T Cell Response

On By ModernMedia
Image from Pixabay

Scientists have found that four COVID vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, J&J/Janssen, and Novavax) prompt the body to make effective, long-lasting T cells against SARS-CoV-2. These T cells can recognise SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern, including Delta and Omicron.

The new study, published in Cell, showed that the vast majority of T cell responses are also still effective against Omicron, reducing the odds of illness for up to six months, regardless of vaccine.

These data come from adults who were fully vaccinated, but not yet boosted. The researchers are now investigating T cell responses in boosted individuals and people who have experienced “breakthrough” COVID cases.

The study also shows that fully vaccinated people have fewer memory B cells and neutralising antibodies against the Omicron variant. This finding is in line with initial reports of waning immunity from laboratories around the world.

Without enough neutralising antibodies, Omicron is more likely to cause a breakthrough infection, and fewer memory B cells means a slower production of more neutralising antibodies.

Co-first author Camila Coelho, PhD, said: “Our study revealed that the 15 mutations present in Omicron RBD can considerably reduce the binding capacity of memory B cells.”

Neutralising antibodies and memory B cells are only two arms of the body’s adaptive immune response. , T cells do not prevent infection, rather they patrol the body and destroy cells that are already infected, which prevents a virus from multiplying and causing severe disease.

The team believes the “second line of defence” from T cells helps explain Omicron’s reduced severity in vaccinated people. The variant also appears to infect different tissues.

To know whether the vaccine-induced T cells they detected in their study were actually effective against variants such as Delta and Omicron, the scientists took a close look at how the T cells responded to different viral “epitopes.”

Every virus is made up of proteins that form a certain shape or architecture. A viral epitope is a specific landmark on this architecture that T cells have been trained to recognise. Current COVID vaccines were designed to teach the immune system to recognise specific epitopes on the initial variant of SARS-CoV-2, specifically targeting the Spike protein which the virus uses to access human cells. As the virus has mutated, its architecture has changed, and the concern is that immune cells will no longer recognise their targets.

The new study shows that while the architecture of Omicron is different enough to evade some neutralising antibodies and memory B cells, memory T cells still do a good job of recognising their targets, even on the highly mutated Omicron variant. Overall, at least 83 percent of the CD4+ (helper) T cell responses and 85 percent of the CD8+ T cell responses stayed the same, no matter the vaccine or the variant.

The memory B cells that do bind Omicron are likely to also contribute to protection against severe disease, forming multiple lines of defence. 

Researchers are now focusing on measuring T cells, B cells and antibody responses after COVID booster shots, and also characterising immune responses after a breakthrough infection.

Source: La Jolla Institute

Categories : COVIDTags :

Six Different Booster Vaccines Found to be Safe and Effective

On By ModernMedia
Image by Ivan Diaz on Unsplash

The first randomised trial of COVID boosters, published in The Lancet, has shown that six are safe and provoke strong immune responses. Participants have previously received a two-dose course of ChAdOx1-nCov19 (Oxford–AstraZeneca [ChAd]) or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech [BNT]). The announcement comes just as the Omicron variant is beginning to spread around the world.

ChAd has now been deployed in more than 180 countries and BNT in more than 145 countries. Several studies show that two doses of ChAd and BNT confer 79% and 90% protection, respectively, against hospitalisation and death after six months. However, protection against COVID infection wanes in time, which has led to the consideration of boosters. However, there are currently little data on the comparative safety of COVID vaccines, and the immune responses they stimulate, when given as a third dose.

The COV-BOOST study looked at safety, immune response (immunogenicity) and side-effects (reactogenicity) of seven vaccines when used as a third booster jab. The vaccines studied were ChAd, BNT, NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax [NVX]), Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen [Ad26]), Moderna [mRNA1273], VLA2001 (Valneva [VLA]), and CVnCov (Curevac [CVn]).

