scholarly journals Efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 lineages circulating in Brazil

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Ann Costa Clemens ◽  
Pedro M. Folegatti ◽  
Katherine R. W. Emary ◽  
Lily Yin Weckx ◽  
Jeremy Ratcliff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Vaccine Efficacy ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Trial Registration ◽  
Spike Protein ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Good Efficacy ◽  
Protein Mutation ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Nose And Throat

AbstractSeveral COVID-19 vaccines have shown good efficacy in clinical trials, but there remains uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccines against different variants. Here, we investigate the efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) against symptomatic COVID-19 in a post-hoc exploratory analysis of a Phase 3 randomised trial in Brazil (trial registration ISRCTN89951424). Nose and throat swabs were tested by PCR in symptomatic participants. Sequencing and genotyping of swabs were performed to determine the lineages of SARS-CoV-2 circulating during the study. Protection against any symptomatic COVID-19 caused by the Zeta (P.2) variant was assessed in 153 cases with vaccine efficacy (VE) of 69% (95% CI 55, 78). 49 cases of B.1.1.28 occurred and VE was 73% (46, 86). The Gamma (P.1) variant arose later in the trial and fewer cases (N = 18) were available for analysis. VE was 64% (−2, 87). ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 provided 95% protection (95% CI 61%, 99%) against hospitalisation due to COVID-19. In summary, we report that ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 protects against emerging variants in Brazil despite the presence of the spike protein mutation E484K.

scholarly journals Assessing Sunscreen Protection Using UV Photography: Descriptive Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin Horsham ◽  
Helen Ford ◽  
Jeremy Herbert ◽  
Alexander Wall ◽  
Sebastian Walpole ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Sun Protection ◽  
Trial Registration ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
The Public ◽  
Uv Photography ◽  
Clinical Trials Registry

BACKGROUND Photography using a UV transmitting filter allows UV light to pass and can be used to illuminate UV blocking lotions such as sunscreens. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study is to compare currently available UV photography cameras and assess whether these devices can be used as visualization tools for adequate coverage of sun protection lotions. METHODS This study was conducted in 3 parts: in phase 1, 3 different UV cameras were tested; in phase 2, we explored whether UV photography could work on a range of sun protection products; and in phase 3, a UV webcam was developed and was field-tested in a beach setting. In phase 1, volunteers were recruited, and researchers applied 3 sun protection products (ranging from sun protection factor [SPF] 15 to 50+) to the participants’ faces and arms. UV photography was performed using 3 UV cameras, and the subsequent images were compared. In phase 2, volunteers were recruited and asked to apply their own SPF products to their faces in their usual manner. UV photographs were collected in the morning and afternoon to assess whether the coverage remained over time. Qualitative interviews were conducted to assess the participants’ level of satisfaction with the UV image. In phase 3, a small portable UV webcam was designed using a plug-and-play approach to enable the viewing of UV images on a larger screen. The developed webcam was deployed at a public beach setting for use by the public for 7 days. RESULTS The 3 UV camera systems tested during phase 1 identified the application of a range of sun protection lotions of SPF 15 to 50+. The sensitivity of the UV camera devices was shown to be adequate, with SPF-containing products applied at concentrations of 2 and 1 mg/cm<sup>2</sup> clearly visible and SPF-containing products applied at a concentration of 0.4 mg/cm<sup>2</sup> having lower levels of coverage. Participants in phase 2 reported high satisfaction with the UV photography images, with 83% (29/35) of participants likely to use UV photography in the future. During phase 2, it was noted that many participants used tinted SPF-containing cosmetics, and several tinted products were further tested. However, it was observed that UV photography could not identify the areas missed for all tinted products. During phase 3, the electrical components of the UV webcam remained operational, and the camera was used 233 times by the public during field-testing. CONCLUSIONS In this study, we found that UV photography could identify the areas missed by sun protection lotions with chemical filters, and participants were engaged with personalized feedback. CLINICALTRIAL Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12619000975190; http://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377089 ; Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12619000145101; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=376672.

scholarly journals Impact of HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine on preventing subsequent infection and disease after excision treatment: post-hoc analysis from a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuang Zhao ◽  
Shangying Hu ◽  
Xiaoqian Xu ◽  
Xun Zhang ◽  
Qinjing Pan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Vaccine Efficacy ◽  
Hpv Vaccination ◽  
Hpv Infection ◽  
Trial Registration ◽  
Subsequent Infection ◽  
Hpv 16 ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Adjuvanted Vaccine ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Post Hoc

Abstract Background It is widely acknowledged that HPV prophylactic vaccine could prevent new infections and their associated lesions among women who are predominantly HPV-naive at vaccination. Yet there still remains uncertainty about whether HPV vaccination could benefit to individuals who have undergone surgery for cervical disease. Methods This post-hoc analysis intends to focus on intent-to-treat participants who underwent excision treatment at baseline and the follow-up period in a phase II/III, double-blind, randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00779766) conducted in Jiangsu province, China. We evaluate the impact of HPV vaccination on preventing women from subsequent infection and cervical lesions (LSIL+ and CIN2+) after excision treatment. Results One hundred sixty-eight (vaccine, n = 87; placebo, n = 81) performed excisional treatment in this clinical trial. We observed a significant effect of vaccination on acquiring 14 high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) infection after treatment (vaccine efficacy: 27.0%; 95% CI 4.9, 44.0%). The vaccine efficacy against new infections after treatment for 14 HR-HPV infection was estimated as 32.0% (95%CI 1.8, 52.8%), and was 41.2% (95%CI -162.7, 86.8%) for HPV16/18 infection. The accumulative clearance rates of the vaccine group and placebo group were 88.9 and 81.6% for HPV16/18 infection (P = 0.345), 63.4, 48.7% for 14 HR-HPV infection (P = 0.062), respectively. No significant difference was observed on the persistent rate of HPV16/18, 14 HR-HPV infection and occurrence rate of LSIL+ between the two groups. Conclusions No significant evidence from this study showed that HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine could lead to viral faster clearance or have any effect on the rates of persistent infection among women who had excision treatment. However, the vaccine may still benefit post-treatment women with “primary prophylactic” effect. Further research is required in clarifying the effect of using the prophylactic HPV vaccine as therapeutic agents. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00779766. Date and status of trial registration: October 24, 2008. Completed; Has Results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document