Intradermal-delivered DNA vaccine provides anamnestic protection in a rhesus macaque SARS-CoV-2 challenge model

SummaryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has had a dramatic global impact on public health, social, and economic infrastructures. Here, we assess immunogenicity and anamnestic protective efficacy in rhesus macaques of the intradermal (ID)-delivered SARS-CoV-2 spike DNA vaccine, INO-4800. INO-4800 is an ID-delivered DNA vaccine currently being evaluated in clinical trials. Vaccination with INO-4800 induced T cell responses and neutralizing antibody responses against both the D614 and G614 SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins. Several months after vaccination, animals were challenged with SARS-CoV-2 resulting in rapid recall of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein T and B cell responses. These responses were associated with lower viral loads in the lung and with faster nasal clearance of virus. These studies support the immune impact of INO-4800 for inducing both humoral and cellular arms of the adaptive immune system which are likely important for providing durable protection against COVID-19 disease.

A prospective, single-blind, randomised, crossover study comparing three nasal hygiene systems and corresponding patient preference for such devices

Objective:To assess subjective preference using three nasal hygiene systems: Stérimar Original®, Emcur® and Sinus Rinse™.Design:We used a prospective, single-blind, randomised, crossover study to compare three nasal hygiene systems: Stérimar Original, Emcur and Sinus Rinse.Subjects:Eighteen adult volunteers were recruited and were asked to rate their experience over three days using three well-established nasal hygiene systems. A standard visual analogue scale was used to assess five criteria: (1) simplicity of instructions; (2) ease of use; (3) comfort; (4) perceived nasal clearance (effectiveness) and (5) single best overall system.Results:Stérimar Original was found to have the easiest instructions to understand compared to the other two systems. There was no significant difference between Stérimar Original and Sinus Rinse with regards to ease of use but they were both significantly easier to use than Emcur (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the three systems when comparing the last three criteria. There was no alteration in preference when the cost of each treatment was disclosed to the subjects, and no significant side effects were reported.Conclusion:The instructions accompanying Stérimar Original appeared to be the easiest to understand, while Stérimar Original and Sinus Rinse were easier to use than Emcur.

A Comparison of Nasal Clearance after Treatment of Perennial Allergic Rhinitis with Budesonide and Mometasone

OBJECTIVE: Evidence in vitro suggests that benzalkonium chloride, a preservative in many intranasal preparations, interferes with ciliary function and thus could potentially interfere with mucociliary transport, the mechanism for clearing secretions from the nasal cavity. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a parallel randomized study with 10 subjects in each arm comparing Rhinocort AQUA (an intranasal steroid (budesonide) spray without benzalkonium chloride) and Nasonex (an intranasal steroid (mometasone furoate) spray with benzalkonium chloride). Before and after 2 weeks of treatment, subjects completed a Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) and underwent a measurement of nasal clearance of a radioactive colloidal spray into the nose. RESULTS: The groups were matched at entry for nasal clearance, even though there was variability among subjects. The amount of change after 2 weeks of treatment (Δ before versus after treatment) showed a significant difference in nasal clearance favoring budesonide. After 2 weeks of treatment, both budesonide and mometasone demonstrated overall improvement in quality of life as assessed by the RQLQ. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Our study extends the observation in vitro that demonstrates the adverse effect of benzalkonium chloride on cilia to a measurement in vivo of clearance. The effects after 2 weeks might not reflect changes after longer periods of treatment. SIGNIFICANCE: To determine the clinical significance of the small improvement in mucociliary transport will require large clinical trials.