Physical Activity Associates with Greater Antibody Persistence through 6 Months after the Second Dose of CoronaVac in Patients with Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases

This study aimed to investigate the association between physical activity and persistent anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies 6 months after two-dose schedule of CoronaVac in autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) patients. This was a prospective cohort study within an open-label, single-arm, phase 4 vaccination trial (clinicaltrials.gov #NCT04754698), conducted at a tertiary referral hospital in Sao Paulo, Brazil. ARD patients aged ≥18 underwent a two-dose schedule of CoronaVac (Sinovac Life Sciences, China). Persistent immunogenicity 6 months after the full-course vaccination was assessed using seroconversion rates of total anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG, geometric mean titers of anti-S1/S2 IgG (GMT), and frequency of positive neutralizing antibodies (NAb). Physical activity was assessed trough questionnaire (active being defined as ≥150 min/week of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity). Physically active (n=421) and inactive (n=327) ARD patients were similar for most characteristics; however, active patients were significantly younger (p<0.001), had less chronic inflammatory arthritis (p<0.001) and less frequently used biologic agents (p<0.001) than inactive ones. Six months after full-course vaccination, being male (p<0.001), use of prednisone (p<0.01) and biologics (p<0.001) were associated with poor immunogenicity, while being physically active was associated with better humoral response (p<0.01). Adjusted point estimates from logistic regression models indicated greater odds of seroconversion rates (OR: 1.5 [95%CI: 1.1 to 2.1]) and NAb positivity (OR: 1.5 [95%CI: 1.0 to 2.1]) in physically active patients and approximately 43% greater GMT (42.8% [95%CI: 11.9 to 82.2]) than inactive ones. In conclusion, among immunocompromised patients, being physically active was associated with an increment in antibody persistence through 6 months after a full-course of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.

Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine in Gynecologic Oncology Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study

Objective: To evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in gynecologic oncology patients under chemotherapy. Methods: A prospective cohort study including gynecologic oncology women who were under chemotherapy or had completed it within 6 months at the time of the study. All patients received a two-dose schedule of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Results were compared with a control group of healthy women vaccinated in the same period. Results: Overall, 44 oncologic patients with a mean age of 61.3 ± 10.7 years were enrolled: 28 (63.6%) had ovarian cancer, 9 (20.4%) endometrial, and 7 (16%) cervical. The IgG antibody titer after 1 month from vaccination was low in 9 (20.5%) patients, moderate in 21 (47.7%), and high in 14 (31.8%). The 3-month titer was null in 2 (4.5%) patients, low in 26 (59.1%), moderate in 13 (29.5%), and high in 3 (6.8%). Patients ≥ 50 years reported lower 1-month (p = 0.018) and 3-month (p = 0.004) titers compared with <50 years. Patients with BMI < 30 kg/m2 had a higher 1-month titer compared with BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 (p = 0.016). Compared with healthy women (n = 44), oncologic patients showed a lower 3-month titer (p < 0.001). None of the patients experienced serious adverse effects. Conclusions: The COVID-19 vaccine was safe and immunogenic in gynecologic oncology patients under chemotherapy. Serological monitoring and further vaccine shots should be considered to boost protection.

Immune Response to Hepatitis B Virus Vaccine Among People Living With HIV: A Meta-Analysis

BackgroundThere is conflicting evidence about whether a double dose of the hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccine induces better immunity than the standard-dose vaccine for people living with HIV (PLWH). This study provides a meta-analysis that summarizes the efficacy of HBV vaccine regimens among HIV-infected patients, clarifying the role of particular factors such as dose and frequency of vaccination in vaccine responsiveness and highlighting the need for evidence-based practice to assess HBV vaccination among PLWH.MethodsRandomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective studies reporting vaccination response rates among PLWH were found through a search of PubMed, Cochrane, and the Web of Science. The key outcome was vaccine response. A random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled response rate. Subgroup analysis was conducted to evaluate key factors and explore sources of heterogeneity. Possible biases were assessed using quality and publication bias assessment.ResultsEligible studies included controlled trials that examined the effects of 17 interventional studies with 1,821 participants. Among PLWH who received the HBV vaccine, the pooled response rate of HBV vaccination was 71.5% (95% CI 64.0%–77.9%, p &lt; 0.001). Compared with the standard dose (65.5%, 95% CI 53.1%–76.1%), the double dose (75.2%, 95% CI 66.2%–82.5%) was associated with a better response rate [Q(1) = 19.617, p &lt; 0.001]. When stratified by schedule, the four-dose schedule (89.7%, 95% CI 83.1%–93.9%) had a higher response rate than the three-dose schedule (63.3%, 95% CI 56.6%–69.4%) and the difference was significant [Q(1) = 88.305, p &lt; 0.001]. PLWH with higher CD4+ T-cell counts (&gt;500 cells/mm3) at the time of vaccination had better response rates [Q(1) = 88.305, p &lt; 0.001].ConclusionsIn this meta-analysis, the double dose of the HBV vaccine and multiple injections were associated with better immune responses than the standard HBV vaccine regimen in PLWH. Higher seroconversion rates were observed in PLWH with high CD4+ T-cell levels, indicating that individuals infected with HIV should receive the HBV vaccine as soon as possible after diagnosis.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/.

Accumulation of Temozolomide-Induced Apoptosis, Senescence and DNA Damage by Metronomic Dose Schedule: A Proof-of-Principle Study with Glioblastoma Cells

Temozolomide (TMZ), a first-line drug in glioma therapy, targets the tumor DNA at various sites. One of the DNA alkylation products is O6-methylguanine (O6MeG), which is, in the low dose range of TMZ, responsible for nearly all genotoxic and cytotoxic effects relevant for cancer therapy. There is, however, a dispute regarding whether the TMZ concentration in the tumor tissue in patients is sufficient to elicit a significant cytotoxic or cytostatic response. Although treatment with TMZ occurs repeatedly with daily doses (metronomic dose schedule) and in view of the short half-life of the drug it is unclear whether doses are accumulating. Here, we addressed the question whether repeated low doses elicit similar effects in glioblastoma cells than a high cumulative dose. We show that repeated treatments with a low dose of TMZ (5 × 5 µM) caused an accumulation of cytotoxicity through apoptosis, cytostasis through cellular senescence, and DNA double-strand breaks, which was similar to the responses induced by a single cumulative dose of 25 µM TMZ. This finding, together with the previously reported linear dose–response curves, support the notion that TMZ is able to trigger a significant cytotoxic and cytostatic effect in vivo if the low-dose metronomic schedule is applied.

A Cluster-randomised, Non-inferiority Trial of the Impact of a Two-dose Compared to Three-dose Schedule of Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccination in Rural Gambia: the PVS Trial

Background:Pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) effectively prevent pneumococcal disease but the global impact of pneumococcal vaccination is hampered by the cost of PCV. The relevance and feasibility of trials of reduced dose schedules is greatest in middle- and low-income countries, such as The Gambia, where PCV has been introduced with good disease control but where transmission of vaccine-type pneumococci persists. We are conducting a large cluster-randomised, non-inferiority, field trial of an alternative reduced dose schedule of PCV compared to the standard schedule, the PVS trial.Methods:PVS is prospective, cluster-randomised, non-inferiority, real-world field trial of an alternative schedule of one dose of PCV scheduled at age 6 weeks with a booster dose at age 9 months (i.e. the alternative ‘1+1’ schedule) compared to the standard schedule of three primary doses scheduled at 6, 10, and 14 weeks weeks of age (i.e. the stardard ‘3+0’ schedule). The intervention will be delivered for 4 years. The primary endpoint is the population-level prevalence of nasopharyngeal vaccine-type pneumococcal carriage in children aged 2 weeks to 59 months with clinical pneumonia in Year 4 of the trial. Participants and field staff are not masked to group allocation while measurement of the laboratory endpoint will be masked. Sixty-eight geographic population clusters have been randomly allocated, in a 1:1 ratio, to each schedule and all resident infants are eligible for enrolment. All resident children less than 5 years of age are under continuous surveillance for clinical safety endpoints measured at 11 health facilities; invasive pneumococcal disease, radiological pneumonia, clinical pneumonia, and hospitalisations. Secondary endpoints include the population-level prevalence of nasopharyngeal vaccine-type pneumococcal carriage in Year 2 and 4 and vaccine-type carriage prevalence in unimmunised infants aged 6-12 weeks in Year 4. The trial includes components of mathematical modeling, health economics, and health systems research.Discussion:Analysis will account for potential non-independence of measurements by cluster, comparing the population-level impact of the two schedules with interpretation at the individual level. The non-inferiority margin is informed by the ‘acceptable loss of effect’ of the alternative compared to standard schedule. The secondary endpoints will provide substantial evidence to support the interpretation of the primary endpoint. PVS will evaluate the effect of transition from a standard 3+0 schedule to an alternative 1+1 schedule in a setting of high pneumococcal transmission. The results of PVS will inform global decision-making concerning the use of reduced-dose PCV schedules.Trial registration: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number – 15056916.

The reactogenicity and immunogenicity of a booster dose after the second dose of a protein subunit vaccine MVC-COV1901

In this extension of the phase 1 clinical study, we report the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of the booster dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, MVC-COV1901, administered six months after the completion of the primary two dose schedule. Antibody persistence was detected at 6 months after the second dose of MVC-COV1901, albeit at reduced levels. At 28 days after the booster dose, the neutralizing antibody titer was 1.7-fold higher compared to the previous peak at 2 weeks after the second dose. These data demonstrated the safety and immunogenicity of booster shot of MVC-COV1901 after the primary schedule of the vaccine.

Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Efficacy and Effectiveness against Cancer

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection, with 15 HPV types related to cervical, anal, oropharyngeal, penile, vulvar, and vaginal cancers. However, cervical cancer remains one of the most common cancers in women, especially in developing countries. Three HPV vaccines have been licensed: bivalent (Cervarix, GSK, Rixensart, Belgium), quadrivalent (Merck, Sharp & Dome (Merck & Co, Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA)), and nonavalent (Merck, Sharp & Dome (Merck & Co, Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA)). The current HPV vaccine recommendations apply to 9 years old and above through the age of 26 years and adults aged 27–45 years who might be at risk of new HPV infection and benefit from vaccination. The primary target population for HPV vaccination recommended by the WHO is girls aged 9–14 years, prior to their becoming sexually active, to undergo a two-dose schedule and girls ≥ 15 years of age, to undergo a three-dose schedule. Safety data for HPV vaccines have indicated that they are safe. The most common adverse side-effect was local symptoms. HPV vaccines are highly immunogenic. The efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines has been remarkably high among young women who were HPV seronegative before vaccination. Vaccine efficacy was lower among women regardless of HPV DNA when vaccinated and among adult women. Comparisons of the efficacy of bivalent, quadrivalent, and nonavalent vaccines against HPV 16/18 showed that they are similar. However, the nonavalent vaccine can provide additional protection against HPV 31/33/45/52/58. In a real-world setting, the notable decrease of HPV 6/11/16/18 among vaccinated women compared with unvaccinated women shows the vaccine to be highly effective. Moreover, the direct effect of the nonavalent vaccine with the cross-protection of bivalent and quadrivalent vaccines results in the reduction of HPV 6/11/16/18/31/33/45/52/58. HPV vaccination has been shown to provide herd protection as well. Two-dose HPV vaccine schedules showed no difference in seroconversion from three-dose schedules. However, the use of a single-dose HPV vaccination schedule remains controversial. For males, the quadrivalent HPV vaccine possibly reduces the incidence of external genital lesions and persistent infection with HPV 6/11/16/18. Evidence regarding the efficacy and risk of HPV vaccination and HIV infection remains limited. HPV vaccination has been shown to be highly effective against oral HPV type 16/18 infection, with a significant percentage of participants developing IgG antibodies in the oral fluid post vaccination. However, the vaccines’ effectiveness in reducing the incidence of and mortality rates from HPV-related head and neck cancers should be observed in the long term. In anal infections and anal intraepithelial neoplasia, the vaccines demonstrate high efficacy. While HPV vaccines are very effective, screening for related cancers, as per guidelines, is still recommended.

OpenSAFELY Vaccine Coverage Report - Third/Booster Doses

Weekly* report on COVID-19 vaccination coverage in England focussing on THIRD/booster doses which are due, based on the booster dose schedule (6 months since second dose). * please note, updates will occur most weeks but not all.