Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
1.
Lancet HIV ; 2022 Mar 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1756297

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: People living with HIV might have a poor or delayed response to vaccines, mainly when CD4 cell counts are low, and data concerning COVID-19 vaccines in this population are scarce. This prospective cohort study assessed the safety and immunogenicity of the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine CoronaVac in people with HIV compared with people with no known immunosuppression. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, adults (aged ≥18 years) living with HIV who were regularly followed up at the University of Sao Paulo HIV/AIDS outpatient clinic in Sao Paulo, Brazil, were included in the study. Eligibility for people with HIV was independent of antiretroviral use, HIV viral load, or CD4 cell count. Adults with no known immunosuppression with CoronaVac vaccination history were included as a control group. CoronaVac was given intramuscularly in a two-dose regimen, 28 days apart. Blood was collected before vaccine administration and 6 weeks after the second dose (day 69). Immunogenicity was assessed at baseline (day 0), before second vaccine (day 28), and 6 weeks after second vaccine dose (day 69) through SARS-CoV-2 IgG titre and seroconversion, neutralising antibody (NAb) positivity and percentage activity, and factor increase in IgG geometric mean titres (FI-GMT). We investigated whether HIV status and CD4 count (<500 or ≥500 cells per µL) were associated with CoronaVac immunogenicity by use of multivariable models adjusted for age and sex. FINDINGS: Between Feb 9, 2021, and March 4, 2021, 776 participants were recruited. Of 511 participants included, 215 (42%) were people with HIV and 296 (58%) were people with no known immunosuppression. At 6 weeks after the second vaccine dose (day 69), 185 (91%) of 204 participants with HIV and 265 (97%) of 274 participants with no known immunosuppression had seroconversion (p=0·0055). 143 (71%) of 202 participants with HIV were NAb positive compared with 229 (84%) of 274 participants with no known immunosuppression (p=0·0008). Median IgG titres were 48·7 AU/mL (IQR 26·6-88·2) in people with HIV compared with 75·2 AU/mL (50·3-112·0) in people with no known immunosuppression (p<0·0001); and median NAb activity was 46·2% (26·9-69·7) compared with 60·8% (39·8-79·9; p<0·0001). In people with HIV who had CD4 counts less than 500 cells per µL seroconversion rates, NAb positivity, and NAb activity were lower than in those with CD4 counts of at least 500 cells per µL. In multivariable models for seroconversion, NAb positivity, IgG concentration, and NAb activity after a complete two-dose regimen, adjusted for age and sex, people with HIV who had CD4 counts of at least 500 cells per µL and people with no known immunosuppression had higher immunogenicity than did people with HIV with CD4 counts less than 500 cells per µL. No serious adverse reactions were reported during the study. INTERPRETATION: Immunogenicity following CoronaVac in people with HIV seems strong but reduced compared with people with no known immunosuppression. Our findings highlight the need for strategies to improve vaccine immunogenicity in people with HIV. FUNDING: Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), and B3-Bolsa de Valores do Brasil.

2.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; 10: 100216, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1740018

ABSTRACT

Background: Administration of convalescent plasma may serve as an adjunct to supportive treatment to prevent COVID-19 progression and death. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 volumes of intravenous convalescent plasma (CP) with high antibody titers for the treatment of severe cases of COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a Bayesian, randomized, open-label, multicenter, controlled clinical trial in 7 Brazilian hospitals. Adults admitted to hospital with positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV2, within 10 days of the symptom onset, were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive standard of care (SoC) alone, or in combination with 200 mL (150-300 mL) of CP (Low-volume), or 400 mL (300-600 mL) of CP (High-volume); infusion had to be performed within 24 h of randomization. Randomization was centralized, stratified by center. The primary outcome was the time until clinical improvement up to day 28, measured by the WHO ten-point scale, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Interim and terminal analyses were performed in a Bayesian framework. Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04415086. Findings: Between June 2, 2020, and November 18, 2020, 129 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to SoC (n = 42), Low-volume (n = 43) or High-volume (n = 44) CP. Donors presented a median titer of neutralizing antibodies of 1:320 (interquartile range, 1:160 to 1:1088). No evidence of any benefit of convalescent plasma was observed, with Bayesian estimate of 28-day clinical improvement of 72.7% (95%CI, 58.8 to 84.7) in the SoC versus 64.1% (95%ci, 53.8 to 73.7) in the pooled experimental groups (mean difference of -8.7%, 95%CI, -24.6 to 8.2). There was one case of cutaneous mild allergic reaction related to plasma transfusion and one case of suspected transfusion-related acute lung injury but deemed not to be related to convalescent plasma infusion. Interpretation: In this prospective, randomized trial of adult hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19, convalescent plasma was not associated with clinical benefits. Funding: Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo.

