Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 26
Filter
2.
JCI Insight ; 7(7)2022 Apr 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1702851

ABSTRACT

Duration of protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection in people living with HIV (PWH) following vaccination is unclear. In a substudy of the phase II/III the COV002 trial (NCT04400838), 54 HIV+ male participants on antiretroviral therapy (undetectable viral loads, CD4+ T cells > 350 cells/µL) received 2 doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) 4-6 weeks apart and were followed for 6 months. Responses to vaccination were determined by serology (IgG ELISA and Meso Scale Discovery [MSD]), neutralization, ACE-2 inhibition, IFN-γ ELISpot, activation-induced marker (AIM) assay and T cell proliferation. We show that, 6 months after vaccination, the majority of measurable immune responses were greater than prevaccination baseline but with evidence of a decline in both humoral and cell-mediated immunity. There was, however, no significant difference compared with a cohort of HIV-uninfected individuals vaccinated with the same regimen. Responses to the variants of concern were detectable, although they were lower than WT. Preexisting cross-reactive T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike were associated with greater postvaccine immunity and correlated with prior exposure to beta coronaviruses. These data support the ongoing policy to vaccinate PWH against SARS-CoV-2, and they underpin the need for long-term monitoring of responses after vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , COVID-19/prevention & control , HIV Infections/drug therapy , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
3.
EuropePMC;
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-327455

ABSTRACT

Background T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 following infection and vaccination are less characterised than antibody responses, due to a more complex experimental pathway. Methods We measured T cell responses in 108 healthcare workers (HCWs) in an observational cohort study, using the commercialised Oxford Immunotec T-SPOT Discovery SARS-CoV-2 assay (OI T-SPOT) and the PITCH ELISpot protocol established for academic research settings. Results Both assays detected T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike, membrane and nucleocapsid proteins. Responses were significantly lower when reported by OI T-SPOT than by PITCH ELISpot. Four weeks after two doses of either Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 AZD1222 vaccine, the responder rate was 63% for OI T-SPOT Panels1+2 (peptides representing SARS-CoV-2 spike protein excluding regions present in seasonal coronaviruses), 69% for OI T-SPOT Panel 14 (peptides representing the entire SARS-CoV-2 spike), and 94% for the PITCH ELISpot assay. The two OI T-SPOT panels correlated strongly with each other showing that either readout quantifies spike-specific T cell responses, although the correlation between the OI T-SPOT panels and the PITCH ELISpot was moderate. Conclusion The standardisation, relative scalability and longer interval between blood acquisition and processing are advantages of the commercial OI T-SPOT assay. However, the OI T-SPOT assay measures T cell responses at a significantly lower magnitude compared to the PITCH ELISpot assay, detecting T cell responses in a lower proportion of vaccinees. This has implications for the reporting of low-level T cell responses that may be observed in patient populations and for the assessment of T cell durability after vaccination.

4.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-322827

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is normally controlled by effective host immunity including innate, humoral and cellular responses. However, the trajectories and correlates of acquired immunity, and the capacity of memory responses months after infection to neutralise variants of concern - which has important public health implications - is not fully understood. To address this, we studied a cohort of 78 UK healthcare workers who presented in April to June 2020 with symptomatic PCR-confirmed infection or who tested positive during an asymptomatic screening programme and tracked virus-specific B and T cell responses longitudinally at 5-6 time points each over 6 months, prior to vaccination. We observed a highly variable range of responses, some of which - T cell interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) ELISpot, N-specific antibody waned over time across the cohort, while others (spike-specific antibody, B cell memory ELISpot) were stable. In such cohorts, antiviral antibody has been linked to protection against re-infection. We used integrative analysis and a machine-learning approach (SIMON - Sequential Iterative Modeling Over Night) to explore this heterogeneity and to identify predictors of sustained immune responses. Hierarchical clustering defined a group of high and low antibody responders, which showed stability over time regardless of clinical presentation. These antibody responses correlated with IFN-γ ELISpot measures of T cell immunity and represent a subgroup of patients with a robust trajectory for longer term immunity. Importantly, this immune-phenotype associates with higher levels of neutralising antibodies not only against the infecting (Victoria) strain but also against variants B.1.1.7 (alpha) and B.1.351 (beta). Overall memory responses to SARS-CoV-2 show distinct trajectories following early priming, that may define subsequent protection against infection and severe disease from novel variants.

5.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-321742

ABSTRACT

Both natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 and immunization with a number of vaccines induce protective immunity. However, the ability of such immune responses to recognize and therefore protect against emerging variants is a matter of increasing importance. Such variants of concern (VOC) include isolates of lineage B1.1.7, first identified in the UK, and B1.351, first identified in South Africa. Our data confirm that VOC, particularly those with substitutions at residues 484 and 417 escape neutralization by antibodies directed to the ACE2-binding Class 1 and the adjacent Class 2 epitopes but are susceptible to neutralization by the generally less potent antibodies directed to Class 3 and 4 epitopes on the flanks RBD. To address this potential threat, we sampled a SARS-CoV-2 uninfected UK cohort recently vaccinated with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech, two doses delivered 18-28 days apart), alongside a cohort naturally infected in the first wave of the epidemic in Spring 2020. We tested antibody and T cell responses against a reference isolate (VIC001) representing the original circulating lineage B and the impact of sequence variation in these two VOCs. We identified a reduction in antibody neutralization against the VOCs which was most evident in the B1.351 variant. However, the majority of the T cell response was directed against epitopes conserved across all three strains. The reduction in antibody neutralization was less marked in post-boost vaccine-induced than in naturally-induced immune responses and could be largely explained by the potency of the homotypic antibody response. However, after a single vaccination, which induced only modestly neutralizing homotypic antibody titres, neutralization against the VOCs was completely abrogated in the majority of vaccinees. These data indicate that VOCs may evade protective neutralising responses induced by prior infection, and to a lesser extent by immunization, particularly after a single vaccine, but the impact of the VOCs on T cell responses appears less marked. The results emphasize the need to generate high potency immune responses through vaccination in order to provide protection against these and other emergent variants. We observed that two doses of vaccine also induced a significant increase in binding antibodies to spike of both SARS-CoV-1 & MERS, in addition to the four common coronaviruses currently circulating in the UK. The impact of antigenic imprinting on the potency of humoral and cellular heterotypic protection generated by the next generation of variant-directed vaccines remains to be determined.

