Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 20
Filter
1.
BMJ Open Respir Res ; 10(1)2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20235739

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a common respiratory virus, particularly affecting children, and can cause respiratory infections such as croup and bronchiolitis. The latter is a leading cause of paediatric hospitalisation within the UK. Children <3 years of age and/or with underlying health conditions are more vulnerable to severe RSV infection.There are currently limited data on the incidence of laboratory-confirmed RSV, particularly within primary care settings and outside the typical 'RSV season', which in the Northern hemisphere tends to coincide with winter months. There is also a lack of data on the health economic impact of RSV infection on families and healthcare systems.This observational surveillance study aims to collect data on the incidence of laboratory-confirmed RSV-attributable respiratory tract infection (RTI) in children aged <3 years presenting to primary, secondary or tertiary care; it also aims to estimate the health economic and quality of life impact of RSV-attributable infection in this cohort. Such data will contribute to informing public health strategies to prevent RSV-associated infection, including use of preventative medications. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Parents/carers of children <3 years of age with RTI symptoms will consent for a respiratory sample (nasal swab) to be taken. Laboratory PCR testing will assess for the presence of RSV and/or other pathogens. Data will be obtained from medical records on demographics, comorbidities, severity of infection and hospitalisation outcomes. Parents will complete questionnaires on the impact of ongoing infection symptoms at day 14 and 28 following enrolment. The primary outcome is incidence of laboratory-confirmed RSV in children <3 years presenting to primary, secondary or tertiary care with RTI symptoms leading to health-seeking behaviours. Recruitment will be carried out from December 2021 to March 2023, encompassing two UK winter seasons and intervening months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted (21/WS/0142), and study findings will be published as per International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' guidelines.


Subject(s)
Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections , Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human , Respiratory Tract Infections , Child , Humans , Child, Preschool , Tertiary Healthcare , Incidence , Quality of Life , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections/epidemiology , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections/prevention & control , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections/diagnosis , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , United Kingdom/epidemiology
2.
J Infect ; 86(6): 574-583, 2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2303587

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Heterologous COVID vaccine priming schedules are immunogenic and effective. This report aims to understand the persistence of immune response to the viral vectored, mRNA and protein-based COVID-19 vaccine platforms used in homologous and heterologous priming combinations, which will inform the choice of vaccine platform in future vaccine development. METHODS: Com-COV2 was a single-blinded trial in which adults ≥ 50 years, previously immunised with single dose 'ChAd' (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, AZD1222, Vaxzevria, Astrazeneca) or 'BNT' (BNT162b2, tozinameran, Comirnaty, Pfizer/BioNTech), were randomised 1:1:1 to receive a second dose 8-12 weeks later with either the homologous vaccine, or 'Mod' (mRNA-1273, Spikevax, Moderna) or 'NVX' (NVX-CoV2373, Nuvaxovid, Novavax). Immunological follow-up and the secondary objective of safety monitoring were performed over nine months. Analyses of antibody and cellular assays were performed on an intention-to-treat population without evidence of COVID-19 infection at baseline or for the trial duration. FINDINGS: In April/May 2021, 1072 participants were enrolled at a median of 9.4 weeks after receipt of a single dose of ChAd (N = 540, 45% female) or BNT (N = 532, 39% female) as part of the national vaccination programme. In ChAd-primed participants, ChAd/Mod had the highest anti-spike IgG from day 28 through to 6 months, although the heterologous vs homologous geometric mean ratio (GMR) dropped from 9.7 (95% CI (confidence interval): 8.2, 11.5) at D28 to 6.2 (95% CI: 5.0, 7.7) at D196. The heterologous/homologous GMR for ChAd/NVX similarly dropped from 3.0 (95% CI:2.5,3.5) to 2.4 (95% CI:1.9, 3.0). In BNT-primed participants, decay was similar between heterologous and homologous schedules with BNT/Mod inducing the highest anti-spike IgG for the duration of follow-up. The adjusted GMR (aGMR) for BNT/Mod compared with BNT/BNT increased from 1.36 (95% CI: 1.17, 1.58) at D28 to 1.52 (95% CI: 1.21, 1.90) at D196, whilst for BNT/NVX this aGMR was 0.55 (95% CI: 0.47, 0.64) at day 28 and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.49, 0.78) at day 196. Heterologous ChAd-primed schedules produced and maintained the largest T-cell responses until D196. Immunisation with BNT/NVX generated a qualitatively different antibody response to BNT/BNT, with the total IgG significantly lower than BNT/BNT during all follow-up time points, but similar levels of neutralising antibodies. INTERPRETATION: Heterologous ChAd-primed schedules remain more immunogenic over time in comparison to ChAd/ChAd. BNT-primed schedules with a second dose of either mRNA vaccine also remain more immunogenic over time in comparison to BNT/NVX. The emerging data on mixed schedules using the novel vaccine platforms deployed in the COVID-19 pandemic, suggest that heterologous priming schedules might be considered as a viable option sooner in future pandemics. ISRCTN: 27841311 EudraCT:2021-001275-16.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , COVID-19 Vaccines , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , BNT162 Vaccine , Pandemics , Single-Blind Method , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination , Immunity , Immunoglobulin G , Antibodies, Viral
3.
Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol ; : e1836, 2022 Aug 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2233965

