Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 5 de 5
Filtre
1.
N Engl J Med ; 388(16): 1451-1464, 2023 Apr 20.
Article Dans Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2297440

Résumé

BACKGROUND: Whether vaccination during pregnancy could reduce the burden of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)-associated lower respiratory tract illness in newborns and infants is uncertain. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind trial conducted in 18 countries, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, pregnant women at 24 through 36 weeks' gestation to receive a single intramuscular injection of 120 µg of a bivalent RSV prefusion F protein-based (RSVpreF) vaccine or placebo. The two primary efficacy end points were medically attended severe RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness and medically attended RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness in infants within 90, 120, 150, and 180 days after birth. A lower boundary of the confidence interval for vaccine efficacy (99.5% confidence interval [CI] at 90 days; 97.58% CI at later intervals) greater than 20% was considered to meet the success criterion for vaccine efficacy with respect to the primary end points. RESULTS: At this prespecified interim analysis, the success criterion for vaccine efficacy was met with respect to one primary end point. Overall, 3682 maternal participants received vaccine and 3676 received placebo; 3570 and 3558 infants, respectively, were evaluated. Medically attended severe lower respiratory tract illness occurred within 90 days after birth in 6 infants of women in the vaccine group and 33 infants of women in the placebo group (vaccine efficacy, 81.8%; 99.5% CI, 40.6 to 96.3); 19 cases and 62 cases, respectively, occurred within 180 days after birth (vaccine efficacy, 69.4%; 97.58% CI, 44.3 to 84.1). Medically attended RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness occurred within 90 days after birth in 24 infants of women in the vaccine group and 56 infants of women in the placebo group (vaccine efficacy, 57.1%; 99.5% CI, 14.7 to 79.8); these results did not meet the statistical success criterion. No safety signals were detected in maternal participants or in infants and toddlers up to 24 months of age. The incidences of adverse events reported within 1 month after injection or within 1 month after birth were similar in the vaccine group (13.8% of women and 37.1% of infants) and the placebo group (13.1% and 34.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: RSVpreF vaccine administered during pregnancy was effective against medically attended severe RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness in infants, and no safety concerns were identified. (Funded by Pfizer; MATISSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04424316.).


Sujets)
Infections à virus respiratoire syncytial , Vaccins contre les virus respiratoires syncytiaux , Infections de l'appareil respiratoire , Femelle , Humains , Nourrisson , Nouveau-né , Grossesse , Anticorps antiviraux , Maladies transmissibles/thérapie , Méthode en double aveugle , Injections musculaires , Infections à virus respiratoire syncytial/épidémiologie , Infections à virus respiratoire syncytial/prévention et contrôle , Vaccins contre les virus respiratoires syncytiaux/administration et posologie , Vaccins contre les virus respiratoires syncytiaux/effets indésirables , Vaccins contre les virus respiratoires syncytiaux/usage thérapeutique , Virus respiratoires syncytiaux , Résultat thérapeutique , Vaccination/effets indésirables , Vaccination/méthodes , , Vaccins combinés/administration et posologie , Vaccins combinés/effets indésirables , Vaccins combinés/usage thérapeutique , Infections de l'appareil respiratoire/épidémiologie , Infections de l'appareil respiratoire/prévention et contrôle
2.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 9: 994160, 2022.
Article Dans Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2080183

Résumé

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has, as of July 2022, infected more than 550 million people and caused over 6 million deaths across the world. COVID-19 vaccines were quickly developed to protect against severe disease, hospitalization and death. In the present study, we performed a direct comparative analysis of four COVID-19 vaccines: BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), ChAdOx1 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) and Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson/Janssen), following primary and booster vaccination. We focused on the vaccine-induced antibody-mediated immune response against multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants: wildtype, B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.351 (Beta), B.1.617.2 (Delta) and B.1.1.529 (Omicron). The analysis included the quantification of total IgG levels against SARS-CoV-2 Spike, as well as the quantification of antibody neutralization titers. Furthermore, the study assessed the high-throughput ACE2 competition assay as a surrogate for the traditional pseudovirus neutralization assay. The results demonstrated marked differences in antibody-mediated immune responses. The lowest Spike-specific IgG levels and antibody neutralization titers were induced by one dose of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine, intermediate levels by two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine, and the highest levels by two doses of the mRNA-1273 vaccine or heterologous vaccination of one dose of the ChAdOx1 vaccine and a subsequent mRNA vaccine. The study also demonstrated that accumulation of SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein mutations was accompanied by a marked decline in antibody neutralization capacity, especially for B.1.1.529. Administration of a booster dose was shown to significantly increase Spike-specific IgG levels and antibody neutralization titers, erasing the differences between the vaccine-induced antibody-mediated immune response between the four vaccines. The findings of this study highlight the importance of booster vaccines and the potential inclusion of future heterologous vaccination strategies for broad protection against current and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.

3.
Front Immunol ; 12: 779453, 2021.
Article Dans Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1566650

Résumé

Introduction of vaccines against COVID-19 has provided the most promising chance to control the world-wide COVID-19 pandemic. However, the adenovirus-vector based Oxford/AstraZeneca [ChAdOx1] (AZ) and Johnson & Johnson [Ad26.CoV2.S] COVID-19 vaccines have been linked with serious thromboembolic events combined with thrombocytopenia, denominated Vaccine-induced Immune Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis (VITT). The pathogenesis of COVID-19 VITT remain incompletely understood; especially the initial events that trigger platelet activation, platelet factor (PF)4 release, complex formation and PF4 antibody production are puzzling. This is a prospective study investigating the impact of different COVID-19 vaccines on inflammation (CRP, TNF-α, IL-1ß, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10), vascular endothelial activation (syndecan-1, thrombomodulin, E-selectin, ICAM-1, ICAM-3, VCAM-1), platelet activation (P-selectin, TGF-ß, sCD40L) and aggregation (Multiplate® impedance aggregometry), whole blood coagulation (ROTEM®), thrombin generation and PF4 antibodies to reveal potential differences between AZ and mRNA vaccines in individuals without VITT. The study included 80 (55 AZ and 55 mRNA) vaccinated individuals and 55 non-vaccinated age- and gender matched healthy controls. The main findings where that both vaccines enhanced inflammation and platelet activation, though AZ vaccination induced a more pronounced increase in several inflammatory and platelet activation markers compared to mRNA vaccination and that post-vaccination thrombin generation was higher following AZ vaccination compared to mRNA vaccination. No difference in neither the PF4 antibody level nor the proportion of individuals with positive PF4 antibodies were observed between the vaccine groups. This is the first study to report enhanced inflammation, platelet activation and thrombin generation following AZ vaccination compared to mRNA vaccination in a head-to-head comparison. We speculate that specific components of the AZ adenovirus vector may serve as initial trigger(s) of (hyper)inflammation, platelet activation and thrombin generation, potentially lowering the threshold for a cascade of events that both trigger complications related to excessive inflammation, platelet and coagulation activation as observed in epidemiological studies and promote development of VITT when combined with high-titer functionally active PF4 antibodies.


Sujets)
Vaccins contre la COVID-19/effets indésirables , COVID-19/prévention et contrôle , Inflammation/sang , Activation plaquettaire , SARS-CoV-2/immunologie , Adulte , Coagulation sanguine , Protéine C-réactive/analyse , Cytokines/sang , Femelle , Humains , Immunoglobuline G/sang , Mâle , Adulte d'âge moyen , Facteur-4 plaquettaire/immunologie , Thromboélastographie , Thrombine/métabolisme , Thrombopénie , Thrombose
4.
EClinicalMedicine ; 35: 100849, 2021 May.
Article Dans Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1198701

Résumé

BACKGROUND: The trans-membrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2) is essential for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) cell entry and infection. Efficacy and safety of TMPRSS2 inhibitors in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have not been evaluated in randomized trials. METHODS: We conducted an investigator-initiated, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled multicenter trial in patients hospitalized with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from April 4, to December 31, 2020. Within 48 h of admission, participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive the TMPRSS2 inhibitor camostat mesilate 200 mg three times daily for 5 days or placebo. The primary outcome was time to discharge or clinical improvement measured as ≥2 points improvement on a 7-point ordinal scale. Other outcomes included 30-day mortality, safety and change in oropharyngeal viral load. FINDINGS: 137 patients were assigned to receive camostat mesilate and 68 to placebo. Median time to clinical improvement was 5 days (interquartile range [IQR], 3 to 7) in the camostat group and 5 days (IQR, 2 to 10) in the placebo group (P = 0·31). The hazard ratio for 30-day mortality in the camostat compared with the placebo group was 0·82 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0·24 to 2·79; P = 0·75). The frequency of adverse events was similar in the two groups. Median change in viral load from baseline to day 5 in the camostat group was -0·22 log10 copies/mL (p <0·05) and -0·82 log10 in the placebo group (P <0·05). INTERPRETATION: Under this protocol, camostat mesilate treatment was not associated with increased adverse events during hospitalization for Covid-19 and did not affect time to clinical improvement, progression to ICU admission or mortality. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04321096. EudraCT Number: 2020-001200-42.

5.
Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol ; 128(2): 204-212, 2021 Feb.
Article Dans Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-919229

Résumé

The coronavirus responsible for COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, utilizes a viral membrane spike protein for host cell entry. For the virus to engage in host membrane fusion, SARS-CoV-2 utilizes the human transmembrane surface protease, TMPRSS2, to cleave and activate the spike protein. Camostat mesylate, an orally available well-known serine protease inhibitor, is a potent inhibitor of TMPRSS2 and has been hypothesized as a potential antiviral drug against COVID-19. In vitro human cell and animal studies have shown that camostat mesylate inhibits virus-cell membrane fusion and hence viral replication. In mice, camostat mesylate treatment during acute infection with influenza, also dependent on TMPRSS2, leads to a reduced viral load. The decreased viral load may be associated with an improved patient outcome. Because camostat mesylate is administered as an oral drug, it may be used in outpatients as well as inpatients at all disease stages of SARS-CoV-2 infection if it is shown to be an effective antiviral agent. Clinical trials are currently ongoing to test whether this well-known drug could be repurposed and utilized to combat the current pandemic. In the following, we will review current knowledge on camostat mesylate mode of action, potential benefits as an antiviral agent and ongoing clinical trials.


Sujets)
Antiviraux/usage thérapeutique , , Esters/usage thérapeutique , Guanidines/usage thérapeutique , Inhibiteurs de la sérine protéinase/usage thérapeutique , Animaux , Antiviraux/administration et posologie , Antiviraux/effets indésirables , Repositionnement des médicaments , Esters/administration et posologie , Esters/effets indésirables , Guanidines/administration et posologie , Guanidines/effets indésirables , Humains , Souris , Sécurité des patients , Serine endopeptidases/effets des médicaments et des substances chimiques , Inhibiteurs de la sérine protéinase/administration et posologie , Inhibiteurs de la sérine protéinase/effets indésirables
SÉLECTION CITATIONS
Détails de la recherche