6.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-321741

ABSTRACT

Both natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 and immunization with vaccines induce protective immunity. However, the extent to which such immune responses protect against emerging variants is of increasing importance. Such variants of concern (VOC) include isolates of lineage B.1.1.7, first identified in the UK, and B.1.351, first identified in South Africa. Our data confirm that VOC, particularly those with substitutions at residues 484 and 417, escape neutralization by antibodies directed to the ACE2-binding Class 1 and the adjacent Class 2 epitopes but are susceptible to neutralization by the generally less potent antibodies directed to Class 3 and 4 epitopes on the flanks of the receptor-binding domain. To address the potential threat posed by VOC, we sampled a SARS-CoV-2 uninfected UK cohort recently vaccinated with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech, two doses delivered 18-28 days apart), alongside a cohort sampled in the early convalescent stages after natural infection in the first wave of the pandemic in Spring 2020. We tested antibody and T cell responses against a reference isolate of the original circulating lineage, B, and the impact of sequence variation in the B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 VOC. Neutralization of the VOC compared to B isolate was reduced, and this was most evident for the B.1.351 isolate. This reduction in antibody neutralization was less marked in post-boost vaccine-induced responses compared to naturally induced immune responses and could be largely explained by the potency of the homotypic antibody response. After a single vaccination, which induced only modestly neutralizing homotypic antibody titres, neutralization against the VOC was completely abrogated in the majority of vaccinees. Importantly, high magnitude T cell responses were generated after two vaccine doses, with the majority of the T cell response directed against epitopes that are conserved between the prototype isolate B and the VOC. These data indicate that VOC may evade protective neutralizing responses induced by prior infection, and to a lesser extent by immunization, particularly after a single vaccine dose, but the impact of the VOC on T cell responses appears less marked. The results emphasize the need to generate high potency immune responses through vaccination in order to provide protection against these and other emergent variants.

7.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-313929

ABSTRACT

SARS-COV-2 vaccines have been shown to be efficacious primarily in healthy volunteer populations and population level studies. Immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are less well characterised in potentially immune vulnerable patient groups, including those with immune-mediated inflammatory and chronic diseases (inflammatory arthritis [IA] incorporating rheumatoid arthritis [RA] and psoriatic arthritis [PsA];ANCA-Associated Vasculitis [AAV];inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]);hepatic disease (HepD), end stage kidney disease requiring haemodialysis (HD) without or with immunosuppression (HDIS);solid cancers (SC) and haematological malignancies (HM), and those that have undergone haemopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). The OCTAVE trial is a multi-centre, multi-disease, prospective cohort that will comprehensively assess SARS-CoV-2 vaccine responses within and between the abovementioned disease cohorts using common analytical platforms in patients recruited across the United Kingdom (UK). The majority of subjects received either COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) or ChAdOx1 Vaccine (AstraZeneca formerly AZD1222) as part of the UK National COVID19 vaccination programme. As of 13 th August 2021;2,583 patients have been recruited. We report herein the humoral and T cell immune response results from the first 600 participants recruited where serology data are available at baseline, pre-second vaccine dose (boost) and/or 4 weeks post second dose. We also include in the analysis, data obtained from 231 healthy individuals from the PITCH (Protective Immunity from T cells in Healthcare workers) study. Overall, in comparison to PITCH where 100% of tested individuals (n=93) generated anti-Spike antibodies after vaccine doses, 89% of patients within OCTAVE seroconverted 4 weeks after second vaccine dose. By corollary, approximately 11% of patients across all disease cohorts fail to generate antibodies that react to SARS-CoV-2 spike 4 weeks after two vaccines. Failure to generate spike reactive antibodies was found at a higher proportion in some specific patient subgroups, particularly AAV (72.4%), HD-IS (16.7%) and HepD (16.7%). Importantly, all recruited AAV patients had received Rituximab;a targeted B cell depletion therapy. Furthermore, even in those who seroconverted, 40% of patients across disease cohorts generate lower levels of SARS-CoV-2 antibody reactivity compared to healthy subjects after two SARS-CoV-2 vaccines;the functional significance of these findings in providing protection from subsequent SARS-CoV-2 exposure is not currently known. In contrast to the observed serological response, evaluation of the Spike-specific T cell response revealed that across all patient sub-groups (including AAV) a response similar to healthy individuals was generated. Our data argue strongly for further vaccination strategies to optimise humoral immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with chronic diseases and/or patients on immune suppressive therapies. Trial Registration: The trial is registered on ISRCTN 12821688.Funding: This work was supported by the Medical Research Council COVID-19 Immunity – National Core Study (IMM-NCS) [grant number MC-PC-20031]. Staff at the Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit (CRCTU) are supported by a core funding grant from Cancer Research UK (C22436/A25354). PK and EB are supported by the NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centres at the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Birmingham Biomedical Research Centres. EB and PK are supported by an NIHR Senior Investigator award. PK is funded by WT109965MA. SJD is funded by an NIHR Global Research Professorship (NIHR300791). TdS is funded by a Wellcome Trust Intermediate Clinical Fellowship (110058/Z/15/Z). DS is supported by the NIHR Academic Clinical Lecturer programme in Oxford. LT is supported by the Wellcome Trust (grant number 205228/Z/16/Z), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Medical Countermeasures Initiative contract 75F40120C00085. and the Nation l Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections (NIHR200907) at University of Liverpool in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford. The PITCH (Protective Immunity from T cells to Covid-19 in Health workers) Consortium, is funded by the UK Department of Health and Social Care with contributions from UKRI/NIHR through the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium (UKCIC), the Huo Family Foundation and The National Institute for Health Research (UKRIDHSC COVID-19 Rapid Response Rolling Call, Grant Reference Number COV19-RECPLAS).Declaration of Interest: None to declare. Ethical Approval: This study was approved by the UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency on the 5th February 2021 and the London and Chelsea Research Ethics Committee (REC Ref:21/HRA/0489) on 12th February 2021, with subsequent amendments approved on 3rd March 2021, 19th April 2021 and 26th April 2021).

8.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-310655

ABSTRACT

Background: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine is immunogenic and protects against COVID-19. However, data on vaccine immunogenicity are needed for the 40 million people living with HIV (PWH), who may have less functional immunity and more associated co-morbidities than the general population. Methods: Between the 5th and 24th November 2020, 54 adults with HIV, aged 18-55 years, were enrolled into a single arm open label vaccination study within the protocol of the larger phase 2/3 COV002 trial. A prime-boost regimen of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, with two doses (5 × 1010 vp) was given 4-6 weeks apart. All participants were on antiretroviral therapy (ART) with undetectable plasma HIV viral loads and CD4+ T cell counts >350 cells/µl at enrolment. Data were captured on adverse events. Humoral responses were measured by anti-spike IgG ELISA and antibody-mediated live virus neutralisation. Cell-mediated immune responses were measured by ex-vivo interferon-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay (ELISpot) and T cell proliferation. All outcomes were compared with a HIV uninfected group from the main COV002 study.Findings: 54 participants with HIV (median age 42.5 years (IQR 37.2-49.8)) received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Median CD4+ T cell count at enrolment was 694 cells/µl (IQR 562-864). Results are reported for 56 days of follow-up. Local and systemic reactions occurring during the first 7 days after prime vaccination included pain at the injection site (49%), fatigue (47%), headache (47%), malaise (34%), chills (23%), and muscle or (36%) joint pain (9%), the frequencies of which were similar to the HIV-negative participants. There were no serious adverse events. Anti-spike IgG responses by ELISA peaked at Day 42 (median 1440 ELISA units, IQR 704-2728) and were sustained out to Day 56. There was no correlation with CD4+ T cell count or age and the magnitude of the anti-spike IgG response at Day 56 (P>0.05 for both). ELISpot and T cell proliferative responses peaked between Day 14 and 28 after prime and were sustained through to Day 56. When compared to participants without HIV there was no statistical difference in magnitude or persistence of SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific humoral or cellular responses (P>0.05 for all analyses).Interpretation: In this study of PWH, vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 was well tolerated and there was no difference in humoral and cell-mediated immune responses compared to an adult cohort without HIV who received the same vaccination regime. Trial Registration: Trial Registration number is NCT04400838. Funding: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.Declaration of Interest: Oxford University has entered into a partnership with AstraZeneca for further development of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222). AstraZeneca reviewed the data from the study and the final manuscript before 474 submission, but the authors retained editorial control. SCG is cofounder of Vaccitech (a collaborator in the early development of this vaccine candidate) and named as an inventor on a patent covering use of ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines (PCT/GB2012/000467) and a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. TL is named as an inventor on a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and was consultant to Vaccitech. PMF is a consultant to Vaccitech. AJP is Chair of the UK Department of Health and Social Care’s JCVI, but does not participate in policy advice on coronavirus vaccines, and is a member of the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE). AVSH is a cofounder of and consultant to Vaccitech and is named as an inventor on a patent covering design and use of ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines (PCT/GB2012/0004 7).Ethical Approval: Written informed consent was obtained from all participants, and the trial was done in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice. This study was approved in the UK by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (reference 21584/0424/001-0001) and the South Central Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (reference 20/SC/0145). Vaccine use was authorised by Genetically Modified Organisms Safety Committees at each participating site.

9.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-318857

ABSTRACT

Extension of the interval between vaccine doses for the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine was introduced in the UK to accelerate population coverage with a single dose. In a study of 503 healthcare workers, we show that after priming following the first vaccine there is a marked decline in SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody (NAb) levels, but, in contrast, a sustained T cell response to spike protein. This divergent immune profile was accompanied by robust protection from infection over this period from the circulating alpha (B.1.1.7) variant. Importantly, following the second vaccine dose, NAb levels were higher after the extended dosing interval (6-14 weeks) compared to the conventional 3-4 week regimen, accompanied by a clear enrichment of CD4+ T cells expressing IL2. These data on dynamic cellular and humoral responses indicate that extension of the dosing interval is an effective, immunogenic protocol and that antiviral T cell responses are a potential mechanism of protection.Trial Registration Details: PITCH is a sub-study of the SIREN study which is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN11041050,Funding Information: This work was funded by the UK Department of Health and Social Care as part of the PITCH (Protective Immunity from T cells to Covid-19 in Health workers) Consortium, with contributions from UKRI/NIHR through the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium (UK-CIC), the Huo Family Foundation and The National Institute for Health Research (UKRIDHSC COVID-19 Rapid Response Rolling Call, Grant Reference Number COV19-RECPLAS).EB and PK are NIHR Senior Investigators and PK is funded by WT109965MA. SJD is funded by an NIHR Global Research Professorship (NIHR300791). TdS is funded by a Wellcome Trust Intermediate Clinical Fellowship (110058/Z/15/Z). RPP is funded by a Career Re-entry Fellowship (204721/Z/16/Z). CJAD is funded by a Wellcome Clinical Research Career Development Fellowship (211153/Z/18/Z). DS is supported by the NIHR Academic Clinical Lecturer programme in Oxford. LT is supported by the Wellcome Trust (grant number 205228/Z/16/Z) and the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections (NIHR200907) at University of Liverpool in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford. DGW is supported by an NIHR Advanced Fellowship in Liverpool. LT and MC are supported by U.S. Food and Drug Administration Medical Countermeasures Initiative contract 75F40120C00085. Declaration of Interests: AJP is Chair of UK Dept. Health and Social Care’s (DHSC) Joint Committee on Vaccination & Immunisation (JCVI), but does not participate in policy decisions on COVID-19 vaccines. He is a member of the WHO’s SAGE. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of DHSC, JCVI, or WHO. AJP is chief investigator on clinical trials of Oxford University’s COVID-19 vaccine funded by NIHR. Oxford University has entered a joint COVID-19 vaccine development partnership with AstraZeneca. Ethics Approval Statement: PITCH is a sub-study of the SIREN study which was approved by the Berkshire Research Ethics Committee, Health Research 250 Authority (IRAS ID 284460, REC reference 20/SC/0230), with PITCH recognised as a sub-study on 2 December 2020. SIREN is registered with ISRCTN (Trial ID:252 ISRCTN11041050). Some participants were recruited under aligned study protocols. In Birmingham participants were recruited under the Determining the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection in convalescent health care workers (COCO) study (IRAS ID: 282525). In Liverpool some participants were recruited under the “Human immune responses to acute virus infections” Study (16/NW/0170), approved by North West - Liverpool Central Research Ethics Committee on 8 March 2016, and amended on 14th September 2020 and 4th May 2021. In Oxford, participants were recruited under the GI Biobank Study 16/YH/0247, approved by the research ethics committee (REC) t Yorkshire & The Humber - Sheffield Research Ethics Committee on 29 July 2016, which has been amended for this purpose on 8 June 2020. In Sheffield, participants were recruited under the Observational Biobanking study STHObs (18/YH/0441), which was amended for this study on 10 September 2020. The study was conducted in compliance with all relevant ethical regulations for work with human participants, and according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (2008) and the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines. Written informed consent was obtained for all patients enrolled in the study.

10.
Murray, Christopher J. L.; Ikuta, Kevin Shunji, Sharara, Fablina, Swetschinski, Lucien, Robles Aguilar, Gisela, Gray, Authia, Han, Chieh, Bisignano, Catherine, Rao, Puja, Wool, Eve, Johnson, Sarah C.; Browne, Annie J.; Chipeta, Michael Give, Fell, Frederick, Hackett, Sean, Haines-Woodhouse, Georgina, Kashef Hamadani, Bahar H.; Kumaran, Emmanuelle A. P.; McManigal, Barney, Agarwal, Ramesh, Akech, Samuel, Albertson, Samuel, Amuasi, John, Andrews, Jason, Aravkin, Aleskandr, Ashley, Elizabeth, Bailey, Freddie, Baker, Stephen, Basnyat, Buddha, Bekker, Adrie, Bender, Rose, Bethou, Adhisivam, Bielicki, Julia, Boonkasidecha, Suppawat, Bukosia, James, Carvalheiro, Cristina, Castañeda-Orjuela, Carlos, Chansamouth, Vilada, Chaurasia, Suman, Chiurchiù, Sara, Chowdhury, Fazle, Cook, Aislinn J.; Cooper, Ben, Cressey, Tim R.; Criollo-Mora, Elia, Cunningham, Matthew, Darboe, Saffiatou, Day, Nicholas P. J.; De Luca, Maia, Dokova, Klara, Dramowski, Angela, Dunachie, Susanna J.; Eckmanns, Tim, Eibach, Daniel, Emami, Amir, Feasey, Nicholas, Fisher-Pearson, Natasha, Forrest, Karen, Garrett, Denise, Gastmeier, Petra, Giref, Ababi Zergaw, Greer, Rachel Claire, Gupta, Vikas, Haller, Sebastian, Haselbeck, Andrea, Hay, Simon I.; Holm, Marianne, Hopkins, Susan, Iregbu, Kenneth C.; Jacobs, Jan, Jarovsky, Daniel, Javanmardi, Fatemeh, Khorana, Meera, Kissoon, Niranjan, Kobeissi, Elsa, Kostyanev, Tomislav, Krapp, Fiorella, Krumkamp, Ralf, Kumar, Ajay, Kyu, Hmwe Hmwe, Lim, Cherry, Limmathurotsakul, Direk, Loftus, Michael James, Lunn, Miles, Ma, Jianing, Mturi, Neema, Munera-Huertas, Tatiana, Musicha, Patrick, Mussi-Pinhata, Marisa Marcia, Nakamura, Tomoka, Nanavati, Ruchi, Nangia, Sushma, Newton, Paul, Ngoun, Chanpheaktra, Novotney, Amanda, Nwakanma, Davis, Obiero, Christina W.; Olivas-Martinez, Antonio, Olliaro, Piero, Ooko, Ednah, Ortiz-Brizuela, Edgar, Peleg, Anton Yariv, Perrone, Carlo, Plakkal, Nishad, Ponce-de-Leon, Alfredo, Raad, Mathieu, Ramdin, Tanusha, Riddell, Amy, Roberts, Tamalee, Robotham, Julie Victoria, Roca, Anna, Rudd, Kristina E.; Russell, Neal, Schnall, Jesse, Scott, John Anthony Gerard, Shivamallappa, Madhusudhan, Sifuentes-Osornio, Jose, Steenkeste, Nicolas, Stewardson, Andrew James, Stoeva, Temenuga, Tasak, Nidanuch, Thaiprakong, Areerat, Thwaites, Guy, Turner, Claudia, Turner, Paul, van Doorn, H. Rogier, Velaphi, Sithembiso, Vongpradith, Avina, Vu, Huong, Walsh, Timothy, Waner, Seymour, Wangrangsimakul, Tri, Wozniak, Teresa, Zheng, Peng, Sartorius, Benn, Lopez, Alan D.; Stergachis, Andy, Moore, Catrin, Dolecek, Christiane, Naghavi, Mohsen.
Lancet ; 399(10325): 629-655, 2022 02 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1624565

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a major threat to human health around the world. Previous publications have estimated the effect of AMR on incidence, deaths, hospital length of stay, and health-care costs for specific pathogen-drug combinations in select locations. To our knowledge, this study presents the most comprehensive estimates of AMR burden to date. METHODS: We estimated deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) attributable to and associated with bacterial AMR for 23 pathogens and 88 pathogen-drug combinations in 204 countries and territories in 2019. We obtained data from systematic literature reviews, hospital systems, surveillance systems, and other sources, covering 471 million individual records or isolates and 7585 study-location-years. We used predictive statistical modelling to produce estimates of AMR burden for all locations, including for locations with no data. Our approach can be divided into five broad components: number of deaths where infection played a role, proportion of infectious deaths attributable to a given infectious syndrome, proportion of infectious syndrome deaths attributable to a given pathogen, the percentage of a given pathogen resistant to an antibiotic of interest, and the excess risk of death or duration of an infection associated with this resistance. Using these components, we estimated disease burden based on two counterfactuals: deaths attributable to AMR (based on an alternative scenario in which all drug-resistant infections were replaced by drug-susceptible infections), and deaths associated with AMR (based on an alternative scenario in which all drug-resistant infections were replaced by no infection). We generated 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for final estimates as the 25th and 975th ordered values across 1000 posterior draws, and models were cross-validated for out-of-sample predictive validity. We present final estimates aggregated to the global and regional level. FINDINGS: On the basis of our predictive statistical models, there were an estimated 4·95 million (3·62-6·57) deaths associated with bacterial AMR in 2019, including 1·27 million (95% UI 0·911-1·71) deaths attributable to bacterial AMR. At the regional level, we estimated the all-age death rate attributable to resistance to be highest in western sub-Saharan Africa, at 27·3 deaths per 100 000 (20·9-35·3), and lowest in Australasia, at 6·5 deaths (4·3-9·4) per 100 000. Lower respiratory infections accounted for more than 1·5 million deaths associated with resistance in 2019, making it the most burdensome infectious syndrome. The six leading pathogens for deaths associated with resistance (Escherichia coli, followed by Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) were responsible for 929 000 (660 000-1 270 000) deaths attributable to AMR and 3·57 million (2·62-4·78) deaths associated with AMR in 2019. One pathogen-drug combination, meticillin-resistant S aureus, caused more than 100 000 deaths attributable to AMR in 2019, while six more each caused 50 000-100 000 deaths: multidrug-resistant excluding extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis, third-generation cephalosporin-resistant E coli, carbapenem-resistant A baumannii, fluoroquinolone-resistant E coli, carbapenem-resistant K pneumoniae, and third-generation cephalosporin-resistant K pneumoniae. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this study provides the first comprehensive assessment of the global burden of AMR, as well as an evaluation of the availability of data. AMR is a leading cause of death around the world, with the highest burdens in low-resource settings. Understanding the burden of AMR and the leading pathogen-drug combinations contributing to it is crucial to making informed and location-specific policy decisions, particularly about infection prevention and control programmes, access to essential antibiotics, and research and development of new vaccines and antibiotics. There are serious data gaps in many low-income settings, emphasising the need to expand microbiology laboratory capacity and data collection systems to improve our understanding of this important human health threat. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, and Department of Health and Social Care using UK aid funding managed by the Fleming Fund.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Bacterial Infections/epidemiology , Drug Resistance, Bacterial , Global Burden of Disease , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Bacterial Infections/drug therapy , Bacterial Infections/microbiology , Global Health , Humans , Models, Statistical
11.
Cell ; 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1601904

ABSTRACT

On the 24th November 2021 the sequence of a new SARS CoV-2 viral isolate Omicron-B.1.1.529 was announced, containing far more mutations in Spike (S) than previously reported variants. Neutralization titres of Omicron by sera from vaccinees and convalescent subjects infected with early pandemic as well as Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta are substantially reduced or fail to neutralize. Titres against Omicron are boosted by third vaccine doses and are high in cases both vaccinated and infected by Delta. Mutations in Omicron knock out or substantially reduce neutralization by most of a large panel of potent monoclonal antibodies and antibodies under commercial development. Omicron S has structural changes from earlier viruses, combining mutations conferring tight binding to ACE2 to unleash evolution driven by immune escape, leading to a large number of mutations in the ACE2 binding site which rebalance receptor affinity to that of early pandemic viruses. A comprehensive analysis of sera from vaccinees, convalescent patients infected previously by multiple variants and potent monoclonal antibodies from early in the COVID-19 pandemic reveals a substantial overall reduction the ability to neutralize the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, which a third vaccine dose seems to ameliorate. Structural analyses of the Omicron RBD suggest a selective pressure enabling the virus bind ACE2 with increased affinity that is offset by other changes in the receptor binding motif that facilitates immune escape.

13.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-295984

ABSTRACT

Background: Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection and mount poor antibody responses to standard vaccines. We addressed whether ESRD patients could mount immune responses that protected against re-infection following natural SARS-CoV-2 infection or 2-dose vaccination.Methods: Haemodialysis (HD and renal transplant patients were recruited following SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=46) or before SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (n=94). SARS-CoV-2 IgG responses, surrogate neutralising antibody (NAb) titres to wildtype and VOCs, T cell responses and viral sequencing in the vaccine-naïve convalescent cohort were serially assessed following infection. Surrogate NAb titres were measured pre-vaccination and 33 days after 2nd vaccine. Incidence of breakthrough infection was assessed 180 days following 1st vaccination. Findings: 22% of vaccine-naive HD (n=9/36) and transplant patients (n=1/10) demonstrated PCR-positive re-infection (RI) at median 212 days (IQR 140-239) post 1st infection. Prior to RI episodes, RI patients demonstrated poor IgG Spike and RBD responses which were equivalent to levels in pre-pandemic sera (median RI titres: Spike 187 AU/ml, IQR 143-3432, p=0.96;RBD 145 AU/ml, IQR 85-938, p>0.99), unlike patients who developed a single infection only (SI) when compared to pre-pandemic sera (median SI titres: Spike 22826 AU/ml, IQR 1255-63811, p<0.0001;RBD 9588 AU/ml, IQR 270-21616, p=0.001). IgG Spike and RBD titres increased following RI compared to pre-pandemic sera (median RI titres: Spike 22611 AU/ml, IQR 4488-75509, p=0.0006;RBD 6354 AU/ml, IQR 1671-20962, p=0.01). T cell analysis revealed no differences between RI and SI cohorts. Following 2-dose vaccination, 5% of the HD cohort who received AZD1222 (n=3/61) developed breakthrough infection at 6 months following 1st vaccination, unlike those who received BNT162b2 (n=0/16). AZD1222-vaccinated, infection-naïve (I-N) HD patients (n=32) and immunosuppressed transplant recipients (n=17) made poor NAb responses to wildtype, alpha, beta and gamma when compared to infection-experienced (I-E) HD patients (n=29) (I-N vs I-E HD wildtype p<0.0001, alpha p=0.0007, beta p<0.0001, gamma p=0.002). NAb responses improved with BNT162b2 vaccination (n=16);RI patients mounted larger NAb responses to AZD1222 vaccination than SI patients (wildtype p=0.01, alpha p=0.02, beta p<0.02). Interpretation: ESRD patients are highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 re-infection, or breakthrough infection following vaccination, associated with poor protective antibody responses. SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and surrogate NAb responses increase with repeated exposure (infection experience and/or vaccination) in patients who survive infections. Our findings support the case for specific booster regimens in such immune-incompetent patients. Funding Information: Oxford Transplant Foundation, Oxfordshire Health Services Research Committee, UK Department of Health and Social Care, Huo Family Foundation, NIHR (COV19-RECPLAS), UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, WT109965MA.Declaration of Interests: We declare no competing interestsEthics Approval Statement: Haemodialysis (HD) and transplant cohorts: In this prospective, observational cohort study, HD and transplant patients within Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust(OUH) were recruited under Oxford Radcliffe Biobank approved studies, “Biomarkers to stratify risk in Renal Transplant Recipients and Dialysis Patients with Covid-19” (ref: ORB 20/A056), and “Immunological responses to COVID-19 vaccines in transplant and haemodialysis patients” (ref: ORB 21/A014). The Oxford Radcliffe Biobank has a favorable ethics opinion from the South Central Oxford Committee C (REC: 19/SC/0173). Healthcare Worker cohort (HC, PITCH study): PITCH is a sub-study of the SIREN study which was approved by the Berkshire Research Ethics Committee, Health Research 250 Authority (IRAS ID 284 60, REC reference 20/SC/0230), with PITCH recognised as a sub-study on 2 December 2020. SIREN is registered with ISRCTN (Trial ID:252 ISRCTN11041050)The study was conducted in compliance with all relevant ethical regulations for work with human participants, and according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (2008) and the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines. Written informed consent was obtained for all patients enrolled in the study.

14.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-294661

ABSTRACT

Evaluation of susceptibility to emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC) requires rapid screening tests for neutralising antibodies which provide protection. We developed a receptor-binding domain specific hemagglutination test (HAT) which correlated with neutralising antibodies (R=0.74-0.82) in two independent cohorts from 798 convalescents. Home-dwelling older individuals (80-99 years, n=89) had significantly lower antibodies after one dose of BNT162b2 vaccine than younger adult vaccinees (n=310) and naturally infected individuals (n=307). The second vaccine dose boosted and broadened the antibody repertoire to VOC in naïve but not previously infected, older and younger adults. >75% of older adults responded after two vaccinations to alpha and delta, but only 59-62% to beta and gamma, compared to 96-97% of younger vaccinees and 68-76% of infected individuals. Overall, the HAT provides a surrogate marker for neutralising antibodies, could be used as a simple inexpensive, rapid test, rapidly adaptable to emerging VOC for large-scale evaluation of potentially diminishing vaccine effectiveness.

15.
iScience ; 24(11): 103353, 2021 Nov 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1509904

ABSTRACT

We identify amino acid variants within dominant SARS-CoV-2 T cell epitopes by interrogating global sequence data. Several variants within nucleocapsid and ORF3a epitopes have arisen independently in multiple lineages and result in loss of recognition by epitope-specific T cells assessed by IFN-γ and cytotoxic killing assays. Complete loss of T cell responsiveness was seen due to Q213K in the A∗01:01-restricted CD8+ ORF3a epitope FTSDYYQLY207-215; due to P13L, P13S, and P13T in the B∗27:05-restricted CD8+ nucleocapsid epitope QRNAPRITF9-17; and due to T362I and P365S in the A∗03:01/A∗11:01-restricted CD8+ nucleocapsid epitope KTFPPTEPK361-369. CD8+ T cell lines unable to recognize variant epitopes have diverse T cell receptor repertoires. These data demonstrate the potential for T cell evasion and highlight the need for ongoing surveillance for variants capable of escaping T cell as well as humoral immunity.

16.
Lancet Microbe ; 3(1): e21-e31, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1510521

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 affects the immune response to the first dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. We aimed to compare SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell and antibody responses in health-care workers with and without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection following a single dose of the BNT162b2 (tozinameran; Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA vaccine. METHODS: We sampled health-care workers enrolled in the PITCH study across four hospital sites in the UK (Oxford, Liverpool, Newcastle, and Sheffield). All health-care workers aged 18 years or older consenting to participate in this prospective cohort study were included, with no exclusion criteria applied. Blood samples were collected where possible before vaccination and 28 (±7) days following one or two doses (given 3-4 weeks apart) of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Previous infection was determined by a documented SARS-CoV-2-positive RT-PCR result or the presence of positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibodies. We measured spike-specific IgG antibodies and quantified T-cell responses by interferon-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay in all participants where samples were available at the time of analysis, comparing SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals to those with previous infection. FINDINGS: Between Dec 9, 2020, and Feb 9, 2021, 119 SARS-CoV-2-naive and 145 previously infected health-care workers received one dose, and 25 SARS-CoV-2-naive health-care workers received two doses, of the BNT162b2 vaccine. In previously infected health-care workers, the median time from previous infection to vaccination was 268 days (IQR 232-285). At 28 days (IQR 27-33) after a single dose, the spike-specific T-cell response measured in fresh peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) was higher in previously infected (n=76) than in infection-naive (n=45) health-care workers (median 284 [IQR 150-461] vs 55 [IQR 24-132] spot-forming units [SFUs] per 106 PBMCs; p<0·0001). With cryopreserved PBMCs, the T-cell response in previously infected individuals (n=52) after one vaccine dose was equivalent to that of infection-naive individuals (n=19) after receiving two vaccine doses (median 152 [IQR 119-275] vs 162 [104-258] SFUs/106 PBMCs; p=1·00). Anti-spike IgG antibody responses following a single dose in 142 previously infected health-care workers (median 270 373 [IQR 203 461-535 188] antibody units [AU] per mL) were higher than in 111 infection-naive health-care workers following one dose (35 001 [17 099-55 341] AU/mL; p<0·0001) and higher than in 25 infection-naive individuals given two doses (180 904 [108 221-242 467] AU/mL; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: A single dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine is likely to provide greater protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, than in SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals, including against variants of concern. Future studies should determine the additional benefit of a second dose on the magnitude and durability of immune responses in individuals vaccinated following infection, alongside evaluation of the impact of extending the interval between vaccine doses. FUNDING: UK Department of Health and Social Care, and UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Antibody Formation , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Immunoglobulin G , Leukocytes, Mononuclear , Prospective Studies , T-Lymphocytes , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Vaccines, Synthetic
17.
PLoS Pathog ; 17(9): e1009804, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1416909

ABSTRACT

Prior studies have demonstrated that immunologic dysfunction underpins severe illness in COVID-19 patients, but have lacked an in-depth analysis of the immunologic drivers of death in the most critically ill patients. We performed immunophenotyping of viral antigen-specific and unconventional T cell responses, neutralizing antibodies, and serum proteins in critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, using influenza infection, SARS-CoV-2-convalescent health care workers, and healthy adults as controls. We identify mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cell activation as an independent and significant predictor of death in COVID-19 (HR = 5.92, 95% CI = 2.49-14.1). MAIT cell activation correlates with several other mortality-associated immunologic measures including broad activation of CD8+ T cells and non-Vδ2 γδT cells, and elevated levels of cytokines and chemokines, including GM-CSF, CXCL10, CCL2, and IL-6. MAIT cell activation is also a predictor of disease severity in influenza (ECMO/death HR = 4.43, 95% CI = 1.08-18.2). Single-cell RNA-sequencing reveals a shift from focused IFNα-driven signals in COVID-19 ICU patients who survive to broad pro-inflammatory responses in fatal COVID-19 -a feature not observed in severe influenza. We conclude that fatal COVID-19 infection is driven by uncoordinated inflammatory responses that drive a hierarchy of T cell activation, elements of which can serve as prognostic indicators and potential targets for immune intervention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/mortality , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antigens, CD/immunology , Antigens, Differentiation, T-Lymphocyte/immunology , B-Lymphocytes/immunology , Biomarkers/blood , Blood Proteins/metabolism , Cohort Studies , Critical Illness/mortality , Female , Humans , Immunophenotyping , Influenza, Human/immunology , Lectins, C-Type/immunology , Lymphocyte Activation , Male , Middle Aged , Mucosal-Associated Invariant T Cells/immunology , Patient Acuity
18.
Nat Commun ; 12(1): 5061, 2021 08 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1361634

ABSTRACT

The extent to which immune responses to natural infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and immunization with vaccines protect against variants of concern (VOC) is of increasing importance. Accordingly, here we analyse antibodies and T cells of a recently vaccinated, UK cohort, alongside those recovering from natural infection in early 2020. We show that neutralization of the VOC compared to a reference isolate of the original circulating lineage, B, is reduced: more profoundly against B.1.351 than for B.1.1.7, and in responses to infection or a single dose of vaccine than to a second dose of vaccine. Importantly, high magnitude T cell responses are generated after two vaccine doses, with the majority of the T cell response directed against epitopes that are conserved between the prototype isolate B and the VOC. Vaccination is required to generate high potency immune responses to protect against these and other emergent variants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/immunology , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal/blood , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/isolation & purification , Antibodies, Neutralizing/metabolism , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Carrier Proteins , Epitopes , Humans , Immunity , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , T-Lymphocytes/immunology
19.
Cell ; 184(11): 2939-2954.e9, 2021 05 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1343152

ABSTRACT

Terminating the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic relies upon pan-global vaccination. Current vaccines elicit neutralizing antibody responses to the virus spike derived from early isolates. However, new strains have emerged with multiple mutations, including P.1 from Brazil, B.1.351 from South Africa, and B.1.1.7 from the UK (12, 10, and 9 changes in the spike, respectively). All have mutations in the ACE2 binding site, with P.1 and B.1.351 having a virtually identical triplet (E484K, K417N/T, and N501Y), which we show confer similar increased affinity for ACE2. We show that, surprisingly, P.1 is significantly less resistant to naturally acquired or vaccine-induced antibody responses than B.1.351, suggesting that changes outside the receptor-binding domain (RBD) impact neutralization. Monoclonal antibody (mAb) 222 neutralizes all three variants despite interacting with two of the ACE2-binding site mutations. We explain this through structural analysis and use the 222 light chain to largely restore neutralization potency to a major class of public antibodies.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Binding Sites , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/virology , Cell Line , Humans , Immune Evasion , Immunization, Passive , Mutation , Protein Binding , Protein Domains , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Sequence Deletion , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/chemistry , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/genetics , Vaccination , Vaccines/immunology
20.
Lancet HIV ; 8(8): e474-e485, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1275800

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Data on vaccine immunogenicity against SARS-CoV-2 are needed for the 40 million people globally living with HIV who might have less functional immunity and more associated comorbidities than the general population. We aimed to explore safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in people with HIV. METHODS: In this single-arm open-label vaccination substudy within the protocol of the larger phase 2/3 trial COV002, adults aged 18-55 years with HIV were enrolled at two HIV clinics in London, UK. Eligible participants were required to be on antiretroviral therapy (ART), with undetectable plasma HIV viral loads (<50 copies per mL), and CD4 counts of more than 350 cells per µL. A prime-boost regimen of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, with two doses was given 4-6 weeks apart. The primary outcomes for this substudy were safety and reactogenicity of the vaccine, as determined by serious adverse events and solicited local and systemic reactions. Humoral responses were measured by anti-spike IgG ELISA and antibody-mediated live virus neutralisation. Cell-mediated immune responses were measured by ex-vivo IFN-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay (ELISpot) and T-cell proliferation. All outcomes were compared with an HIV-uninfected group from the main COV002 study within the same age group and dosing strategy and are reported until day 56 after prime vaccination. Outcomes were analysed in all participants who received both doses and with available samples. The COV002 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Nov 5 and Nov 24, 2020, 54 participants with HIV (all male, median age 42·5 years [IQR 37·2-49·8]) were enrolled and received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Median CD4 count at enrolment was 694·0 cells per µL (IQR 573·5-859·5). No serious adverse events occurred. Local and systemic reactions occurring during the first 7 days after prime vaccination included pain at the injection site (26 [49%] of 53 participants with available data), fatigue (25 [47%]), headache (25 [47%]), malaise (18 [34%]), chills (12 [23%]), muscle ache (19 [36%]), joint pain (five [9%]), and nausea (four [8%]), the frequencies of which were similar to the HIV-negative participants. Anti-spike IgG responses by ELISA peaked at day 42 (median 1440 ELISA units [EUs; IQR 704-2728]; n=50) and were sustained until day 56 (median 941 EUs [531-1445]; n=49). We found no correlation between the magnitude of the anti-spike IgG response at day 56 and CD4 cell count (p=0·93) or age (p=0·48). ELISpot and T-cell proliferative responses peaked at day 14 and 28 after prime dose and were sustained to day 56. Compared with participants without HIV, we found no difference in magnitude or persistence of SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific humoral or cellular responses (p>0·05 for all analyses). INTERPRETATION: In this study of people with HIV, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 was safe and immunogenic, supporting vaccination for those well controlled on ART. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , HIV Infections/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , CD4 Lymphocyte Count , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , HIV Infections/drug therapy , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Vaccination
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL