COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness and variants in Nepal: study protocol for a test-negative case-control study with SARS-CoV-2 genetic sequencing.

INTRODUCTION: Inactivated, viral vector and mRNA vaccines have been used in the Nepali COVID-19 vaccination programme but there is little evidence on the effectiveness of these vaccines in this setting. The aim of this study is to describe COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in Nepal and provide information on infections with SARS-CoV-2 variants. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a hospital-based, prospective test-negative case-control study conducted at Patan Hospital, Kathmandu. All patients >18 years of age presenting to Patan Hospital with COVID-19-like symptoms who have received a COVID-19 antigen/PCR test are eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome is vaccine effectiveness of licensed COVID-19 vaccines against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 disease.After enrolment, information will be collected on vaccine status, date of vaccination, type of vaccine, demographics and other medical comorbidities. The primary outcome of interest is laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Cases (positive for SARS-CoV-2) and controls (negative for SARS-CoV-2) will be enrolled in a 1:4 ratio. Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 disease will be analysed by comparing vaccination status with SARS-CoV-2 test results.Positive SARS-CoV-2 samples will be sequenced to identify circulating variants and estimate vaccine effectiveness against common variants.Measuring vaccine effectiveness and identifying SARS-CoV-2 variants in Nepal will help to inform public health efforts. Describing disease severity in relation to specific SARS-CoV-2 variants and vaccine status will also inform future prevention and care efforts. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Oxford Tropical Ethics Committee (OxTREC) (ref: 561-21) and the Patan Academy of Health Sciences Institutional Review Board (ref: drs2111121578). The protocol and supporting study documents were approved for use by the Nepal Health Research Council (NHRC 550-2021). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and to the public health authorities in Nepal.

How COVID-19 News Affect Older Adults' Mental Health—Evidence of a Positivity Bias

Background: Media affects the trajectory of many individuals' mental health—with media news, individuals experience negative bias more than positive bias. However, there is also evidence of an age-related positivity effect, with negativity bias generally fading with age. With the rise of COVID-19 cases, older adults (aged 55 years and older) who consume media frequently are at a high risk for declining mental health. To date, there has been no research on the positivity vs. negativity bias of media news on older adults. Here, we investigated whether positivity or negativity bias plays a larger role in affecting how older adults react to COVID-19 news. Methods: Sixty-nine older adults (aged 55–95) answered questions about their weekly media consumption and how closely they followed news relating to COVID-19. They also completed a general health questionnaire. They were then randomly assigned to read either positive or negative COVID-19 news (n = 35 and 34, respectively). The adults were asked if the news made them feel happy or fearful, and if they wanted to read more about the news or ignore the news. Results: An analysis revealed that the more often older adults consumed media and the more closely they followed COVID-19 news, the more they felt unhappy and depressed. Importantly, older adults who read positive news reported stronger responses than those who read negative news. Older adults appeared to have a strong positivity bias for COVID-19 news, reporting feeling happy and wanting to read about positive news. In contrast, negative COVID-19 news did not evoke similar levels of response from the older adults. Conclusions: Media consumption of COVID-19 news does negatively impact the mental well-being of older adults, but older adults appear to have a strong positivity bias and a lack of negativity bias for COVID-19 news. These findings suggest that older adults can remain hopeful and positive during periods of public health crises and intense stress, which is essential to sustaining their mental well-being during difficult times.

How COVID-19 News Affect Older Adults' Mental Health-Evidence of a Positivity Bias.

BACKGROUND: Media affects the trajectory of many individuals' mental health-with media news, individuals experience negative bias more than positive bias. However, there is also evidence of an age-related positivity effect, with negativity bias generally fading with age. With the rise of COVID-19 cases, older adults (aged 55 years and older) who consume media frequently are at a high risk for declining mental health. To date, there has been no research on the positivity vs. negativity bias of media news on older adults. Here, we investigated whether positivity or negativity bias plays a larger role in affecting how older adults react to COVID-19 news. METHODS: Sixty-nine older adults (aged 55-95) answered questions about their weekly media consumption and how closely they followed news relating to COVID-19. They also completed a general health questionnaire. They were then randomly assigned to read either positive or negative COVID-19 news (n = 35 and 34, respectively). The adults were asked if the news made them feel happy or fearful, and if they wanted to read more about the news or ignore the news. RESULTS: An analysis revealed that the more often older adults consumed media and the more closely they followed COVID-19 news, the more they felt unhappy and depressed. Importantly, older adults who read positive news reported stronger responses than those who read negative news. Older adults appeared to have a strong positivity bias for COVID-19 news, reporting feeling happy and wanting to read about positive news. In contrast, negative COVID-19 news did not evoke similar levels of response from the older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Media consumption of COVID-19 news does negatively impact the mental well-being of older adults, but older adults appear to have a strong positivity bias and a lack of negativity bias for COVID-19 news. These findings suggest that older adults can remain hopeful and positive during periods of public health crises and intense stress, which is essential to sustaining their mental well-being during difficult times.

