Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Topics in Antiviral Medicine ; 30(1 SUPPL):18, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1880294

ABSTRACT

Background: The Sisonke Phase IIIB open-label implementation study vaccinated health care workers (HCWs) with the single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine during two phases of the South African Covid-19 epidemic, dominated first by the Beta followed by the Delta variant of concern. Methods: HCWs were vaccinated over 3 months (17 February-17 May 2021). Safety was monitored by self-reporting, facility reporting and linkage to national databases. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against Covid-19 related hospitalisation, hospitalisation requiring critical or intensive care and death, ascertained 28 days or more post vaccination was assessed up until 17 July 2021. Nested sub-cohorts (A and B) from two national medical schemes were evaluated to assess VE using a matched retrospective cohort design. Results: Over the 3-month period, 477234 HCWs were vaccinated in 122 vaccination sites across South Africa. VE derived from the sub-cohorts comprising 215 813 HCWs was 83% (95% CI 75-89) to prevent Covid-19 deaths, 75% (95% CI 69-82) to prevent hospital admissions requiring critical or intensive care and 67% (95% CI 62-71) to prevent Covid-19 related hospitalisations. The VE was maintained in older HCWs and those with comorbidities including HIV infection. VE remained consistent throughout the Beta and Delta dominant phases of the study. 10279 adverse events were reported and 139 (1.4%) were serious, including two cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and four cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome who recovered. Conclusion: The single dose Ad26.COV2.S was safe and effective against severe Covid-19 disease and death post-vaccination, and against both Beta and Delta variants providing real-world evidence for its use globally.

2.
Topics in Antiviral Medicine ; 30(1 SUPPL):331-332, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1880280

ABSTRACT

Background: SARS-CoV2 antibody testing is an important auxillary test especially for retrospective diagnosis or in patients with long COVID-19 or multisystem inflammatory syndrome of childhood. Epidemiological serology studies may also assist public health planning. Access to formal laboratory testing is not universal in many low-and middle-income (LMIC) countries and rapid lateral flow antibody tests are an attractive alternative. Performance of these tests has been inconsistent. A large-scale study was undertaken in South Africa, during the beta and delta waves, to assess the field-based performance of rapid point of care (POC) COVID-19 antibody tests. Methods: Symptomatic, ambulatory persons under investigation (PUIs) aged 18 years and older, presenting for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis at public health facilities in three provinces, South Africa were enrolled at baseline. All patients completed a questionnaire regarding symptoms. Nasopharyngeal swabs were taken and processed for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing using a GeneXpert (Cepheid, USA), or manual assay (ThermoFisher TaqPath assay or Seegene Allplex assay) on a real-time platform at routine accredited National Health Laboratory Service laboratories as per routine national protocols. Concomitantly, trained study staff performed three facility-based POC lateral flow antibody tests on a on a fingerstick sample and blood was collected for formal serology. POC tests were selected following a rapid in-laboratory evaluation. Asymptomatic contacts of people with confirmed COVID-19 were recruited into the asymptomatic study arm and rapid tests and PCR were performed. PCR and rapid positive patients and 500 negative controls were followed up at 5-14 days. Antibody tests were compared with formal serology performed on 2 platforms-Euroimmun (Euroimmun, Lubeck) IgA and IgG anti-S antibodies and Abbott Architect IgG test. Results: The sensitivity (S), specificity (Sp), positive (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) values of tests for PUIs and contacts were calculated (Table 1)∗. Analyses using serology as a reference are forthcoming. Conclusion: Compared with PCR, performance of rapid POC COVID-19 antibody tests was poor with low sensitivity. This may reflect the patient cohort tested as humoral responses typically develop from day 7-14. The tests are unlikely to be useful for acute diagnosis but sensitivity may improve at later timepoints and further follow up data will be analysed by duration of symptom onset, severity of symptoms and wave (beta versus delta).

3.
Topics in Antiviral Medicine ; 30(1 SUPPL):331, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1880279

ABSTRACT

Background: Access to SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing is a bottleneck globally, especially in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). Reliable point-of-care (POC) diagnostics for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are cheaper and easier to scale-up than PCR especially in LMICs, and will facilitate interruption of transmission. We report the field-based effectiveness of rapid point-of-care (POC) antigen COVID-19 tests during the beta and delta waves, in South Africa. Methods: We enrolled symptomatic, ambulatory persons under investigation (PUIs) aged 18 years and older, presenting for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis at public health facilities in three provinces, South Africa. All patients completed a questionnaire regarding symptoms. Nasopharyngeal swabs were taken and processed for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing using either GeneXpert (Cepheid, USA), or with a manual assay (ThermoFisher TaqPath assay or Seegene Allplex assay) on a real-time PCR platform at routine, accredited National Health Laboratory Service laboratories, as per routine national protocols. Concomitantly, trained study staff performed three facility-based POC antigen tests on a nasal/nasopharyngeal swab, as recommended by the manufacturer. Asymptomatic contacts of people with confirmed COVID-19 were recruited into the asymptomatic study arm and rapid tests and PCR were performed. The sensitivity (S), specificity (Sp), positive (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) values of tests for PUIs and contacts were calculated using PCR as the reference standard. Results: Between Oct 2020-2021 1816 participants were enrolled;472 (26%) tested PCR or rapid test positive;235 positives (49.8%) and 532 negatives were followed up at 5-14 days;574 asymptomatic contacts were enrolled, of which 21 (3.7%) were PCR positive. Performance of the three antigen tests are shown in Table 1∗. Conclusion: In a real world setting, during the beta and delta waves, compared with PCR the sensitivity of rapid antigen tests ranged from 35-68%. This may reflect low viral loads at diagnosis. Further work will compare antigen test performance in patients with high versus lower cycle threshold (Ct) values. Meanwhile, PCR testing capacity needs urgent scale-up in LMICs and improved POC diagnostics are needed to facilitate COVID-19 diagnosis in LMICs.

4.
Embase;
Preprint in English | EMBASE | ID: ppcovidwho-327037

ABSTRACT

Following the results of the ENSEMBLE 2 study, which demonstrated improved vaccine efficacy of a two-dose regimen of Ad26.COV.2 vaccine given 2 months apart, we expanded the Sisonke study which had provided single dose Ad26.COV.2 vaccine to almost 500 000 health care workers (HCW) in South Africa to include a booster dose of the Ad26.COV.2. Sisonke 2 enrolled 227 310 HCW from the 8 November to the 17 December 2021. Enrolment commenced before the onset of the Omicron driven fourth wave in South Africa affording us an opportunity to evaluate early VE in preventing hospital admissions of a homologous boost of the Ad26.COV.2 vaccine given 6-9 months after the initial vaccination in HCW. We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine booster in 69 092 HCW as compared to unvaccinated individuals enrolled in the same managed care organization using a test negative design. We compared VE against COVID19 admission for omicron during the period 15 November to 20 December 2021. After adjusting for confounders, we observed that VE for hospitalisation increased over time since booster dose, from 63% (95%CI 31-81%);to 84% (95% CI 67-92%) and then 85% (95% CI: 54-95%), 0-13 days, 14-27 days, and 1-2 months post-boost. We provide the first evidence of the effectiveness of a homologous Ad26.COV.2 vaccine boost given 6-9 months after the initial single vaccination series during a period of omicron variant circulation. This data is important given the increased reliance on the Ad26.COV.2 vaccine in Africa.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL