Final efficacy analysis, interim safety analysis, and immunogenicity of a single dose of recombinant novel coronavirus vaccine (adenovirus type 5 vector) in adults 18 years and older: an international, multicentre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The Ad5-nCoV vaccine is a single-dose adenovirus type 5 (Ad5) vectored vaccine expressing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that was well-tolerated and immunogenic in phase 1 and 2 studies. In this study, we report results on the final efficacy and interim safety analyses of the phase 3 trial. METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, international, placebo-controlled, endpoint-case driven, phase 3, clinical trial enrolled adults aged 18 years older at study centres in Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Pakistan, and Russia. Participants were eligible for the study if they had no unstable or severe underlying medical or psychiatric conditions; had no history of a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection; were not pregnant or breastfeeding; and had no previous receipt of an adenovirus-vectored, coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. After informed consent was obtained, 25 mL of whole blood was withdrawn from all eligible participants who were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single intramuscular dose of 0·5 mL placebo or a 0·5 mL dose of 5 × 1010 viral particle (vp)/mL Ad5-nCoV vaccine; study staff and participants were blinded to treatment allocation. All participants were contacted weekly by email, telephone, or text message to self-report any symptoms of COVID-19 illness, and laboratory testing for SARS-CoV-2 was done for all participants with any symptoms. The primary efficacy objective evaluated Ad5-nCoV in preventing symptomatic, PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection occurring at least 28 days after vaccination in all participants who were at least 28 days postvaccination on Jan 15, 2021. The primary safety objective evaluated the incidence of any serious adverse events or medically attended adverse events postvaccination in all participants who received a study injection. This trial is closed for enrolment and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04526990). FINDINGS: Study enrolment began on Sept 22, 2020, in Pakistan, Nov 6, 2020, in Mexico, Dec 2, 2020, in Russia and Chile, and Dec 17, 2020, in Argentina; 150 endpoint cases were reached on Jan 15, 2021, triggering the final primary efficacy analysis. One dose of Ad5-nCoV showed a 57·5% (95% CI 39·7-70·0, p=0·0026) efficacy against symptomatic, PCR-confirmed, COVID-19 infection at 28 days or more postvaccination (21 250 participants; 45 days median duration of follow-up [IQR 36-58]). In the primary safety analysis undertaken at the time of the efficacy analysis (36 717 participants), there was no significant difference in the incidence of serious adverse events (14 [0·1%] of 18 363 Ad5-nCoV recipients and 10 [0·1%] of 18 354 placebo recipients, p=0·54) or medically attended adverse events (442 [2·4%] of 18 363 Ad5-nCoV recipients and 411 [2·2%] of 18 354 placebo recipients, p=0·30) between the Ad5-nCoV or placebo groups, or any serious adverse events considered related to the study product (none in both Ad5-nCoV and placebo recipients). In the extended safety cohort, 1004 (63·5%) of 1582 of Ad5-nCoV recipients and 729 (46·4%) of 1572 placebo recipients reported a solicited systemic adverse event (p<0·0001), of which headache was the most common (699 [44%] of Ad5-nCoV recipients and 481 [30·6%] of placebo recipients; p<0·0001). 971 (61·3%) of 1584 Ad5-nCoV recipients and 314 (20·0%) of 1573 placebo recipients reported an injection-site adverse event (p<0·0001), of which pain at the injection site was the most frequent; reported by 939 (59%) Ad5-nCoV recipients and 303 (19%) placebo recipients. INTERPRETATION: One dose of Ad5-nCoV is efficacious and safe in healthy adults aged 18 years and older. FUNDING: CanSino Biologics and the Beijing Institute of Biotechnology.

Prevention and Treatment of SARS-CoV2 Infection in People Living with HIV: The Need for Specific Data.