Human leukocyte antigen alleles associate with COVID-19 vaccine immunogenicity and risk of breakthrough infection.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immunogenicity varies between individuals, and immune responses correlate with vaccine efficacy. Using data from 1,076 participants enrolled in ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccine efficacy trials in the United Kingdom, we find that inter-individual variation in normalised antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) and its receptor binding domain (RBD) at 28 days following first vaccination shows genome-wide significant association with major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II alleles. The most statistically significant association with higher levels of anti-RBD antibody was HLA-DQB1*06 (P = 3.2 × 10-9), which we replicate in 1,677 additional vaccinees. Individuals carrying HLA-DQB1*06 alleles were less likely to experience PCR-confirmed breakthrough infection during the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 virus and subsequent Alpha-variant waves compared with non-carriers (HR 0.63, 0.42-0.93, P = 0.02). We identify a distinct S-derived peptide that is predicted to bind differentially to HLA-DQB1*06 compared with other similar alleles, and find evidence of increased spike-specific memory B-cell responses in HLA-DQB1*06 carriers at 84 days following first vaccination. Our results demonstrate association of HLA type with COVID-19 vaccine antibody response and risk of breakthrough infection, with implications for future vaccine design and implementation.

Incident and recurrent depression among older adults with asthma during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging.

OBJECTIVES: (1) In a subsample of older adults with asthma without a history of depression, to determine the factors associated with developing depression during the COVID-19 pandemic; (2) in a subsample of older adults with asthma with a history of depression, to identify factors associated with recurrent depression during the pandemic. METHODS: Data came from four waves (Baseline [2011-2015], Follow-up 1 [2015-2018]; COVID Spring 2020, COVID Autumn 2020) of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging's comprehensive cohort (n = 2,047 with asthma). The outcome of interest was a positive screen for depression based on the CES-D-10 during the autumn of 2020. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Among older adults with asthma without a history of depression (n = 1,247), approximately 1 in 7 (13.5%) developed depression for the first time during the COVID-19 pandemic. Among those with a history of depression (n = 770), approximately 1 in 2 (48.6%) experienced a recurrence of depression. The risk of incident depression and recurrent depression was higher among those who were lonely, those experiencing family conflict during the pandemic, and those who had difficulty accessing healthcare resources during the pandemic. The risk of incident depression only was higher among those who had difficulty accessing resources and/or loss of income during the pandemic. The risk of recurrent depression only was higher among those with functional limitations. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for targeted interventions to support the mental health of older adults with asthma who have the above identified vulnerabilities during the pandemic.

Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in children aged 6-17 years: a preliminary report of COV006, a phase 2 single-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination of children and young people against SARS-CoV-2 is recommended in some countries. Scarce data have been published on immune responses induced by COVID-19 vaccines in people younger than 18 years compared with the same data that are available in adults. METHODS: COV006 is a phase 2, single-blind, randomised, controlled trial of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) in children and adolescents at four trial sites in the UK. Healthy participants aged 6-17 years, who did not have a history of chronic respiratory conditions, laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, or previously received capsular group B meningococcal vaccine (the control), were randomly assigned to four groups (4:1:4:1) to receive two intramuscular doses of 5 × 1010 viral particles of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or control, 28 days or 84 days apart. Participants, clinical investigators, and the laboratory team were masked to treatment allocation. Study groups were stratified by age, and participants aged 12-17 years were enrolled before those aged 6-11 years. Due to the restrictions in the use of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in people younger than 30 years that were introduced during the study, only participants aged 12-17 years who were randomly assigned to the 28-day interval group had received their vaccinations at the intended interval (day 28). The remaining participants received their second dose at day 112. The primary outcome was assessment of safety and tolerability in the safety population, which included all participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. The secondary outcome was immunogenicity, which was assessed in participants who were seronegative to the nucleocapsid protein at baseline and received both prime and boost vaccine. This study is registered with ISRCTN (15638344). FINDINGS: Between Feb 15 and April 2, 2021, 262 participants (150 [57%] participants aged 12-17 years and 112 [43%] aged 6-11 years; due to the change in the UK vaccination policy, the study terminated recruitment of the younger age group before the planned number of participants had been enrolled) were randomly assigned to receive vaccination with two doses of either ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (n=211 [n=105 at day 28 and n=106 at day 84]) or control (n=51 [n=26 at day 28 and n=25 at day 84]). One participant in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 day 28 group in the younger age bracket withdrew their consent before receiving a first dose. Of the participants who received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 169 (80%) of 210 participants reported at least one solicited local or systemic adverse event up to 7 days following the first dose, and 146 (76%) of 193 participants following the second dose. No serious adverse events related to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 administration were recorded by the data cutoff date on Oct 28, 2021. Of the participants who received at least one dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, there were 128 unsolicited adverse events up to 28 days after vaccination reported by 83 (40%) of 210 participants. One participant aged 6-11 years receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 reported a grade 4 fever of 40·2°C on day 1 following first vaccination, which resolved within 24 h. Pain and tenderness were the most common local solicited adverse events for all the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and capsular group B meningococcal groups following both doses. Of the 242 participants with available serostatus data, 14 (6%) were seropositive at baseline. Serostatus data were not available for 20 (8%) of 262 participants. Among seronegative participants who received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and pseudoneutralising antibody titres at day 28 after the second dose were higher in participants aged 12-17 years with a longer interval between doses (geometric means of 73 371 arbitrary units [AU]/mL [95% CI 58 685-91 733] and 299 half-maximal inhibitory concentration [IC50; 95% CI 230-390]) compared with those aged 12-17 years who received their vaccines 28 days apart (43 280 AU/mL [95% CI 35 852-52 246] and 150 IC50 [95% CI 116-194]). Humoral responses were higher in those aged 6-11 years than in those aged 12-17 years receiving their second dose at the same 112-day interval (geometric mean ratios 1·48 [95% CI 1·07-2·07] for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and 2·96 [1·89-4·62] for pseudoneutralising antibody titres). Cellular responses peaked after a first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 across all age and interval groups and remained above baseline after a second vaccination. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 is well tolerated and immunogenic in children aged 6-17 years, inducing concentrations of antibody that are similar to those associated with high efficacy in phase 3 studies in adults. No safety concerns were raised in this trial. FUNDING: AstraZeneca and the UK Department of Health and Social Care through the UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.

An exploratory analysis of the response to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in males and females.

BACKGROUND: There are known differences in vaccine reactogenicity and immunogenicity by sex. Females have been shown to report greater reactogenicity and generate higher humoral and cellular immune responses than males following vaccination with several different vaccines. Whether this is also the case for COVID-19 vaccines is currently unknown, as COVID-19 vaccine study data disaggregated by sex are not routinely reported. Therefore, we have assessed the influence of sex on reactogenicity, immunogenicity and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. METHODS: Vaccine efficacy was assessed in 15169 volunteers enrolled into single-blind randomised controlled trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in Brazil and the UK, with the primary endpoint defined as nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. All participants were electronically randomised to receive two standard doses of vaccine or the control product. Logistic regression models were fitted to explore the effect of age and sex on reactogenicity, and linear models fitted to log-transformed values for immunogenicity data. Reactogenicity data were taken from self-reported diaries of 788 trial participants. Pseudovirus neutralisation assay data were available from 748 participants and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG assay data from 1543 participants. FINDINGS: 7619 participants received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 7550 received the control. Vaccine efficacy in participants after two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (4243 females and 3376 males) was 66.1% (95% CI 55.9-73.9%) in males and 59.9% (95% CI 49.8-67.9%) in females; with no evidence of a difference in efficacy between the sexes (vaccine by sex interaction term P=0.3359). A small, statistically significant difference in anti-spike IgG was observed (adjusted GMR 1.14; 95% CI 1.04-1.26), with higher titres in females than males, but there were no statistically significant differences in other immunological endpoints. Whilst the majority of individuals reported at least one systemic reaction following a first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, females were twice as likely as males to report any systemic reaction after a first dose (OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.37-2.77). Measured fever of 38°C or above was reported in 5% of females and 1% of males following first doses. Headache and fatigue were the most commonly reported reactions in both sexes. INTERPRETATION: Our results show that there is no evidence of difference in efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in males and females. Greater reactogenicity in females was not associated with any difference in vaccine efficacy. FUNDING: Studies were registered with ISRCTN 90906759 (COV002) and ISRCTN 89951424 (COV003) and follow-up is ongoing. Funding was received from the UK Research and Innovation, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Science, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, the Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior, Brazil, and AstraZeneca.