Core protocol for the adaptive Platform Trial In COVID-19 Vaccine priming and BOOsting (PICOBOO).

BACKGROUND: The need for coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in different age groups and populations is a subject of great uncertainty and an ongoing global debate. Critical knowledge gaps regarding COVID-19 vaccination include the duration of protection offered by different priming and booster vaccination regimens in different populations, including homologous or heterologous schedules; how vaccination impacts key elements of the immune system; how this is modified by prior or subsequent exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and future variants; and how immune responses correlate with protection against infection and disease, including antibodies and effector and T cell central memory. METHODS: The Platform Trial In COVID-19 priming and BOOsting (PICOBOO) is a multi-site, multi-arm, Bayesian, adaptive, randomised controlled platform trial. PICOBOO will expeditiously generate and translate high-quality evidence of the immunogenicity, reactogenicity and cross-protection of different COVID-19 priming and booster vaccination strategies against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants/subvariants, specific to the Australian context. While the platform is designed to be vaccine agnostic, participants will be randomised to one of three vaccines at trial commencement, including Pfizer's Comirnaty, Moderna's Spikevax or Novavax's Nuvaxovid COVID-19 vaccine. The protocol structure specifying PICOBOO is modular and hierarchical. Here, we describe the Core Protocol, which outlines the trial processes applicable to all study participants included in the platform trial. DISCUSSION: PICOBOO is the first adaptive platform trial evaluating different COVID-19 priming and booster vaccination strategies in Australia, and one of the few established internationally, that is designed to generate high-quality evidence to inform immunisation practice and policy. The modular, hierarchical protocol structure is intended to standardise outcomes, endpoints, data collection and other study processes for nested substudies included in the trial platform and to minimise duplication. It is anticipated that this flexible trial structure will enable investigators to respond with agility to new research questions as they arise, such as the utility of new vaccines (such as bivalent, or SARS-CoV-2 variant-specific vaccines) as they become available for use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12622000238774. Registered on 10 February 2022.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of pertussis vaccine in pregnancy on the risk of chorioamnionitis, non-pertussis infectious diseases and other adverse pregnancy outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Several countries have introduced maternal immunisation with pertussis vaccine to provide protection against pertussis in early infancy. There is increasing interest in non-specific effects of vaccines including that non-live vaccines may enhance susceptibility to non-targeted infections in females. Some studies have shown increased risk of chorioamnionitis among women receiving pertussis vaccine during pregnancy. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of maternal pertussis immunisation on the risk of chorioamnionitis, as well as the secondary outcomes of non-pertussis infections in women, non-pertussis infections in infants, spontaneous abortion or stillbirth, maternal death and infant death. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase for articles published until January 14, 2021. We screened articles for eligibility and extracted data using Covidence. Quality was assessed using Cochrane RoB tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were imported into RevMan for pooling and conduction of a meta-analysis stratified by study type. Outcomes are presented as risk ratios. RESULTS: We identified 13 observational studies and six randomized controlled trials eligible for inclusion. We pooled data on chorioamnionitis from six observational studies and found maternal pertussis vaccine (mostly compared with other maternal immunizations with non-live vaccines) to be associated with an increased risk among the pertussis vaccinated women, RR = 1.27 [CI 95%: 1.14-1.42]. We found no difference in the analysis of our secondary outcomes of non-pertussis infections, spontaneous abortion or stillbirth and death. CONCLUSION: We found an increased risk of chorioamnionitis among women who received pertussis vaccine in pregnancy. The large number of women receiving pertussis vaccine during pregnancy, as well as the growing evidence of non-live vaccines causing increased susceptibility to infections, indicates a need for further randomised trials to assess potential adverse effects of maternal immunisation with pertussis-containing vaccines.