“The side effect data show all seven vaccines are safe to use as third doses, with acceptable levels of inflammatory side effects like injection site pain, muscle soreness, fatigue. Whilst all boosted spike protein immunogenicity after two doses of AstraZeneca, only AstraZeneca, Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, Novavax, Janssen and Curevac did so after two doses of Pfizer-BioNTech”, commented Professor Saul Faust, trial lead.

“It’s really encouraging that a wide range of vaccines, using different technologies, show benefits as a third dose to either AstraZeneca or Pfizer-BioNTech. That gives confidence and flexibility in developing booster programmes here in the UK and globally, with other factors like supply chain and logistics also in play”, added Prof Faust.

“It’s important to note that these results relate only to these vaccines as boosters to the two primary vaccinations, and to the immune response they drive at 28 days. Further work will generate data at three months and one year after people have received their boosters, which will provide insights into their impact on long-term protection and immunological memory. We are also studying two of the vaccines in people who had a later third dose after 7-8 months although results will not be available until the new year.”

A randomised, phase 2 trial of seven booster vaccines was conducted, with the third doses given 10-12 weeks after initial two-dose courses of ChAd or BNT. The trial involved 2878 healthy participants between June 1st and June 30th 2021. Participants had received their first doses of ChAd or BNT in December 2020, January or February 2021, and second doses at least 70 days before enrolment for ChAd and at least 84 days for BNT. About half of participants received two doses of ChAd and half two doses of BNT. The control vaccine used was a meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MenACWY).

Participants were aged 30 or older, roughly half of whom were 70 or older. The average age of participants who received ChAd was 53 years in the younger age group and 76 years in the older age group. Average ages for BNT were 51 and 78 years, respectively.

Thirteen experimental and control arms of the trial (seven vaccines plus three at half dose and three control arms) were split into three participant groups. Group A received NVX, half dose NVX, ChAd, or a control. Group B received BNT, VLA, half dose VLA, Ad26 or a control. Group C received Moderna, CVn (development of which was halted in October 2021), half dose BNT, or a control.

Primary outcomes were adverse effects seven days after receiving a booster, and levels of antibodies targeting the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein after 28 days, compared to controls. Secondary outcomes included the response of T cells to wild type, Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants. 

Increases in anti-spike protein antibody levels after 28 days varied across the vaccines. After two doses of ChAd these ranged from 1.8 times higher to 32.3 times higher according to the booster vaccine used. Following two doses of BNT, the range was 1.3 times higher to 11.5 times higher. Significant T-cell responses were reported in several combinations.

At 28 days, all booster results were similar for participants aged 30-69 years and those aged 70 years or older. Boost ratios should be interpreted with caution, the authors caution, since they relate to immunogenicity rather than protection against disease, and the relationship between antibody levels at day 28 and long-term protection and immunological memory is unknown.

Reactions to all seven vaccines were similar, with fatigue, headache, and injection site pain most often reported. These were more commonly reported by those aged 30-69. 912 of the 2878 participants experienced a total of 1036 adverse events, 24 of which were severe.

Source: EurekAlert!

Categories : COVID VaccinesTags :

Why It’s So Hard to Compare Vaccines

On By ModernMedia

While the world is looking to vaccinations to end the COVID pandemic, a MedPage Today article explains that even with vaccines that have high efficacy, ending transmission is not guaranteed, and there are a lot of differences between simple figures like 94% for Pfizer and 95% for Moderna vaccines.

Firstly, asymptomatic cases are not tracked, simply because assembling tens of thousands of people for a clinical trial is a monumental logistic task, and in the current pandemic, a race against time.

Internist Jeffrey Carson, MD, who managed the Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine trial’s site at Rutgers University in New Jersey, explained to MedPage Today that it would be difficult but not impossible to create a vaccine trial that provided rapid data about asymptomatic cases.

“You might have people swab themselves every couple days, or every week. You’ll be picking up a lot of disease that way, and you’ll be able to see if the vaccine prevents asymptomatic disease,” Dr Carson said. The current Novavax trial, for example, only asks participants to test themselves for COVID with provided swabs if they believe they are developing symptoms. The Novavax vaccine had also prompted alarm as it was only 49.4% effective against the B501Y.V2 variant, its efficacy reduced by the low rate of protection for HIV positive participants.

The New York Times explained that efficacy is merely how well a vaccine did in a clinical trial, effectiveness is how well it performs in the real world.
Vaccine statistics are difficult even for medical experts to grasp. An infectious diseases expert wrote in a letter to the Lancet explaining that they had misunderstood what 94% to 95% efficacy means for Moderna and Pfizer vaccines and asymptomatic spread.

“It does not mean that 95% of people are protected from disease with the vaccine — a general misconception of vaccine protection.” Instead, it “means that in a population such as the one enrolled in the trials, with a cumulated COVID-19 attack rate over a period of 3 months of about 1% without a vaccine, we would expect roughly 0.05% of vaccinated people would get diseased [with symptomatic infections]. … Accurate description of effects is not hair-splitting; it is much-needed exactness to avoid adding confusion to an extraordinarily complicated and tense scientific and societal debate around COVID-19 vaccines.”

A further problem for scientists is that viral diseases can spread to people unaware that they are infected, something they are still working on understanding. “It makes a lot of sense for survival of the invaders, if you think about it. Humans who feel unwell are not going out to meet up with others, but ones who feel fine will continue along with their daily schedules, allowing the infection to spread,” Bryn Boslett, MD, an infectious disease physician at the University of California San Francisco, told MedPage Today.

Regardless of how well vaccines interrupt the transmission of COVID, it’s important that mask-wearing, social distancing and disinfecting habits are maintained.

“One major worry going forward is that vaccinated people will change their behaviour and stop taking COVID-19 precautions,” Dr Boslett said. “It’s very tempting to do so, very understandable. However, the stars are not yet aligned for us to go back to ‘normal.’ There is still a lot of COVID-19, and most of us are still vulnerable. We need to continue to focus on behavior to reduce new cases of COVID-19.”

Source: MedPage Today

Categories : COVID HIVTags :

Novavax COVID Vaccine only 49.4% Effective in SA

On By ModernMedia

On Thursday, Novavax announced that its vaccine was 89% effective, according to its UK trials which had 15 000 participants. However, its SA trials showed a much lower effectiveness of 49.4%, believed to be caused by the SA COVID variant B.1.351 (aka 501.V2). 

The company conveyed the information in a press release, with a detailed journal publication still to come. The SA trial had 4400 participants, and the observed protection varied depending on HIV status. In people who were HIV negative, the vaccine conferred 60% protection. If the vaccination trial included a representative proportion of HIV positive adult South Africans, it may mean that its effectiveness for this vulnerable segment is very low.

“The higher efficacy of the vaccine in the UK than in South Africa is because the variants circulating in SA are less sensitive to vaccine induced immune responses,” said Professor Shabir Madhi, Executive Director of the Vaccines and Infectious Diseases Analytics Research Unit (VIDA) at Wits, and principal investigator in the Novavax COVID vaccine trial in SA.

“Nevertheless, the 60% reduced risk against Covid-19 illness in vaccinated individuals in South Africans underscores the value of this vaccine to prevent illness from the highly worrisome variant currently circulating in South Africa, and which is spreading globally. This is the only Covid-19 vaccine for which we now have objective evidence that it protects against the variant dominating in South Africa.”

Novavax is pressing ahead with a trial involving 30 000 participants in the United States and Mexico, and has shared data with the UK’s pharmaceutical regulator. It is not clear whether the data from the US and Mexico trial will be required before the vaccine receives approval there. Meanwhile on Friday, the Johnson & Johnson vaccine developed by its subsidiary Janssen has been shown to be 66% effective. It is a single dose vaccine with minimal refrigeration requirements, making it very important for the logistical challenge of vaccinations in developing countries. Since Aspen would be producing some of the doses locally, the SA government had been in talks with Johnson & Johnson to secure some of those vaccines for SA use. However, there are signs that it too is less effective against the B.1.351 variant.

Source: Business Insider