3.
Int J Infect Dis ; 117: 356-360, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1729823

ABSTRACT

Detection and epidemiologic characterization of infectious disease outbreaks are key for early identification and response to potential pandemic threats. The rapid global spread of severe SARS-CoV-2 in 2020 highlighted the critical role of diagnostics in understanding the epidemiology of the virus early in the pandemic. As a natural extension of Abbott's work in diagnostics, virus discovery, and virus surveillance, the Abbott Pandemic Defense Coalition (APDC) was launched in early 2021. The APDC is a global multisector scientific and public health partnership whose primary objective is the early detection and mitigation of infectious disease threats of pandemic potential. As of January 2022, the APDC network has partners on 5 continents including academic institutions, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations. A novel element of the APDC is the capacity for early development and rapid deployment of scalable, quality diagnostics targeting newly identified pathogens of pandemic potential.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 4(2): e113-e124, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1649499

ABSTRACT

Background: We aimed to examine the immunogenicity pattern induced by the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine CoronaVac (Sinovac Life Sciences, Beijing, China) in SARS-CoV-2 seropositive patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases compared with seropositive controls, seronegative patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, and seronegative controls. Methods: CoronavRheum is an ongoing, prospective, controlled, phase 4 study, in which patients aged 18 years or older with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, and healthy controls were recruited from a single site (Rheumatology Division of Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo) in São Paulo, Brazil Participants were vaccinated with two doses of CoronaVac (intramuscular injection, 3 µg in 0·5 mL of ß-propiolactone inactivated SARS-CoV-2) on day 0 and on day 28. Blood samples were taken pre-vaccination on day 0, day 28, and also on day 69. For this subgroup analysis, participants were defined as being SARS-CoV-2 seropositive or seronegative prevaccination via anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S)1 or S2 IgG (cutoff of 15·0 arbitrary units [AU] per mL) or neutralising antibody titres (cutoff of ≥30%) and were matched for age and sex, via convenience sampling, in a 1:3:1:1 ratio (seropositive patients to seronegative patients to seropositive controls to seronegative controls). The primary outcomes were rates of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 and S2 IgG seropositivity and SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibody positivity at day 28 and day 69 and immunogenicity dynamics assessed by geometric mean titres (GMTs) of IgG and median neutralising activity in seropositive patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases compared with seronegative patients and seropositive and seronegative controls. We assessed safety in all participants randomly selected for this subgroup analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04754698, and is ongoing for long-term immunogenicity evaluation. Findings: Between Feb 4 and Feb 8, 2021, 1418 patients and 542 controls were recruited, of whom 1685 received two vaccinations (1193 patients and 492 controls). After random sampling, our immunogenicity analysis population comprised 942 participants, of whom 157 were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, 157 were seropositive controls, 471 were seronegative patients, and 157 were seronegative controls; the median age was 48 years (IQR 38-56) and 594 (63%) were female and 348 (37%) were male. For seropositive patients and controls, an increase in anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 and S2 IgG titres (seropositive patients GMT 52·3 [95% CI 42·9-63·9] at day 0 vs 128·9 [105·6-157·4] at day 28; seropositive controls 53·3 [45·4-62·5] at day 0 vs 202·0 [174·8-233·4] at day 28) and neutralising antibody activity (seropositive patients 59% [IQR 39-83] at day 0 vs 82% [54-96] at day 28; seropositive controls 58% [41-79] at day 0 vs 92% [79-96] at day 28), was observed from day 0 to day 28, without further increases from day 28 to day 69 (at day 69 seropositive patients' GMT was 137·1 [116·2-161·9] and neutralising antibody activity was 79% [57-94]); and seropositive controls' GMT was 188·6 [167·4-212·6] and neutralising antibody activity was 92% [75-96]). By contrast, for seronegative patients and controls, the second dose was required for maximum response at day 69, which was lower in seronegative patients than in seronegative controls. GMTs in seronegative patients were 2·3 (95% CI 2·2-2·3) at day 0, 5·7 (5·1-6·4) at day 28, and 29·6 (26·4-33·3) at day 69, and in seronegative controls were 2·3 (2·1-2·5) at day 0, 10·6 (8·7-13·1) at day 28, and 71·7 (63·5-81·0) at day 69; neutralising antibody activity in seronegative patients was 15% (IQR 15-15) on day 0, 15% (15-15) at day 28, and 39% (15-65) at day 69, and in seronegative controls was 15% (15-15) at day 0, 24% (15-37) at day 28, and 61% (37-79) at day 69. Neither seronegative patients nor seronegative controls reached the GMT or antibody activity levels of seropositive patients at day 69. Interpretation: By contrast with seronegative patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, seropositive patients have a robust response after a single dose of CoronaVac. Our findings raise the possibility that the reduced immunogenicity observed in seronegative patients might not be the optimum response potential to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, and therefore emphasise the importance of at least a single booster vaccination in these patients. Funding: Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, and B3-Bolsa de Valores do Brasil. Translation: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

5.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) ; 74(4): 562-571, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1527408

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To date, the only study that has assessed the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 mRNA) vaccine in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) observed a moderate response, but the sample size precluded an accurate analysis of the effect of individual drugs. Therefore, we evaluated the immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (Sinovac-CoronaVac) and the influence of different medications in SLE. Safety was also assessed. METHODS: We conducted a prospective controlled study of 232 SARS-CoV-2-naive SLE patients and 58 SARS-CoV-2-naive controls who were vaccinated with 2 doses of Sinovac-CoronaVac with a 28-day interval (day 0/day 28 [D0/D28]). Immunogenicity analysis at D0/D28 and D69 included anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG seroconversion (SC) and neutralizing antibodies (NAb) positivity. The influence of individual drugs on immune response and safety was assessed. RESULTS: Patients and controls were well balanced for age (P = 0.771). At D69, SLE patients showed a moderate SC (70.2% versus 98.1%; P < 0.001) and moderate frequency of NAb positivity (61.5% versus 84.6%; P = 0.002), although both frequencies were lower than in controls. Factors associated with lower SC in univariate analysis at D69 were prednisone use (odds ratio [OR] 0.215 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.108-0.427], P < 0.001) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) use (OR 0.201 [95% CI 0.107-0.378], P < 0.001), whereas hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) use led to a 2.5 increase in SC (P = 0.011). SLE patients who were receiving HCQ monotherapy had similar SC to controls at D69 (100% versus 98.1%; P = 1.000). In multivariate analysis, prednisone and MMF use were independently associated with lower SC (P < 0.001) and NAb positivity (P < 0.001). Safety analysis revealed no moderate/severe adverse events. CONCLUSION: Sinovac-CoronaVac has a moderate immunogenicity in SARS-CoV-2-naive SLE patients with an excellent safety profile. We further demonstrate that HCQ may improve SC, whereas prednisone and MMF had a major deleterious effect in vaccine response, reinforcing the need to investigate the role of temporary MMF withdrawal or a vaccine-booster dose (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04754698).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic , Antibodies, Viral/therapeutic use , Antibody Formation , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Humans , Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic/immunology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Nat Med ; 27(10): 1744-1751, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526090

ABSTRACT

CoronaVac, an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, has been approved for emergency use in several countries. However, its immunogenicity in immunocompromised individuals has not been well established. We initiated a prospective phase 4 controlled trial (no. NCT04754698, CoronavRheum) in 910 adults with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) and 182 age- and sex-frequency-matched healthy adults (control group, CG), who received two doses of CoronaVac. The primary outcomes were reduction of ≥15% in both anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroconversion (SC) and neutralizing antibody (NAb) positivity 6 weeks (day 69 (D69)) after the second dose in the ARD group compared with that in the CG. Secondary outcomes were IgG SC and NAb positivity at D28, IgG titers and neutralizing activity at D28 and D69 and vaccine safety. Prespecified endpoints were met, with lower anti-SARS-Cov-2 IgG SC (70.4 versus 95.5%, P < 0.001) and NAb positivity (56.3 versus 79.3%, P < 0.001) at D69 in the ARD group than in the CG. Moreover, IgG titers (12.1 versus 29.7, P < 0.001) and median neutralization activity (58.7 versus 64.5%, P = 0.013) were also lower at D69 in patients with ARD. At D28, patients with ARD presented with lower IgG frequency (18.7 versus 34.6%, P < 0.001) and NAb positivity (20.6 versus 36.3%, P < 0.001) than that of the CG. There were no moderate/severe adverse events. These data support the use of CoronaVac in patients with ARD, suggesting reduced but acceptable short-term immunogenicity. The trial is still ongoing to evaluate the long-term effectiveness/immunogenicity.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/biosynthesis , Autoimmune Diseases/complications , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Rheumatic Diseases/complications , Adult , Antibodies, Neutralizing/biosynthesis , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
8.
Transfusion ; 61(8): 2295-2306, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1282041

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Current evidence regarding COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) transfusion practices is limited and heterogeneous. We aimed to determine the impact of the use of CCP transfusion in patients with previous circulating neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) in COVID-19. METHODS: Prospective cohort including 102 patients with COVID-19 transfused with ABO compatible CCP on days 0-2 after enrollment. Clinical status of patients was assessed using the adapted World Health Organization (WHO) ordinal scale on days 0, 5, and 14. The nAbs titration was performed using the cytopathic effect-based virus neutralization test with SARS-CoV-2 (GenBank MT126808.1). The primary outcome was clinical improvement on day 14, defined as a reduction of at least two points on the adapted WHO ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were the number of intensive care unit (ICU)-free days and the number of invasive mechanical ventilation-free days. RESULTS: Both nAbs of CCP units transfused (p < 0.001) and nAbs of patients before CCP transfusions (p = 0.028) were associated with clinical improvements by day 14. No significant associations between nAbs of patients or CCP units transfused were observed in the number of ICU or mechanical ventilation-free days. Administration of CCP units after 10 days of symptom onset resulted in a decrease in ICU-free days (p < 0.001) and mechanical ventilation-free days (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Transfusion of high titer nAbs CCP units may be a determinant in clinical strategies against COVID-19. We consider these data as useful parameters to guide future CCP transfusion practices.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , COVID-19/therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Blood Donors , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/immunology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive/methods , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/immunology
9.
Adv Ther ; 38(7): 3911-3923, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1258274

ABSTRACT

INTRODUTION: COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of thrombotic events. However, the contribution of platelet reactivity (PR) to the aetiology of the increased thrombotic risk associated with COVID-19 remains unclear. Our aim was to evaluate PR in stable patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and hospitalized with respiratory symptoms (mainly dyspnoea and dry cough), in comparison with a control group comprised of non-hospitalized healthy controls. METHODS: Observational, case control study that included patients with confirmed COVID-19 (COVID-19 group, n = 60) and healthy individuals matched by age and sex (control group, n = 60). Multiplate electrode aggregometry (MEA) tests were used to assess PR with adenosine diphosphate (MEA-ADP, low PR defined as < 53 AUC), arachidonic acid (MEA-ASPI, low PR < 86 AUC) and thrombin receptor-activating peptide 6 (MEA-TRAP, low PR < 97 AUC) in both groups. RESULTS: The rates of low PR with MEA-ADP were 27.5% in the COVID-19 group and 21.7% in the control group (OR = 1.60, p = 0.20); with MEA-ASPI, the rates were, respectively, 37.5% and 22.5% (OR = 3.67, p < 0.001); and with MEA-TRAP, the incidences were 48.5% and 18.8%, respectively (OR = 9.58, p < 0.001). Levels of D-dimer, fibrinogen, and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) were higher in the COVID-19 group in comparison with the control group (all p < 0.05). Thromboelastometry was utilized in a subgroup of patients and showed a hypercoagulable state in the COVID-19 group. CONCLUSION: Patients hospitalized with non-severe COVID-19 had lower PR compared to healthy controls, despite having higher levels of D-dimer, fibrinogen, and PAI-1, and hypercoagulability by thromboelastometry. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04447131.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Blood Platelets , Case-Control Studies , Humans , Platelet Aggregation , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/pharmacology , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Andrologia ; 53(4): e13973, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1075768

ABSTRACT

The testis is a potential target organ for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our study intended to investigate any testicular involvement in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 men. We conduct a cross-sectional study in 18 to 55-year-old men hospitalised for confirmed COVID-19. A senior radiologist executed the ultrasound with multi-frequency linear probe in all participants, regardless of any scrotal complaints. Exclusion criteria involved any situation that could impair testicular function. Statistical analysis compared independent groups, classified by any pathological change. Categorical and numerical outcome hypotheses were tested by Fisher's Exact and Mann-Whitney tests, using the Excel for Mac, version 16.29 (p < .05). The sample size was 26 men (mean 33.7 ± 6.2 years; range: 21-42 years), all without scrotal complaints. No orchitis was seen. Eleven men (32.6 ± 5.8 years) had epididymitis (42.3%), bilateral in 19.2%. More than half of men with epididymitis displayed epididymal head augmentation > 1.2 cm (p = .002). Two distinct epididymitis' patterns were reported: (a) disseminated micro-abscesses (n = 6) and (b) inhomogeneous echogenicity with reactional hydrocele (n = 5). Both patterns revealed increased epididymal head, augmented Doppler flow and scrotal skin thickening. The use of colour Doppler ultrasound in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 men, even in the absence of testicular complaints, might be useful to diagnose epididymitis that could elicit fertility complications.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/physiopathology , Epididymitis/diagnostic imaging , Testicular Hydrocele/diagnostic imaging , Adult , Asymptomatic Diseases , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Epididymitis/epidemiology , Epididymitis/physiopathology , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Testicular Hydrocele/epidemiology , Testicular Hydrocele/physiopathology , Ultrasonography, Doppler, Color , Young Adult
12.
Asian J Androl ; 23(4): 335-347, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1039129

ABSTRACT

Viral infections have haunted humankind since times immemorial. Overpopulation, globalization, and extensive deforestation have created an ideal environment for a viral spread with unknown and multiple shedding routes. Many viruses can infect the male reproductive tract, with potential adverse consequences to male reproductive health, including infertility and cancer. Moreover, some genital tract viral infections can be sexually transmitted, potentially impacting the resulting offspring's health. We have summarized the evidence concerning the presence and adverse effects of the relevant viruses on the reproductive tract (mumps virus, human immunodeficiency virus, herpes virus, human papillomavirus, hepatitis B and C viruses, Ebola virus, Zika virus, influenza virus, and coronaviruses), their routes of infection, target organs and cells, prevalence and pattern of virus shedding in semen, as well as diagnosis/testing and treatment strategies. The pathophysiological understanding in the male genital tract is essential to assess its clinical impact on male reproductive health and guide future research.


Subject(s)
Reproductive Health/trends , Virus Diseases/complications , Hepatitis B/complications , Hepatitis B/physiopathology , Hepatitis C/complications , Hepatitis C/physiopathology , Herpes Genitalis/complications , Herpes Genitalis/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Papillomavirus Infections/complications , Papillomavirus Infections/physiopathology , Virus Diseases/physiopathology , Zika Virus Infection/complications , Zika Virus Infection/physiopathology
13.
Trials ; 21(1): 853, 2020 Oct 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-865129

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of two doses of the adsorbed vaccine COVID-19 (inactivated) produced by Sinovac in symptomatic individuals, with virological confirmation of COVID-19, two weeks after the completion of the two-dose vaccination regimen, aged 18 years or older who work as health professionals providing care to patients with possible or confirmed COVID-19. To describe the occurrence of adverse reactions associated with the administration of each of two doses of the adsorbed vaccine COVID-19 (inactivated) produced by Sinovac up to one week after vaccination in Adults (18-59 years of age) and Elderly (60 years of age or more). TRIAL DESIGN: This is a Phase III, randomized, multicenter, endpoint driven, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to assess the efficacy and safety of the adsorbed vaccine COVID-19 (inactivated) produced by Sinovac. The adsorbed vaccine COVID-19 (inactivated) produced by Sinovac (product under investigation) will be compared to placebo. Voluntary participants will be randomized to receive two intramuscular doses of the investigational product or the placebo, in a 1: 1 ratio, stratified by age group (18 to 59 years and 60 years or more) and will be monitored for one year by active surveillance of COVID-19. Two databases will be established according to the age groups: one for adults (18-59 years) and one for the elderly (60 years of age or older). The threshold to consider the vaccine efficacious will be to reach a protection level of at least 50%, as proposed by the World Health Organization and the FDA. Success in this criterion will be defined by sequential monitoring with adjustment of the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval above 30% for the primary efficacy endpoint. PARTICIPANTS: Healthy participants and / or participants with clinically controlled disease, of both genders, 18 years of age or older, working as health professionals performing care in units specialized in direct contact with people with possible or confirmed cases of COVID-19. Participation of pregnant women and those who are breastfeeding, as well as those intending to become pregnant within three months after vaccination will not be allowed. Participants will only be included after signing the voluntary Informed Consent Form and ensuring they undergo screening evaluation and conform to all the inclusion and exclusion criteria. All the clinical sites are located in Brazil. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Experimental intervention: The vaccine was manufactured by Sinovac Life Sciences (Beijing, China) and contains 3 µg/0.5 mL (equivalent to 600 SU per dose) of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 virus, and aluminium hydroxide as adjuvant. Control comparator: The placebo contains aluminium hydroxide in a 0.5 mL solution The schedule of both, experimental intervention and placebo is two 0.5 mL doses IM (deltoid) with a two week interval. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary efficacy endpoint is the incidence of symptomatic cases of virologically confirmed COVID-19 two weeks after the second vaccination. The virological diagnosis will be confirmed by detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in a clinical sample. The primary safety endpoint is the frequency of solicited and unsolicited local and systemic adverse reactions during the period of one week after vaccination according to age group in adult (18-59 years old) and elder (60 years of age or older) subjects. Adverse reactions are defined as adverse events that have a reasonable causal relationship to vaccination. RANDOMISATION: There will be two randomization lists, one for each age group, based on the investigational products to be administered, i.e., vaccine or placebo at a 1: 1 ratio. Each randomization list will be made to include up to 11,800 (18-59 year-old) adults, and 1,260 elderly (60 y-o and older) participants, the maximum number of participants needed per age group. An electronic central randomization system will be used to designate the investigational product that each participant must receive. BLINDING (MASKING): This trial is designed as a double-blind study to avoid introducing bias in the evaluation of efficacy, safety and immunogenicity. The clinical care team, the professionals responsible for the vaccination and the participants will not know which investigational product will be administered. Only pharmacists or nurses in the study who are responsible for the randomization, separation and blinding of the investigational product will have access to unblinded information. The sponsor's operational team will also remain blind. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The total number of participants needed to evaluate efficacy, 13,060 participants, satisfies the needed sample size calculated to evaluate safety. Therefore, the total number obtained for efficacy will be the number retained for the study. Up to 13,060 participants are expected to enter the study, with up to 11,800 participants aged 18 to 59 years and 1,260 elderly participants aged 60 and over. Half of the participants of each group will receive the experimental vaccine and half of them will receive the placebo. The recruitment of participants may be modified as recommended by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee at time of the interim unblinded analysis or blind assessment of the COVID-19 attack rate during the study. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 2.0 - 24-Aug-2020. Recruitment started on July 21st, 2020. The recruitment is expected to conclude in October 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0445659 . Registry on 2 July 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/genetics , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Vaccination/methods , Vaccines/therapeutic use , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus/immunology , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Case-Control Studies , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Data Management , Double-Blind Method , Female , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Informed Consent/ethics , Injections, Intramuscular , Male , Middle Aged , Placebos/administration & dosage , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Safety , Therapies, Investigational/methods , Treatment Outcome , Vaccines/administration & dosage , Vaccines/adverse effects , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL