Vaccines and Autoimmunity-From Side Effects to ASIA Syndrome.

Since vaccines are in fact manufactured chemical compounds such as drugs, the appearance of side effects following their use is not surprising. Similarly, as the main goal of vaccines is to stimulate the immune system bringing out the production of protective antibodies, autoimmune-related side effects as a consequence of increased immune activity do not seem irrational. Fortunately, the rate of such side effects is low; however, the importance of reporting adverse events following vaccinations, understanding the mechanisms behind their appearance, making early diagnosis, and appropriate treatment cannot be overemphasized. In fact, autoimmune-related side effects of vaccines, particularly those based on adjuvants, were reported long before the introduction of the autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA). Nevertheless, ASIA gathered and united the side effects of vaccines under one title, a step which helped organize the research and call for better immune stimulators than adjuvants. New technologies and methods of making vaccines were clearly noticed during the pandemic of COVID-19 after the introduction of mRNA-based vaccines. In our current paper, we introduce the notion of side effects to vaccines, particularly those of autoimmune nature, the mechanisms of ASIA, and the main vaccines linked with the syndrome including the recent COVID-19 vaccines. The transition from side effects to ASIA is the main idea behind our work.

Imiquimod-Associated Localized Skin Ulceration in a Patient With Uncontrolled Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus, one of the most common viral infections worldwide, frequently manifests as condyloma acuminata, or anogenital warts. First-line treatment of this condition includes the use of imiquimod, a topical immunomodulator. CASE: We describe a case of a localized skin ulceration necessitating surgical debridement after the use of topical imiquimod for 24 hours in a patient with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus. After debridement, the patient's wound healed appropriately, with regular wound clinic visits and diabetes education. CONCLUSION: Health care professionals should use caution when prescribing imiquimod in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in vaccine randomised clinical trials: a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in randomised clinical trials in relation to human vaccine development. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis assessing the certainty of evidence with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). DATA SOURCES: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, BIOSIS, Science Citation Index Expanded and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science until 29 June 2021, and Chinese databases until September 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials irrespective of type, status and language of publication, with trial participants of any sex, age, ethnicity, diagnosis, comorbidity and country of residence. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias with Cochrane's RoB tool 1. Dichotomous data were analysed as risk ratios (RRs) and continuous data as mean differences. We explored both fixed-effect and random-effects models, with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was quantified with I2 statistic. We GRADE assessed the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We included 102 randomised clinical trials (26 457 participants). Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention may have no effect on serious adverse events (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.43; very low certainty) and on all-cause mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.41; very low certainty). No trial reported on quality of life. Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention may increase adverse events (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.20; very low certainty). We found no or little evidence of a difference between aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention when assessing serology with geometric mean titres or concentrations or participants' seroprotection. CONCLUSIONS: Based on evidence at very low certainty, we were unable to identify benefits of aluminium adjuvants, which may be associated with adverse events considered non-serious.

Efficacy and Safety of a Recombinant Plant-Based Adjuvanted Covid-19 Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus-like particles (CoVLP) that are produced in plants and display the prefusion spike glycoprotein of the original strain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are combined with an adjuvant (Adjuvant System 03 [AS03]) to form the candidate vaccine. METHODS: In this phase 3, multinational, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 85 centers, we assigned adults (≥18 years of age) in a 1:1 ratio to receive two intramuscular injections of the CoVLP+AS03 vaccine or placebo 21 days apart. The primary objective of the trial was to determine the efficacy of the CoVLP+AS03 vaccine in preventing symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) beginning at least 7 days after the second injection, with the analysis performed after the detection of at least 160 cases. RESULTS: A total of 24,141 volunteers participated in the trial; the median age of the participants was 29 years. Covid-19 was confirmed by polymerase-chain-reaction assay in 165 participants in the intention-to-treat population; all viral samples that could be sequenced contained variants of the original strain. Vaccine efficacy was 69.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 56.7 to 78.8) against any symptomatic Covid-19 caused by five variants that were identified by sequencing. In a post hoc analysis, vaccine efficacy was 78.8% (95% CI, 55.8 to 90.8) against moderate-to-severe disease and 74.0% (95% CI, 62.1 to 82.5) among the participants who were seronegative at baseline. No severe cases of Covid-19 occurred in the vaccine group, in which the median viral load for breakthrough cases was lower than that in the placebo group by a factor of more than 100. Solicited adverse events were mostly mild or moderate and transient and were more frequent in the vaccine group than in the placebo group; local adverse events occurred in 92.3% and 45.5% of participants, respectively, and systemic adverse events in 87.3% and 65.0%. The incidence of unsolicited adverse events was similar in the two groups up to 21 days after each dose (22.7% and 20.4%) and from day 43 through day 201 (4.2% and 4.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The CoVLP+AS03 vaccine was effective in preventing Covid-19 caused by a spectrum of variants, with efficacy ranging from 69.5% against symptomatic infection to 78.8% against moderate-to-severe disease. (Funded by Medicago; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04636697.).

Safety, immunogenicity, and protection provided by unadjuvanted and adjuvanted formulations of a recombinant plant-derived virus-like particle vaccine candidate for COVID-19 in nonhuman primates.

Although antivirals are important tools to control severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, effective vaccines are essential to control the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Plant-derived virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine candidates have previously demonstrated immunogenicity and efficacy against influenza. Here, we report the immunogenicity and protection induced in rhesus macaques by intramuscular injections of a VLP bearing a SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (CoVLP) vaccine candidate formulated with or without Adjuvant System 03 (AS03) or cytidine-phospho-guanosine (CpG) 1018. Although a single dose of the unadjuvanted CoVLP vaccine candidate stimulated humoral and cell-mediated immune responses, booster immunization (at 28 days after priming) and adjuvant administration significantly improved both responses, with higher immunogenicity and protection provided by the AS03-adjuvanted CoVLP. Fifteen micrograms of CoVLP adjuvanted with AS03 induced a polyfunctional interleukin-2 (IL-2)-driven response and IL-4 expression in CD4 T cells. Animals were challenged by multiple routes (i.e., intratracheal, intranasal, and ocular) with a total viral dose of 106 plaque-forming units of SARS-CoV-2. Lower viral replication in nasal swabs and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) as well as fewer SARS-CoV-2-infected cells and immune cell infiltrates in the lungs concomitant with reduced levels of proinflammatory cytokines and chemotactic factors in the BALF were observed in animals immunized with the CoVLP adjuvanted with AS03. No clinical, pathologic, or virologic evidence of vaccine-associated enhanced disease was observed in vaccinated animals. The CoVLP adjuvanted with AS03 was therefore selected for vaccine development and clinical trials.

A case of Graves' disease and type 1 diabetes mellitus following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

Autoimmune diseases, including autoimmune endocrine diseases (AIED), are thought to develop following environmental exposure in patients with genetic predisposition. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and vaccines against it could represent new environmental triggers for AIED. We report a patient, with history of vitiligo vulgaris and 8 years of type 2 diabetes, who came to our institution because of fever, weight loss, asthenia and thyrotoxicosis occurred 4 weeks later the administration of BNT162B2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Clinical, biochemical and instrumental work-up demonstrated Graves' disease and autoimmune diabetes mellitus. The occurrence of these disorders could be explained through different mechanism such as autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA syndrome), mRNA "self-adjuvant" effect, molecular mimicry between human and viral proteins and immune disruption from external stimuli. However further studies are needed to better understand the underlying pathogenesis of AIED following SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.

Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac) in healthy children and adolescents: a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 1/2 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: A vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 for children and adolescents will play an important role in curbing the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a candidate COVID-19 vaccine, CoronaVac, containing inactivated SARS-CoV-2, in children and adolescents aged 3-17 years. METHODS: We did a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 1/2 clinical trial of CoronaVac in healthy children and adolescents aged 3-17 years old at Hebei Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Zanhuang (Hebei, China). Individuals with SARS-CoV-2 exposure or infection history were excluded. Vaccine (in 0·5 mL aluminum hydroxide adjuvant) or aluminum hydroxide only (alum only, control) was given by intramuscular injection in two doses (day 0 and day 28). We did a phase 1 trial in 72 participants with an age de-escalation in three groups and dose-escalation in two blocks (1·5 µg or 3·0 µg per injection). Within each block, participants were randomly assigned (3:1) by means of block randomisation to receive CoronaVac or alum only. In phase 2, participants were randomly assigned (2:2:1) by means of block randomisation to receive either CoronaVac at 1·5 µg or 3·0 µg per dose, or alum only. All participants, investigators, and laboratory staff were masked to group allocation. The primary safety endpoint was adverse reactions within 28 days after each injection in all participants who received at least one dose. The primary immunogenicity endpoint assessed in the per-protocol population was seroconversion rate of neutralising antibody to live SARS-CoV-2 at 28 days after the second injection. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04551547. FINDINGS: Between Oct 31, 2020, and Dec 2, 2020, 72 participants were enrolled in phase 1, and between Dec 12, 2020, and Dec 30, 2020, 480 participants were enrolled in phase 2. 550 participants received at least one dose of vaccine or alum only (n=71 for phase 1 and n=479 for phase 2; safety population). In the combined safety profile of phase 1 and phase 2, any adverse reactions within 28 days after injection occurred in 56 (26%) of 219 participants in the 1·5 µg group, 63 (29%) of 217 in the 3·0 µg group, and 27 (24%) of 114 in the alum-only group, without significant difference (p=0·55). Most adverse reactions were mild and moderate in severity. Injection site pain was the most frequently reported event (73 [13%] of 550 participants), occurring in 36 (16%) of 219 participants in the 1·5 µg group, 35 (16%) of 217 in the 3·0 µg group, and two (2%) in the alum-only group. As of June 12, 2021, only one serious adverse event of pneumonia has been reported in the alum-only group, which was considered unrelated to vaccination. In phase 1, seroconversion of neutralising antibody after the second dose was observed in 27 of 27 participants (100·0% [95% CI 87·2-100·0]) in the 1·5 µg group and 26 of 26 participants (100·0% [86·8-100·0]) in the 3·0 µg group, with the geometric mean titres of 55·0 (95% CI 38·9-77·9) and 117·4 (87·8-157·0). In phase 2, seroconversion was seen in 180 of 186 participants (96·8% [93·1-98·8]) in the 1·5 µg group and 180 of 180 participants (100·0% [98·0-100·0]) in the 3·0 µg group, with the geometric mean titres of 86·4 (73·9-101·0) and 142·2 (124·7-162·1). There were no detectable antibody responses in the alum-only groups. INTERPRETATION: CoronaVac was well tolerated and safe and induced humoral responses in children and adolescents aged 3-17 years. Neutralising antibody titres induced by the 3·0 µg dose were higher than those of the 1·5 µg dose. The results support the use of 3·0 µg dose with a two-immunisation schedule for further studies in children and adolescents. FUNDING: The Chinese National Key Research and Development Program and the Beijing Science and Technology Program.

Two Cases of Graves' Disease Following SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination: An Autoimmune/Inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants.

Background: The autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA) comprises four entities, including the postvaccination phenomenon, which appears after being exposed to adjuvants in vaccines that increase the immune response. There is limited information about autoimmune endocrine diseases and ASIA after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination. Patient's Findings: Two female health care workers received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, and three days later developed clinical manifestations of thyroid hyperactivity, with increased thyroid hormone levels on thyroid function tests, suppressed thyroid-stimulating hormone, and elevated antithyroid antibodies. Summary: Vaccines have been shown to trigger an immune response that leads to a broad spectrum of autoimmune diseases, including autoimmune thyroid disease. Our patients met the diagnostic criteria for ASIA; they were exposed to an adjuvant (vaccine), and they developed clinical manifestations of thyroid hyperfunction within a few days, with the appearance of antithyroid antibodies, despite being healthy before vaccination. Conclusion: Graves' disease can occur after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

Does COVID-19 Vaccination Warrant the Classical Principle "ofelein i mi vlaptin"?

The current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic warrants an imperative necessity for effective and safe vaccination, to restrain Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) including transmissibility, morbidity, and mortality. In this regard, intensive medical and biological research leading to the development of an arsenal of vaccines, albeit incomplete preconditioned evaluation, due to emergency. The subsequent scientific gap raises some concerns in the medical community and the general public. More specifically, the accelerated vaccine development downgraded the value of necessary pre-clinical studies to elicit medium- and long-term beneficial or harmful consequences. Previous experience and pathophysiological background of coronaviruses' infections and vaccine technologies, combined with the global vaccines' application, underlined the obligation of a cautious and qualitative approach, to illuminate potential vaccination-related adverse events. Moreover, the high SARS-CoV-2 mutation potential and the already aggregated genetical alterations provoke a rational vagueness and uncertainty concerning vaccines' efficacy against dominant strains and the respective clinical immunity. This review critically summarizes existing evidence and queries regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, to motivate scientists' and clinicians' interest for an optimal, individualized, and holistic management of this unprecedented pandemic.

Adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines: A practical approach.

COVID-19-related mortality in high-risk individuals is substantial and current treatment options are limited. There is convincing evidence that the COVID-19 vaccines reduce the severity of infection and prevent deaths. Three COVID-19 vaccines are approved in the United Kingdom with many more in development. There are limited data on the triggers and mechanisms of anaphylaxis to these vaccines. We review the potential allergenic compounds in the COVID-19 vaccines and describe an innovative allergy support model for the vaccination hubs that allows most patients with severe allergy be immunized. Finally, we propose a practical algorithm for the investigations of anaphylaxis to these vaccines.

Safety, Reactogenicity, and Health-Related Quality of Life After Trivalent Adjuvanted vs Trivalent High-Dose Inactivated Influenza Vaccines in Older Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Trivalent adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3) and trivalent high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3) are US-licensed for adults aged 65 years and older. Data are needed on the comparative safety, reactogenicity, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) effects of these vaccines. Objective: To compare safety, reactogenicity, and changes in HRQOL scores after aIIV3 vs HD-IIV3. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized blinded clinical trial was a multicenter US study conducted during the 2017 to 2018 and 2018 to 2019 influenza seasons. Among 778 community-dwelling adults aged at least 65 years and assessed for eligibility, 13 were ineligible and 8 withdrew before randomization. Statistical analysis was performed from August 2019 to August 2020. Interventions: Intramuscular administration of aIIV3 or HD-IIV3 after age-stratification (65-79 years; ≥80 years) and randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportions of participants with moderate-to-severe injection-site pain and 14 other solicited reactions during days 1 to 8, using a noninferiority test (5% noninferiority margin), and serious adverse events (SAE) and adverse events of clinical interest (AECI), including new-onset immune-mediated conditions, during days 1 to 43. Changes in HRQOL scores before and after vaccination (days 1, 3) were also compared between study groups. Results: A total of 757 adults were randomized, 378 to receive aIIV3 and 379 to receive HD-IIV3. Of these participants, there were 420 women (55%) and 589 White individuals (78%) with a median (range) age of 72 (65-97) years. The proportion reporting moderate-to-severe injection-site pain, limiting or preventing activity, after aIIV3 (12 participants [3.2%]) (primary outcome) was noninferior compared with HD-IIV3 (22 participants [5.8%]) (difference -2.7%; 95% CI, -5.8 to 0.4). Ten reactions met noninferiority criteria for aIIV3; 4 (moderate-to-severe injection-site tenderness, arthralgia, fatigue, malaise) did not. It was inconclusive whether these 4 reactions occurred in higher proportions of participants after aIIV3. No participant sought medical care for a vaccine reaction. No AECI was observed. Nine participants had at least SAE after aIIV3 (2.4%; 95% CI,1.1% to 4.5%); 3 had at least 1 SAE after HD-IIV3 (0.8%; 95% CI, 0.2% to 2.2%). No SAE was associated with vaccination. Changes in prevaccination and postvaccination HRQOL scores were not clinically meaningful and not different between the groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Overall safety and HRQOL findings were similar after aIIV3 and HD-IIV3, and consistent with prelicensure data. From a safety standpoint, this study's results support using either vaccine to prevent influenza in older adults. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03183908.

