Tolerability and immunogenicity of an intranasally-administered adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccine: An open-label partially-randomised ascending dose phase I trial.

BACKGROUND: Intranasal vaccination may induce protective local and systemic immune responses against respiratory pathogens. A number of intranasal SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates have achieved protection in pre-clinical challenge models, including ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222, University of Oxford / AstraZeneca). METHODS: We performed a single-centre open-label Phase I clinical trial of intranasal vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in healthy adults, using the existing formulation produced for intramuscular administration. Thirty SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-naïve participants were allocated to receive 5 × 109 viral particles (VP, n=6), 2 × 1010 VP (n=12), or 5 × 1010 VP (n=12). Fourteen received second intranasal doses 28 days later. A further 12 received non-study intramuscular mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination between study days 22 and 46. To investigate intranasal ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 as a booster, six participants who had previously received two intramuscular doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and six who had received two intramuscular doses of BNT162b2 (Pfizer / BioNTech) were given a single intranasal dose of 5 × 1010 VP of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Objectives were to assess safety (primary) and mucosal antibody responses (secondary). FINDINGS: Reactogenicity was mild or moderate. Antigen-specific mucosal antibody responses to intranasal vaccination were detectable in a minority of participants, rarely exceeding levels seen after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Systemic responses to intranasal vaccination were typically weaker than after intramuscular vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Antigen-specific mucosal antibody was detectable in participants who received an intramuscular mRNA vaccine after intranasal vaccination. Seven participants developed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. INTERPRETATION: This formulation of intranasal ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 showed an acceptable tolerability profile but induced neither a consistent mucosal antibody response nor a strong systemic response. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

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.

Was lockdown life worth living?

Lockdowns in Australia have been strict and lengthy. Policy-makers appear to have given the preservation of quantity of lives strong priority over the preservation of quality of lives. But thought-experiments in population ethics suggest that this is not always the right priority. In this paper, I'll discuss both negative impacts on quantity of lives caused by the lockdowns themselves, including an increase in domestic violence, and negative impacts on quality of lives caused by lockdowns, in order to raise the question of whether we each had reason to choose quantity over quality in our own lives in a way that would justify the lockdowns we had.

Divergent trajectories of antiviral memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The trajectories of acquired immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection are not fully understood. We present a detailed longitudinal cohort study of UK healthcare workers prior to vaccination, presenting April-June 2020 with asymptomatic or symptomatic infection. Here we show a highly variable range of responses, some of which (T cell interferon-gamma ELISpot, N-specific antibody) wane over time, while others (spike-specific antibody, B cell memory ELISpot) are stable. We use integrative analysis and a machine-learning approach (SIMON - Sequential Iterative Modeling OverNight) to explore this heterogeneity. We identify a subgroup of participants with higher antibody responses and interferon-gamma ELISpot T cell responses, and a robust trajectory for longer term immunity associates with higher levels of neutralising antibodies against the infecting (Victoria) strain and also against variants B.1.1.7 (alpha) and B.1.351 (beta). These variable trajectories following early priming may define subsequent protection from severe disease from novel variants.

Staff support in a National Health Service mental health trust in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the impact work can have on healthcare workers and the importance of staff support services. Rapid guidance was published to encourage preventive and responsive support for healthcare workers. AIMS: To understand mental healthcare staff's help-seeking behaviours and access to support at work in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, to inform iterative improvements to provision of staff support. METHOD: We conducted a formative appraisal of access to support and support needs of staff in a National Health Service mental health trust. This involved 11 semi-structured individual interviews using a topic guide. Five virtual staff forums were additional sources of data. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify key themes. RESULTS: Peer-based, within-team support was highly valued and sought after. However, access to support was negatively affected by work pressures, physical distancing and perceived cultural barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare organisations need to help colleagues to support each other by facilitating open, diverse workplace cultures and providing easily accessible, safe and reflective spaces. Future research should evaluate support in the evolving work contexts imposed by COVID-19 to inform interventions that account for differences across healthcare workforces.

Reactogenicity and immunogenicity after a late second dose or a third dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in the UK: a substudy of two randomised controlled trials (COV001 and COV002).

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccine supply shortages are causing concerns about compromised immunity in some countries as the interval between the first and second dose becomes longer. Conversely, countries with no supply constraints are considering administering a third dose. We assessed the persistence of immunogenicity after a single dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), immunity after an extended interval (44-45 weeks) between the first and second dose, and response to a third dose as a booster given 28-38 weeks after the second dose. METHODS: In this substudy, volunteers aged 18-55 years who were enrolled in the phase 1/2 (COV001) controlled trial in the UK and had received either a single dose or two doses of 5 × 1010 viral particles were invited back for vaccination. Here we report the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of a delayed second dose (44-45 weeks after first dose) or a third dose of the vaccine (28-38 weeks after second dose). Data from volunteers aged 18-55 years who were enrolled in either the phase 1/2 (COV001) or phase 2/3 (COV002), single-blinded, randomised controlled trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and who had previously received a single dose or two doses of 5 × 1010 viral particles are used for comparison purposes. COV001 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, and ISRCTN, 15281137, and COV002 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137, and both are continuing but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between March 11 and 21, 2021, 90 participants were enrolled in the third-dose boost substudy, of whom 80 (89%) were assessable for reactogenicity, 75 (83%) were assessable for evaluation of antibodies, and 15 (17%) were assessable for T-cells responses. The two-dose cohort comprised 321 participants who had reactogenicity data (with prime-boost interval of 8-12 weeks: 267 [83%] of 321; 15-25 weeks: 24 [7%]; or 44-45 weeks: 30 [9%]) and 261 who had immunogenicity data (interval of 8-12 weeks: 115 [44%] of 261; 15-25 weeks: 116 [44%]; and 44-45 weeks: 30 [11%]). 480 participants from the single-dose cohort were assessable for immunogenicity up to 44-45 weeks after vaccination. Antibody titres after a single dose measured approximately 320 days after vaccination remained higher than the titres measured at baseline (geometric mean titre of 66·00 ELISA units [EUs; 95% CI 47·83-91·08] vs 1·75 EUs [1·60-1·93]). 32 participants received a late second dose of vaccine 44-45 weeks after the first dose, of whom 30 were included in immunogenicity and reactogenicity analyses. Antibody titres were higher 28 days after vaccination in those with a longer interval between first and second dose than for those with a short interval (median total IgG titre: 923 EUs [IQR 525-1764] with an 8-12 week interval; 1860 EUs [917-4934] with a 15-25 week interval; and 3738 EUs [1824-6625] with a 44-45 week interval). Among participants who received a third dose of vaccine, antibody titres (measured in 73 [81%] participants for whom samples were available) were significantly higher 28 days after a third dose (median total IgG titre: 3746 EUs [IQR 2047-6420]) than 28 days after a second dose (median 1792 EUs [IQR 899-4634]; Wilcoxon signed rank test p=0·0043). T-cell responses were also boosted after a third dose (median response increased from 200 spot forming units [SFUs] per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells [PBMCs; IQR 127-389] immediately before the third dose to 399 SFUs per milion PBMCs [314-662] by day 28 after the third dose; Wilcoxon signed rank test p=0·012). Reactogenicity after a late second dose or a third dose was lower than reactogenicity after a first dose. INTERPRETATION: An extended interval before the second dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 leads to increased antibody titres. A third dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 induces antibodies to a level that correlates with high efficacy after second dose and boosts T-cell responses. FUNDING: 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, AstraZeneca, and Wellcome.

Comparison of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Screening Using Reverse Transcriptase-Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction or CRISPR-Based Assays in Asymptomatic College Students.

Importance: The reopening of colleges and universities in the US during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a significant public health challenge. The development of accessible and practical approaches for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection in the college population is paramount for deploying recurrent surveillance testing as an essential strategy for virus detection, containment, and mitigation. Objective: To determine the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic participants in a university community by using CREST (Cas13-based, rugged, equitable, scalable testing), a CRISPR-based test developed for accessible and large-scale viral screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this cohort study, a total of 1808 asymptomatic participants were screened for SARS-CoV-2 using a CRISPR-based assay and a point-of-reference reverse transcriptase-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) test. Viral prevalence in self-collected oropharyngeal swab samples collected from May 28 to June 11, 2020, and from June 23 to July 2, 2020, was evaluated. Exposures: Testing for SARS-CoV-2. Main Outcomes and Measures: SARS-CoV-2 status, viral load, and demographic information of the study participants were collected. Results: Among the 1808 participants (mean [SD] age, 27.3 [11.0] years; 955 [52.8%] female), 732 underwent testing from May to early June (mean [SD] age, 28.4 [11.7] years; 392 [53.6%] female). All test results in this cohort were negative. In contrast, 1076 participants underwent testing from late June to early July (mean [SD] age, 26.6 [10.5] years; 563 [52.3%] female), with 9 positive results by RT-qPCR. Eight of these positive samples were detected by the CRISPR-based assay and confirmed by Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified diagnostic testing. The mean (SD) age of the positive cases was 21.7 (3.3) years; all 8 individuals self-identified as students. These metrics showed that a CRISPR-based assay was effective at capturing positive SARS-CoV-2 cases in this student population. Notably, the viral loads detected in these asymptomatic cases resemble those seen in clinical samples, highlighting the potential of covert viral transmission. The shift in viral prevalence coincided with the relaxation of stay-at-home measures. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings reveal a shift in SARS-CoV-2 prevalence in a young and asymptomatic population and uncover the leading edge of a local outbreak that coincided with rising case counts in the surrounding county and the state of California. The concordance between CRISPR-based and RT-qPCR testing suggests that CRISPR-based assays are reliable and offer alternative options for surveillance testing and detection of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks, as is required to resume operations in higher-education institutions in the US and abroad.

Navigating uncertainty, employment and women's safety during COVID-19: Reflections of sexual assault resistance educators.

COVID-19 affects women in ways unique to the impacts of structural inequalities related to gender, sexuality, disability, race and socioeconomic status. In this article, we reflect on our own experiences of the pandemic, as feminist students, workers and sexual assault resistance educators located in a Canadian post-secondary setting. Situating ourselves within feminist responses to sexual violence prevention, as facilitators of the Enhanced Assess, Acknowledge, and Act (EAAA) sexual assault resistance education programme for university women, we reflect on the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on our work as EAAA facilitators in our Canadian university. We explore the theoretical possibilities that critical disability theory and queer theory present to the EAAA programme, and argue that incorporating concepts from these frameworks will complement the goals of the EAAA programme and improve inclusivity of queer, trans and disabled participants. We conclude with a look into the future by anticipating the impacts of COVID-19 on our future work.