ABSTRACT

Advances in nanotechnology and medical science have spurred the development of engineered nanomaterials and nanoparticles with particular focus on their applications in biomedicine. In particular, gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) have been the focus of great interest, due to their exquisite intrinsic properties, such as ease of synthesis and surface functionalization, tunable size and shape, lack of acute toxicity and favorable optical, electronic, and physicochemical features, which possess great value for application in biodetection and diagnostics purposes, including molecular sensing, photoimaging, and application under the form of portable and simple biosensors (e.g., lateral flow immunoassays that have been extensively exploited during the current COVID-19 pandemic). We shall discuss the main properties of AuNPs, their synthesis and conjugation to biorecognition moieties, and the current trends in sensing and detection in biomedicine and diagnostics. This article is categorized under: Diagnostic Tools > Biosensing Diagnostic Tools > In Vitro Nanoparticle-Based Sensing Diagnostic Tools > In Vivo Nanodiagnostics and Imaging.

4.
PLoS One ; 18(1): e0280908, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2224473

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused an unprecedented strain on healthcare systems worldwide, including the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS). We conducted an observational cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 infection in frontline healthcare workers (HCW) working in an acute NHS Trust during the first wave of the pandemic, to answer emerging questions surrounding SARS-CoV-2 infection, diagnosis, transmission and control. METHODS: Using self-collected weekly saliva and twice weekly combined oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal (OP/NP) samples, in addition to self-assessed symptom profiles and isolation behaviours, we retrospectively compared SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR of saliva and OP/NP samples. We report the association with contemporaneous symptoms and isolation behaviour. RESULTS: Over a 12-week period from 30th March 2020, 40·0% (n = 34/85, 95% confidence interval 31·3-51·8%) HCW had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by surveillance OP/NP swab and/or saliva sample. Symptoms were reported by 47·1% (n = 40) and self-isolation by 25·9% (n = 22) participants. Only 44.1% (n = 15/34) participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection reported any symptoms within 14 days of a positive result and only 29·4% (n = 10/34) reported self-isolation periods. Overall agreement between paired saliva and OP/NP swabs was 93·4% (n = 211/226 pairs) but rates of positive concordance were low. In paired samples with at least one positive result, 35·0% (n = 7/20) were positive exclusively by OP/NP swab, 40·0% (n = 8/20) exclusively by saliva and in only 25·0% (n = 5/20) were the OP/NP and saliva result both positive. CONCLUSIONS: HCW are a potential source of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in hospitals and symptom screening will identify the minority of infections. Without routine asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 screening, it is likely that HCW with SARS-CoV-2 infection would continue to attend work. Saliva, in addition to OP/NP swab testing, facilitated ascertainment of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. Combined saliva and OP/NP swab sampling would improve detection of SARS-CoV-2 for surveillance and is recommended for a high sensitivity strategy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Saliva , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , State Medicine , Health Personnel , Specimen Handling , Nasopharynx
5.
J Nurs Manag ; 2022 Oct 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2192893