The HIV pandemic has led to close to 40 million people living with HIV (PLWH) worldwide. To date, SARS-CoV2 has affected > 220 million people, and unprecedented global efforts have resulted in almost 6000 million doses of SARS-CoV2 vaccines being administered. Although several specific COVID-19 antiviral and anti-inflammatory treatments and SARS-CoV2 vaccines have been approved, the data available to support their use in specific populations such as PLWH remain limited. PLWH includes a range of individuals from practically unaffected immunity to severely immunocompromised individuals, and preventive and therapeutic interventions should be tailored for these subgroups . However, in most randomized clinical trials regarding antivirals, immunomodulators and vaccines for COVID-19, PLWH have been excluded or only enrolled in small numbers leading to a paucity of data. We briefly discuss the current evidence for prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in PLWH and identify key areas where more information is required.

Effect of Colchicine vs Usual Care Alone on Intubation and 28-Day Mortality in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia have high rates of morbidity and mortality. Objective: To assess the efficacy of colchicine in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Estudios Clínicos Latino América (ECLA) Population Health Research Institute (PHRI) COLCOVID trial was a multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical trial performed from April 17, 2020, to March 28, 2021, in adults with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection followed for up to 28 days. Participants received colchicine vs usual care if they were hospitalized with COVID-19 symptoms and had severe acute respiratory syndrome or oxygen desaturation. The main exclusion criteria were clear indications or contraindications for colchicine, chronic kidney disease, and negative results on a reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 before randomization. Data were analyzed from June 20 to July 25, 2021. Interventions: Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to usual care or usual care plus colchicine. Colchicine was administered orally in a loading dose of 1.5 mg immediately after randomization, followed by 0.5 mg orally within 2 hours of the initial dose and 0.5 mg orally twice a day for 14 days or discharge, whichever occurred first. Main Outcomes and Measures: The first coprimary outcome was the composite of a new requirement for mechanical ventilation or death evaluated at 28 days. The second coprimary outcome was death at 28 days. Results: A total of 1279 hospitalized patients (mean [SD] age, 61.8 [14.6] years; 449 [35.1%] women and 830 [64.9%] men) were randomized, including 639 patients in the usual care group and 640 patients in the colchicine group. Corticosteroids were used in 1171 patients (91.5%). The coprimary outcome of mechanical ventilation or 28-day death occurred in 160 patients (25.0%) in the colchicine group and 184 patients (28.8%) in the usual care group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.67-1.02; P = .08). The second coprimary outcome, 28-day death, occurred in 131 patients (20.5%) in the colchicine group and 142 patients (22.2%) in the usual care group (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.70-1.12). Diarrhea was the most frequent adverse effect of colchicine, reported in 68 patients (11.3%). Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that compared with usual care, colchicine did not significantly reduce mechanical ventilation or 28-day mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04328480.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection in a Latin American country: Results from the ECCOVID multicenter prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical features and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infections diverge in different countries. The aim of this study was to describe clinical characteristics and outcomes in a cohort of patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 in Argentina. METHODS: Multicenter prospective cohort study of ≥18 years-old patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection consecutively admitted to 19 hospitals in Argentina. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify variables associated with 30-day mortality and admission to intensive care unit (ICU). RESULTS: A total of 809 patients were analyzed. Median age was 53 years, 56% were males and 71% had at least one comorbidity. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (32%), obesity (23%) and diabetes (17%). Disease severity at admission was classified as mild 25%, moderate 51%, severe 17%, and critical 7%. Almost half of patients (49%) required supplemental oxygen, 18% ICU, and 12% invasive ventilation. Overall, 30-day mortality was 11%. Factors independently associated with ICU admission were male gender (OR 1.81; 95%CI 1.16-2.81), hypertension (OR 3.21; 95%CI 2.08-4.95), obesity (OR 2.38; 95%CI 1.51-3.7), oxygen saturation ≤93% (OR 6.45; 95%CI 4.20-9.92) and lymphopenia (OR 3.21; 95%CI 2.08-4.95). Factors independently associated with 30-day mortality included age ≥60 years-old (OR 2.68; 95% CI 1.63-4.43), oxygen saturation ≤93% (OR 3.19; 95%CI 1.97-5.16) and lymphopenia (OR 2.65; 95%CI 1.64-4.27). CONCLUSIONS: This cohort validates crucial clinical data on patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 in Argentina.

Overview of SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults living with HIV.

Around 2·5 million deaths and more than 110 million COVID-19 cases have been reported globally. Although it initially appeared that HIV infection was not a risk factor for COVID-19 or more severe disease, more recent large studies suggest that people living with HIV (particularly with low CD4 cell counts or untreated HIV infection) might have a more severe clinical course than those who are HIV-negative. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted HIV prevention and treatment services worldwide, creating huge challenges to the continuity of essential activities. We have reviewed the most relevant features of COVID-19 in people living with HIV and highlighted topics where further research is required.

RBD-specific polyclonal F(ab´)2 fragments of equine antibodies in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease: A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, adaptive phase 2/3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: passive immunotherapy is a therapeutic alternative for patients with COVID-19. Equine polyclonal antibodies (EpAbs) could represent a source of scalable neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: we conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to assess efficacy and safety of EpAbs (INM005) in hospitalized adult patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 pneumonia in 19 hospitals of Argentina. Primary endpoint was improvement in at least two categories in WHO ordinal clinical scale at day 28 or hospital discharge (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT04494984). FINDINGS: between August 1st and October 26th, 2020, a total of 245 patients were enrolled. Enrolled patients were assigned to receive two blinded doses of INM005 (n = 118) or placebo (n = 123). Median age was 54 years old, 65•1% were male and 61% had moderate disease at baseline. Median time from symptoms onset to study treatment was 6 days (interquartile range 5 to 8). No statistically significant difference was noted between study groups on primary endpoint (risk difference [95% IC]: 5•28% [-3•95; 14•50]; p = 0•15). Rate of improvement in at least two categories was statistically significantly higher for INM005 at days 14 and 21 of follow-up. Time to improvement in two ordinal categories or hospital discharge was 14•2 (± 0•7) days in the INM005 group and 16•3 (± 0•7) days in the placebo group, hazard ratio 1•31 (95% CI 1•0 to 1•74). Subgroup analyses showed a beneficial effect of INM005 over severe patients and in those with negative baseline antibodies. Overall mortality was 6•9% the INM005 group and 11•4% in the placebo group (risk difference [95% IC]: 0•57 [0•24 to 1•37]). Adverse events of special interest were mild or moderate; no anaphylaxis was reported. INTERPRETATION: Albeit not having reached the primary endpoint, we found clinical improvement of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, particularly those with severe disease.

False-negative results of initial RT-PCR assays for COVID-19: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A false-negative case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is defined as a person with suspected infection and an initial negative result by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, with a positive result on a subsequent test. False-negative cases have important implications for isolation and risk of transmission of infected people and for the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to review and critically appraise evidence about the rate of RT-PCR false-negatives at initial testing for COVID-19. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, as well as COVID-19 repositories, including the EPPI-Centre living systematic map of evidence about COVID-19 and the Coronavirus Open Access Project living evidence database. Two authors independently screened and selected studies according to the eligibility criteria and collected data from the included studies. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. We calculated the proportion of false-negative test results using a multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression model. The certainty of the evidence about false-negative cases was rated using the GRADE approach for tests and strategies. All information in this article is current up to July 17, 2020. RESULTS: We included 34 studies enrolling 12,057 COVID-19 confirmed cases. All studies were affected by several risks of bias and applicability concerns. The pooled estimate of false-negative proportion was highly affected by unexplained heterogeneity (tau-squared = 1.39; 90% prediction interval from 0.02 to 0.54). The certainty of the evidence was judged as very low due to the risk of bias, indirectness, and inconsistency issues. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial and largely unexplained heterogeneity in the proportion of false-negative RT-PCR results. The collected evidence has several limitations, including risk of bias issues, high heterogeneity, and concerns about its applicability. Nonetheless, our findings reinforce the need for repeated testing in patients with suspicion of SARS-Cov-2 infection given that up to 54% of COVID-19 patients may have an initial false-negative RT-PCR (very low certainty of evidence). SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Protocol available on the OSF website: https://tinyurl.com/vvbgqya.