Safety and immunogenicity of S-Trimer (SCB-2019), a protein subunit vaccine candidate for COVID-19 in healthy adults: a phase 1, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: As part of the accelerated development of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), we report a dose-finding and adjuvant justification study of SCB-2019, a protein subunit vaccine candidate containing a stabilised trimeric form of the spike (S)-protein (S-Trimer) combined with two different adjuvants. METHODS: Our study is a phase 1, randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled trial at a specialised clinical trials centre in Australia. We enrolled healthy adult volunteers in two age groups: younger adults (aged 18-54 years) and older adults (aged 55-75 years). Participants were randomly allocated either vaccine or placebo using a list prepared by the study funder. Participants were to receive two doses of SCB-2019 (either 3 µg, 9 µg, or 30 µg) or a placebo (0·9% NaCl) 21 days apart. SCB-2019 either had no adjuvant (S-Trimer protein alone) or was adjuvanted with AS03 or CpG/Alum. The assigned treatment was administered in opaque syringes to maintain masking of assignments. Reactogenicity was assessed for 7 days after each vaccination. Humoral responses were measured as SCB-2019 binding IgG antibodies and ACE2-competitive blocking IgG antibodies by ELISA and as neutralising antibodies by wild-type SARS-CoV-2 microneutralisation assay. Cellular responses to pooled S-protein peptides were measured by flow-cytometric intracellular cytokine staining. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04405908; this is an interim analysis and the study is continuing. FINDINGS: Between June 19 and Sept 23, 2020, 151 volunteers were enrolled; three people withdrew, two for personal reasons and one with an unrelated serious adverse event (pituitary adenoma). 148 participants had at least 4 weeks of follow-up after dose two and were included in this analysis (database lock, Oct 23, 2020). Vaccination was well tolerated, with two grade 3 solicited adverse events (pain in 9 µg AS03-adjuvanted and 9 µg CpG/Alum-adjuvanted groups). Most local adverse events were mild injection-site pain, and local events were more frequent with SCB-2019 formulations containing AS03 adjuvant (44-69%) than with those containing CpG/Alum adjuvant (6-44%) or no adjuvant (3-13%). Systemic adverse events were more frequent in younger adults (38%) than in older adults (17%) after the first dose but increased to similar levels in both age groups after the second dose (30% in older and 34% in younger adults). SCB-2019 with no adjuvant elicited minimal immune responses (three seroconversions by day 50), but SCB-2019 with fixed doses of either AS03 or CpG/Alum adjuvants induced high titres and seroconversion rates of binding and neutralising antibodies in both younger and older adults (anti-SCB-2019 IgG antibody geometric mean titres at day 36 were 1567-4452 with AS03 and 174-2440 with CpG/Alum). Titres in all AS03 dose groups and the CpG/Alum 30 µg group were higher than were those recorded in a panel of convalescent serum samples from patients with COVID-19. Both adjuvanted SCB-2019 formulations elicited T-helper-1-biased CD4+ T-cell responses. INTERPRETATION: The SCB-2019 vaccine, comprising S-Trimer protein formulated with either AS03 or CpG/Alum adjuvants, elicited robust humoral and cellular immune responses against SARS-CoV-2, with high viral neutralising activity. Both adjuvanted vaccine formulations were well tolerated and are suitable for further clinical development. FUNDING: Clover Biopharmaceuticals and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.

Thymosin α1 therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 characterized by refractory hypoxemia increases patient mortality because of immunosuppression effects. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of immunomodulatory with thymosin α1 for critical COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed in 8 government-designated treatment centers for COVID-19 patients in China from Dec. 2019 to Mar. 2020. Thymosin α1 was administrated with 1.6 mg qd or q12 h for >5 days. The primary outcomes were the 28-day and 60-day mortality, the secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay and the total duration of the disease. Subgroup analysis was carried out according to clinical classification. RESULTS: Of the 334 enrolled COVID-19 patients, 42 (12.6%) died within 28 days, and 55 (16.5%) died within 60 days of hospitalization. There was a significant difference in the 28-day mortality between the thymosin α1 and non-thymosin α1-treated groups in adjusted model (P = 0.016), without obvious differences in the 60-day mortality and survival time in the overall cohort (P > 0.05). In the subgroup analysis, it was found that thymosin α1 therapy significantly reduced 28-day mortality (Hazards Ratios HR, 0.11, 95% confidence interval CI 0.02-0.63, P=0.013) via improvement of Pa02/FiO2 (P = 0.036) and prolonged the hospital length of stay (P = 0.024) as well as the total duration of the disease (P=0.001) in the critical type patients, especially those aged over 64 years, with white blood cell >6.8×109/L, neutrophil >5.3×109/L, lymphocyte < 0.73 × 109/L, PaO2/FiO2 < 196, SOFA > 3, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II > 7. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that treatment with thymosin α1 can markedly decrease 28-day mortality and attenuate acute lung injury in critical type COVID-19 patients.

Real-world prevalence and consequences of potential drug-drug interactions in the first-wave COVID-19 treatments.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Initial treatment recommendations of COVID-19 were based on the use of antimicrobial drugs and immunomodulators. Although information on drug interactions was available for other pathologies, there was little evidence in the treatment of COVID-19. The objective of this study was to analyse the potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) derived from the medication used in COVID-19 patients in the first pandemic wave and to evaluate the real consequences of such interactions in clinical practice. METHODS: Cohort, retrospective and single-centre study carried out in a third-level hospital. Adult patients, admitted with suspected COVID-19, that received at least one dose of hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, interferon beta 1-b or tocilizumab and with any pDDIs according to "Liverpool Drug Interaction Group" between March and May 2020 were included. The possible consequences of pDDIs at the QTc interval level or any other adverse event according to the patient's medical record were analysed. A descriptive analysis was carried out to assess possible factors that may affect the QTc interval prolongation. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Two hundred and eighteen (62.3%) patients of a total of 350 patients admitted with COVID-19 had at least one pDDI. There were 598 pDDIs. Thirty-eight pDDIs (6.3%) were categorized as not recommended or contraindicated. The mean value difference between baseline and pDDI posterior ECG was 412.3 ms ± 25.8 ms vs. 426.3 ms ± 26.7 ms; p < 0.001. Seven patients (5.7%) had a clinically significant alteration of QTc. A total of 44 non-cardiological events (7.3%) with a possible connection to a pDDI were detected. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The number of pDDIs in patients admitted for COVID-19 in the first pandemic wave was remarkably high. However, clinical consequences occurred in a low percentage of patients. Interactions involving medications that would be contraindicated for concomitant administration are rare. Knowledge of these pDDIs and their consequences could help to establish appropriate therapeutic strategies in patients with COVID-19 or other diseases with these treatments.

COVID-19 infection threat in patients with high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer receiving intravesical BCG therapy.

AIM: We evaluated the COVID-19 infection threat in patients receiving intravesical BCG therapy which has immunotherapeutic effects and is of vital importance in most of the individuals with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and investigated the need for postponement of this therapy. METHODS: A total of 71 patients, who were diagnosed with high-risk NMIBC and on intravesical BCG treatment regularly (induction or maintenance), were enrolled in the study. The patients were classified into two groups depending on whether they were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the pandemic period or not. RESULTS: Of 71 patients, 26 underwent a COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction test with clinical suspicion during the pandemic period. Of these 26 patients, 4 were diagnosed with COVID-19. Age of the patients, working status (working/retired), compliance with containment measures against the pandemic, number of BCG courses, adverse effects after BCG therapy and systemic immune-inflammation index, which is an inflammation-related parameter, were not different between groups (P > .05). Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio was significantly higher in the COVID-19 positive group (P < .05). COVID-19 positivity was higher in age groups 50-64 (6.6%) and 65-80 (5.8%) years than that in similar age groups of the normal population. CONCLUSION: Every effort should be made to administer intravesical BCG treatment in high-risk NMIBC patients even during the pandemic period. However, increased risk of COVID-19 transmission should be kept in mind and protective measures against COVID-19 for healthcare providers and patients before the procedure should be taken optimally. The procedure should be postponed in patients with lymphopenia in recent complete blood count.

Effect of an Inactivated Vaccine Against SARS-CoV-2 on Safety and Immunogenicity Outcomes: Interim Analysis of 2 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: A vaccine against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is urgently needed. Objective: To evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of an investigational inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccine in China. Interventions: In the phase 1 trial, 96 participants were assigned to 1 of the 3 dose groups (2.5, 5, and 10 µg/dose) and an aluminum hydroxide (alum) adjuvant-only group (n = 24 in each group), and received 3 intramuscular injections at days 0, 28, and 56. In the phase 2 trial, 224 adults were randomized to 5 µg/dose in 2 schedule groups (injections on days 0 and 14 [n = 84] vs alum only [n = 28], and days 0 and 21 [n = 84] vs alum only [n = 28]). Design, Setting, and Participants: Interim analysis of ongoing randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 and 2 clinical trials to assess an inactivated COVID-19 vaccine. The trials were conducted in Henan Province, China, among 96 (phase 1) and 224 (phase 2) healthy adults aged between 18 and 59 years. Study enrollment began on April 12, 2020. The interim analysis was conducted on June 16, 2020, and updated on July 27, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary safety outcome was the combined adverse reactions 7 days after each injection, and the primary immunogenicity outcome was neutralizing antibody response 14 days after the whole-course vaccination, which was measured by a 50% plaque reduction neutralization test against live severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Results: Among 320 patients who were randomized (mean age, 42.8 years; 200 women [62.5%]), all completed the trial up to 28 days after the whole-course vaccination. The 7-day adverse reactions occurred in 3 (12.5%), 5 (20.8%), 4 (16.7%), and 6 (25.0%) patients in the alum only, low-dose, medium-dose, and high-dose groups, respectively, in the phase 1 trial; and in 5 (6.0%) and 4 (14.3%) patients who received injections on days 0 and 14 for vaccine and alum only, and 16 (19.0%) and 5 (17.9%) patients who received injections on days 0 and 21 for vaccine and alum only, respectively, in the phase 2 trial. The most common adverse reaction was injection site pain, followed by fever, which were mild and self-limiting; no serious adverse reactions were noted. The geometric mean titers of neutralizing antibodies in the low-, medium-, and high-dose groups at day 14 after 3 injections were 316 (95% CI, 218-457), 206 (95% CI, 123-343), and 297 (95% CI, 208-424), respectively, in the phase 1 trial, and were 121 (95% CI, 95-154) and 247 (95% CI, 176-345) at day 14 after 2 injections in participants receiving vaccine on days 0 and 14 and on days 0 and 21, respectively, in the phase 2 trial. There were no detectable antibody responses in all alum-only groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this interim report of the phase 1 and phase 2 trials of an inactivated COVID-19 vaccine, patients had a low rate of adverse reactions and demonstrated immunogenicity; the study is ongoing. Efficacy and longer-term adverse event assessment will require phase 3 trials. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ChiCTR2000031809.