ABSTRACT

AIM: The aim was to evaluate the feasibility of protective measures for infants of low-income SARS-CoV-2 positive breastfeeding mothers. BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding mothers with SARS-CoV-2 positive should avoid exposing the infant through protective measures (PM), but it could be challenging in a low-income population. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter study was conducted between July and October 2020 (BRACOVID). The participants were recruited at birth and interviewed through a structured questionnaire at seven and 14 days in the home environment. The feasibility of PM during breastfeeding at home was defined by guidelines recommendations (mask using, handwashing, and distancing from newborn when not breastfeeding). Three groups according to the feasibility of guidelines: complete guidelines feasibility (CG): all PM; partial guidelines feasibility (PG): at least one PM feasible; no guidelines (NG): infeasibility to all of PM. Flu-like neonatal symptoms, mothers' breastfeeding practices. We evaluated the association between PM feasibility and socioeconomic factors. RESULTS: 117 infected mothers from 17 Brazilian hospitals were enrolled. 47 (40%) mothers followed all recommendations, 14 (11.9%) could not practice at least one recommendation, and 50 (42.7%) did not execute any of them. The breastfeeding rate was 98%. Factors associated with infeasibility were monthly family income < 92.7 dollars/person, high housing density (>1 inhabitant/room), teenage mothers, responsive feeding, and poor schooling. Regarding infants' flu-like symptoms, 5% presented symptoms at fourteen days (NG group). CONCLUSION: The guidelines were not applied to infants of SARs-CoV-positive mothers in 54.6% of the dyads since the recommendations were unviable in their environments. During pandemics, we should look for feasible and effective guidelines to protect neonates from low-income populations. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Poor socioeconomic conditions lead to the unfeasibility of protective measures for infants of low-income SARS-CoV-2 positive breastfeeding mothers during the isolation period in the pandemics. The orientations and the support provided to dyad should consider the socioeconomic factors to guide feasible measures in the home environment and promote adequate protections; only an individual approach will allow a safe environment for low-income infants.

6.
Lancet Respir Med ; 10(11): 1049-1060, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2106218

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Priming COVID-19 vaccine schedules have been deployed at variable intervals globally, which might influence immune persistence and the relative importance of third-dose booster programmes. Here, we report exploratory analyses from the Com-COV trial, assessing the effect of 4-week versus 12-week priming intervals on reactogenicity and the persistence of immune response up to 6 months after homologous and heterologous priming schedules using the vaccines BNT162b2 (tozinameran, Pfizer/BioNTech) and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca). METHODS: Com-COV was a participant-masked, randomised immunogenicity trial. For these exploratory analyses, we used the trial's general cohort, in which adults aged 50 years or older were randomly assigned to four homologous and four heterologous vaccine schedules using BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 with 4-week or 12-week priming intervals (eight groups in total). Immunogenicity analyses were done on the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, comprising participants with no evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline or for the trial duration, to assess the effect of priming interval on humoral and cellular immune response 28 days and 6 months post-second dose, in addition to the effects on reactogenicity and safety. The Com-COV trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 69254139 (EudraCT 2020-005085-33). FINDINGS: Between Feb 11 and 26, 2021, 730 participants were randomly assigned in the general cohort, with 77-89 per group in the ITT analysis. At 28 days and 6 months post-second dose, the geometric mean concentration of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG was significantly higher in the 12-week interval groups than in the 4-week groups for homologous schedules. In heterologous schedule groups, we observed a significant difference between intervals only for the BNT162b2-ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group at 28 days. Pseudotyped virus neutralisation titres were significantly higher in all 12-week interval groups versus 4-week groups, 28 days post-second dose, with geometric mean ratios of 1·4 (95% CI 1·1-1·8) for homologous BNT162b2, 1·5 (1·2-1·9) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19-BNT162b2, 1·6 (1·3-2·1) for BNT162b2-ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and 2·4 (1·7-3·2) for homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. At 6 months post-second dose, anti-spike IgG geometric mean concentrations fell to 0·17-0·24 of the 28-day post-second dose value across all eight study groups, with only homologous BNT162b2 showing a slightly slower decay for the 12-week versus 4-week interval in the adjusted analysis. The rank order of schedules by humoral response was unaffected by interval, with homologous BNT162b2 remaining the most immunogenic by antibody response. T-cell responses were reduced in all 12-week priming intervals compared with their 4-week counterparts. 12-week schedules for homologous BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19-BNT162b2 were up to 80% less reactogenic than 4-week schedules. INTERPRETATION: These data support flexibility in priming interval in all studied COVID-19 vaccine schedules. Longer priming intervals might result in lower reactogenicity in schedules with BNT162b2 as a second dose and higher humoral immunogenicity in homologous schedules, but overall lower T-cell responses across all schedules. Future vaccines using these novel platforms might benefit from schedules with long intervals. FUNDING: UK Vaccine Taskforce and National Institute for Health and Care Research.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunization, Secondary , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Immunoglobulin G
7.
Nat Immunol ; 23(9): 1324-1329, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2016769

ABSTRACT

T cells can contribute to clearance of respiratory viruses that cause acute-resolving infections such as SARS-CoV-2, helping to provide long-lived protection against disease. Recent studies have suggested an additional role for T cells in resisting overt infection: pre-existing cross-reactive responses were preferentially enriched in healthcare workers who had abortive infections1, and in household contacts protected from infection2. We hypothesize that such early viral control would require pre-existing cross-reactive memory T cells already resident at the site of infection; such airway-resident responses have been shown to be critical for mediating protection after intranasal vaccination in a murine model of SARS-CoV3. Bronchoalveolar lavage samples from the lower respiratory tract of healthy donors obtained before the COVID-19 pandemic revealed airway-resident, SARS-CoV-2-cross-reactive T cells, which correlated with the strength of human seasonal coronavirus immunity. We therefore demonstrate the potential to harness functional airway-resident SARS-CoV-2-reactive T cells in next-generation mucosal vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Animals , Antibodies, Viral , Cross Reactions , Humans , Mice , Pandemics , Respiratory System
8.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther ; 2022 Aug 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1983505

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of aquatic training on motor risk factors for falls in older people during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was carried out with older people, divided into an aquatic training group (ATG) (n = 24) and a control group (CG) (n = 25). Muscle strength was assessed by the 5-Times Sit-to-Stand Test, mobility by the simple and dual-task Timed Up and Go Test, and postural stability through stabilometric data (force platform). The CG received monthly calls to monitor general health. The ATG carried out training lasting 16 weeks, with two 1-hour sessions per week. RESULTS: Both groups improved muscular strength and cognitive-motor tasks, and they performed a dual task with fewer errors in the secondary task after 16 weeks regardless of the pandemic and COVID-19 diagnosis. There was a significant decrease in the area of center of pressure displacement in the tandem posture with eyes closed in the CG. When analyzing participants who adhered at least 50% to the intervention, the ATG significantly reduced the number of steps on the Timed Up and Go Test performance. Both groups improved muscular strength and cognitive-motor tasks and increased the cognitive task cost. In the CG, there was a significant decrease in the mean amplitude of the anteroposterior center of pressure displacement in the feet together with eyes open. CONCLUSION: We found that aquatic physical exercise presented positive effects on some potentially modifiable motor risk factors for falls (mobility and muscle strength) regardless of the COVID-19 pandemic and COVID-19 diagnosis, especially among people who adhered to the intervention.

9.
Area (Oxf) ; 2022 Feb 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1861206

ABSTRACT

This paper shows that, while the pandemic lockdown decelerated everyday life, it has also potentiated further acceleration of the platformisation of urban economic sectors. We show this through an empirical qualitative study of the restaurant sector in Lisbon, in which we found that: (i) the digitalisation of three management tasks during the COVID-19 lockdown - namely marketing, customer relationship management, and delivery tasks - was the trigger for the acceleration of the platformisation of the restaurant sector in Lisbon and (ii) restaurant firms had different departure points in terms of the use of digital technologies - which are linked to their location within the city - and these led to different rhythms in the platformisation of restaurants. We conclude that, as the lockdown measures led to a deceleration of social and economic activities, they also promoted further acceleration of economic change, especially under the logic of the platform economy. Additionally, we show that firms unable to engage with digital platforms have been trying to mimic online dynamics through the implementation of non-platformised digital processes, which leads us to consider that the effects of the process of platformisation extend beyond the platform itself.

10.
J Clin Invest ; 132(7)2022 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1775054

ABSTRACT

BackgroundAlthough recent epidemiological data suggest that pneumococci may contribute to the risk of SARS-CoV-2 disease, cases of coinfection with Streptococcus pneumoniae in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during hospitalization have been reported infrequently. This apparent contradiction may be explained by interactions of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and pneumococci in the upper airway, resulting in the escape of SARS-CoV-2 from protective host immune responses.MethodsHere, we investigated the relationship of these 2 respiratory pathogens in 2 distinct cohorts of health care workers with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection identified by systematic screening and patients with moderate to severe disease who presented to the hospital. We assessed the effect of coinfection on host antibody, cellular, and inflammatory responses to the virus.ResultsIn both cohorts, pneumococcal colonization was associated with diminished antiviral immune responses, which primarily affected mucosal IgA levels among individuals with mild or asymptomatic infection and cellular memory responses in infected patients.ConclusionOur findings suggest that S. pneumoniae impair host immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and raise the question of whether pneumococcal carriage also enables immune escape of other respiratory viruses and facilitates reinfection.Trial registrationISRCTN89159899 (FASTER study) and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03502291 (LAIV study).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Health Personnel , Humans , Immunity , Streptococcus pneumoniae
11.
J Infect ; 84(3): 355-360, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1560123

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are an abundance of commercially available lateral flow assays (LFAs) that detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Whilst these are usually evaluated by the manufacturer, externally performed diagnostic accuracy studies to assess performance are essential. Herein we present an evaluation of 12 LFAs. METHODS: Sera from 100 SARS-CoV-2 reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) positive participants were recruited through the FASTER study. A total of 105 pre-pandemic sera from participants with other infections were included as negative samples. RESULTS: At presentation sensitivity against RT-PCR ranged from 37.4 to 79% for IgM/IgG, 30.3-74% for IgG, and 21.2-67% for IgM. Sensitivity for IgM/IgG improved ≥ 21 days post symptom onset for 10/12 tests. Specificity ranged from 74.3 to 99.1% for IgM/IgG, 82.9-100% for IgG, and 75.2-98% for IgM. Compared to the EuroImmun IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), sensitivity and specificity ranged from 44.6 to 95.4% and 85.4-100%, respectively. CONCLUSION: There are many LFAs available with varied sensitivity and specificity. Understanding the diagnostic accuracy of these tests will be vital as we come to rely more on the antibody status of a person moving forward, and as such manufacturer-independent evaluations are crucial.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , Immunoassay , Immunoglobulin G , Immunoglobulin M , Sensitivity and Specificity
12.
Lancet ; 399(10319): 36-49, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1557000

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Given the importance of flexible use of different COVID-19 vaccines within the same schedule to facilitate rapid deployment, we studied mixed priming schedules incorporating an adenoviral-vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [ChAd], AstraZeneca), two mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 [BNT], Pfizer-BioNTech, and mRNA-1273 [m1273], Moderna) and a nanoparticle vaccine containing SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and Matrix-M adjuvant (NVX-CoV2373 [NVX], Novavax). METHODS: Com-COV2 is a single-blind, randomised, non-inferiority trial in which adults aged 50 years and older, previously immunised with a single dose of ChAd or BNT in the community, were randomly assigned (in random blocks of three and six) within these cohorts in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive a second dose intramuscularly (8-12 weeks after the first dose) with the homologous vaccine, m1273, or NVX. The primary endpoint was the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of serum SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG concentrations measured by ELISA in heterologous versus homologous schedules at 28 days after the second dose, with a non-inferiority criterion of the GMR above 0·63 for the one-sided 98·75% CI. The primary analysis was on the per-protocol population, who were seronegative at baseline. Safety analyses were done for all participants who received a dose of study vaccine. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 27841311. FINDINGS: Between April 19 and May 14, 2021, 1072 participants were enrolled at a median of 9·4 weeks after receipt of a single dose of ChAd (n=540, 47% female) or BNT (n=532, 40% female). In ChAd-primed participants, geometric mean concentration (GMC) 28 days after a boost of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG in recipients of ChAd/m1273 (20 114 ELISA laboratory units [ELU]/mL [95% CI 18 160 to 22 279]) and ChAd/NVX (5597 ELU/mL [4756 to 6586]) was non-inferior to that of ChAd/ChAd recipients (1971 ELU/mL [1718 to 2262]) with a GMR of 10·2 (one-sided 98·75% CI 8·4 to ∞) for ChAd/m1273 and 2·8 (2·2 to ∞) for ChAd/NVX, compared with ChAd/ChAd. In BNT-primed participants, non-inferiority was shown for BNT/m1273 (GMC 22 978 ELU/mL [95% CI 20 597 to 25 636]) but not for BNT/NVX (8874 ELU/mL [7391 to 10 654]), compared with BNT/BNT (16 929 ELU/mL [15 025 to 19 075]) with a GMR of 1·3 (one-sided 98·75% CI 1·1 to ∞) for BNT/m1273 and 0·5 (0·4 to ∞) for BNT/NVX, compared with BNT/BNT; however, NVX still induced an 18-fold rise in GMC 28 days after vaccination. There were 15 serious adverse events, none considered related to immunisation. INTERPRETATION: Heterologous second dosing with m1273, but not NVX, increased transient systemic reactogenicity compared with homologous schedules. Multiple vaccines are appropriate to complete primary immunisation following priming with BNT or ChAd, facilitating rapid vaccine deployment globally and supporting recognition of such schedules for vaccine certification. FUNDING: UK Vaccine Task Force, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), and National Institute for Health Research. NVX vaccine was supplied for use in the trial by Novavax.


Subject(s)
Adjuvants, Vaccine/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Immunization, Secondary/adverse effects , Immunization, Secondary/methods , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , mRNA Vaccines/administration & dosage , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273/administration & dosage , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273/immunology , Aged , BNT162 Vaccine/administration & dosage , BNT162 Vaccine/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/administration & dosage , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/immunology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Single-Blind Method , United Kingdom , Vaccination/adverse effects , Vaccination/methods , mRNA Vaccines/immunology
13.
Nat Immunol ; 22(11): 1350-1352, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1483140
14.
Lancet ; 398(10303): 856-869, 2021 09 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1397746

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Use of heterologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccine schedules could facilitate mass COVID-19 immunisation. However, we have previously reported that heterologous schedules incorporating an adenoviral vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, AstraZeneca; hereafter referred to as ChAd) and an mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2, Pfizer-BioNTech; hereafter referred to as BNT) at a 4-week interval are more reactogenic than homologous schedules. Here, we report the safety and immunogenicity of heterologous schedules with the ChAd and BNT vaccines. METHODS: Com-COV is a participant-blinded, randomised, non-inferiority trial evaluating vaccine safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity. Adults aged 50 years and older with no or well controlled comorbidities and no previous SARS-CoV-2 infection by laboratory confirmation were eligible and were recruited at eight sites across the UK. The majority of eligible participants were enrolled into the general cohort (28-day or 84-day prime-boost intervals), who were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1) to receive ChAd/ChAd, ChAd/BNT, BNT/BNT, or BNT/ChAd, administered at either 28-day or 84-day prime-boost intervals. A small subset of eligible participants (n=100) were enrolled into an immunology cohort, who had additional blood tests to evaluate immune responses; these participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to the four schedules (28-day interval only). Participants were masked to the vaccine received but not to the prime-boost interval. The primary endpoint was the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of serum SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG concentration (measured by ELISA) at 28 days after boost, when comparing ChAd/BNT with ChAd/ChAd, and BNT/ChAd with BNT/BNT. The heterologous schedules were considered non-inferior to the approved homologous schedules if the lower limit of the one-sided 97·5% CI of the GMR of these comparisons was greater than 0·63. The primary analysis was done in the per-protocol population, who were seronegative at baseline. Safety analyses were done among participants receiving at least one dose of a study vaccine. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 69254139. FINDINGS: Between Feb 11 and Feb 26, 2021, 830 participants were enrolled and randomised, including 463 participants with a 28-day prime-boost interval, for whom results are reported here. The mean age of participants was 57·8 years (SD 4·7), with 212 (46%) female participants and 117 (25%) from ethnic minorities. At day 28 post boost, the geometric mean concentration of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG in ChAd/BNT recipients (12 906 ELU/mL) was non-inferior to that in ChAd/ChAd recipients (1392 ELU/mL), with a GMR of 9·2 (one-sided 97·5% CI 7·5 to ∞). In participants primed with BNT, we did not show non-inferiority of the heterologous schedule (BNT/ChAd, 7133 ELU/mL) against the homologous schedule (BNT/BNT, 14 080 ELU/mL), with a GMR of 0·51 (one-sided 97·5% CI 0·43 to ∞). Four serious adverse events occurred across all groups, none of which were considered to be related to immunisation. INTERPRETATION: Despite the BNT/ChAd regimen not meeting non-inferiority criteria, the SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG concentrations of both heterologous schedules were higher than that of a licensed vaccine schedule (ChAd/ChAd) with proven efficacy against COVID-19 disease and hospitalisation. Along with the higher immunogenicity of ChAd/BNT compared with ChAD/ChAd, these data support flexibility in the use of heterologous prime-boost vaccination using ChAd and BNT COVID-19 vaccines. FUNDING: UK Vaccine Task Force and National Institute for Health Research.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Aged , Antibodies, Viral/blood , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Equivalence Trials as Topic , Female , Humans , Immunization Schedule , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Intention to Treat Analysis , Male , Middle Aged , Single-Blind Method , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology
15.
Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology ; 28(4):284-287, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1310396

ABSTRACT

Introduction:Although patient-centered care can be found in the mission statement of nearly every hospital, it is not always put into practice, and COVID-19 brings new challenges even to the best-organized hospitals and well-developed health care systems. Methods:In the current COVID-19 pandemic, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients have a potentially higher risk of complications from this infectious disease due to the use of immunosuppressant and/or biologic treatments and due to flares of this chronic illness, which often require urgent care and sometimes hospitalization. Moreover, patients undergoing biologic intravenous (IV) treatment visit the hospital for scheduled IV infusions. Discussion: In hospitals like ours, where COVID-19 patients are treated, the organization of “clean circuits” is essential to minimize the risks of infection for non-COVID-19 patients, such as patients in IBD infusion units. In our hospital, the IBD infusion unit is located within the gastroenterology department, which, under normal circumstances, is very advantageous for patients but in the current context is not. Our goal was to maximize adherence to biologic IV treatment and clinical safety at a time of profound changes in gastroenterology activity and in a department with daily increases in the number of COVID-19 patients. Conclusion:To this end, we initiated proactive COVID-19 testing in IBD patients undergoing biologic IV treatment and changed the location of the infusion unit to a “COVID-free” institution, maintaining the care of these patients by the dedicated IBD team of our department. The purpose of this report is to show that a patient-centered care strategy allowed us to reach very high levels of patient comfort, satisfaction, and compliance with therapeutics.

16.
Lancet ; 397(10277): 881-891, 2021 03 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1174543

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. METHODS: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 1010 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 1010 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68]). INTERPRETATION: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunization Schedule , Immunization, Secondary , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antibody Formation , Asymptomatic Infections , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Humans , Middle Aged , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Young Adult
17.
Int Breastfeed J ; 16(1): 30, 2021 03 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1166920

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recognizes exclusive breastfeeding a safe source of nutrition available for children in most humanitarian emergencies, as in the current pandemic caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Despite the Brazilian national guideline protecting breastfeeding practices, there are many concerns about protecting infants from their infected mothers. This study aimed to analyze how the Brazilian hospitals and maternity services promote and support mothers suspected or diagnosed with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). METHODS: This is a descriptive cross-sectional and multicenter study which collected data from 24 Brazilian hospitals and maternity services between March and July 2020. Representatives of the institutions completed a questionnaire based on acts to promote and support breastfeeding, the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative, and Brazil's federal law recommendations. RESULTS: The results showed that in delivery rooms, 98.5% of the services prohibited immediate and uninterrupted skin-to-skin contact between mothers and their infants and did not support mothers to initiate breastfeeding in the first hour. On the postnatal ward, 98.5% of the services allowed breastfeeding while implementing respiratory hygiene practices to prevent transmission of COVID-19. Companions for mothers were forbidden in 83.3% of the hospitals. Hospital discharge was mostly between 24 and 28 h (79.1%); discharge guidelines were not individualized. Additionally, a lack of support was noticed from the home environment's health community network (83.3%). Hospital and home breast pumping were allowed (87.5%), but breast milk donation was not accepted (95.8%). There was a lack of guidance regarding the use of infant comforting strategies. Guidelines specific for vulnerable populations were not covered in the material evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: In Brazil, hospitals have not followed recommendations to protect, promote, and support breastfeeding during the COVID-19 outbreak. The disagreement between international guidelines has been a major issue. The absence of recommendations on breastfeeding support during the pandemic led to difficulties in developing standards among hospitals in different regions of Brazil and other countries worldwide. The scientific community needs to discuss how to improve maternal and infant care services to protect breastfeeding in the current pandemic.


Subject(s)
Breast Feeding , COVID-19/prevention & control , Guideline Adherence , Hygiene , Brazil/epidemiology , Breast Feeding/adverse effects , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/etiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Female , Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals , Humans , Maternal Health Services , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Surveys and Questionnaires
18.
Lancet ; 397(10282): 1351-1362, 2021 04 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1157794

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A new variant of SARS-CoV-2, B.1.1.7, emerged as the dominant cause of COVID-19 disease in the UK from November, 2020. We report a post-hoc analysis of the efficacy of the adenoviral vector vaccine, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), against this variant. METHODS: Volunteers (aged ≥18 years) who were enrolled in phase 2/3 vaccine efficacy studies in the UK, and who were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or a meningococcal conjugate control (MenACWY) vaccine, provided upper airway swabs on a weekly basis and also if they developed symptoms of COVID-19 disease (a cough, a fever of 37·8°C or higher, shortness of breath, anosmia, or ageusia). Swabs were tested by nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for SARS-CoV-2 and positive samples were sequenced through the COVID-19 Genomics UK consortium. Neutralising antibody responses were measured using a live-virus microneutralisation assay against the B.1.1.7 lineage and a canonical non-B.1.1.7 lineage (Victoria). The efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a NAAT positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to vaccine received. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vs MenACWY groups) derived from a robust Poisson regression model. This study is continuing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137. FINDINGS: Participants in efficacy cohorts were recruited between May 31 and Nov 13, 2020, and received booster doses between Aug 3 and Dec 30, 2020. Of 8534 participants in the primary efficacy cohort, 6636 (78%) were aged 18-55 years and 5065 (59%) were female. Between Oct 1, 2020, and Jan 14, 2021, 520 participants developed SARS-CoV-2 infection. 1466 NAAT positive nose and throat swabs were collected from these participants during the trial. Of these, 401 swabs from 311 participants were successfully sequenced. Laboratory virus neutralisation activity by vaccine-induced antibodies was lower against the B.1.1.7 variant than against the Victoria lineage (geometric mean ratio 8·9, 95% CI 7·2-11·0). Clinical vaccine efficacy against symptomatic NAAT positive infection was 70·4% (95% CI 43·6-84·5) for B.1.1.7 and 81·5% (67·9-89·4) for non-B.1.1.7 lineages. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 showed reduced neutralisation activity against the B.1.1.7 variant compared with a non-B.1.1.7 variant in vitro, but the vaccine showed efficacy against the B.1.1.7 variant of SARS-CoV-2. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institute 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.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques , Pandemics/prevention & control , Single-Blind Method , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Viral Load , Young Adult
19.
Lancet ; 397(10269): 99-111, 2021 01 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1057535

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Brazil , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Single-Blind Method , South Africa , Treatment Outcome , United Kingdom , Young Adult
20.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 26(11): 2770-2771, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-760833

ABSTRACT

PCR of upper respiratory specimens is the diagnostic standard for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. However, saliva sampling is an easy alternative to nasal and throat swabbing. We found similar viral loads in saliva samples and in nasal and throat swab samples from 110 patients with coronavirus disease.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Saliva/virology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nose/virology , Pandemics , Pharynx/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Viral Load
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL