Search This Blog

Friday, August 14, 2020

Sinopharm Vaccine Against SARS-CoV-2: Safety, Immunogenicity Interim Outcomes


JAMA. Published online August 13, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.15543

Key Points

Question  What are the safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated vaccine against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)?

Findings  This was an interim analysis of 2 randomized placebo-controlled trials. In 96 healthy adults in a phase 1 trial of patients randomized to aluminum hydroxide (alum) only and low, medium, and high vaccine doses on days 0, 28, and 56, 7-day adverse reactions occurred in 12.5%, 20.8%, 16.7%, and 25.0%, respectively; geometric mean titers of neutralizing antibodies at day 14 after the third injection were 316, 206 and 297 in the low-, medium-, and high-dose groups, respectively. In 224 healthy adults randomized to the medium dose, 7-day adverse reactions occurred in 6.0% and 14.3% of the participants who received injections on days 0 and 14 vs alum only, and 19.0% and 17.9% who received injections on days 0 and 21 vs alum only, respectively; geometric mean titers of neutralizing antibodies in the vaccine groups at day 14 after the second injection were 121 vs 247, respectively.

Meaning  This inactivated COVID-19 vaccine had a low rate of adverse reactions and demonstrated immunogenicity, but longer-term assessment of safety and efficacy will require phase 3 trials.


Antibodies may curb pandemic before vaccines

While the world is transfixed by the high-stakes race to develop a COVID-19 vaccine, an equally crucial competition is heating up to produce targeted antibodies that could provide an instant immune boost against the virus. Clinical trials of these monoclonal antibodies, which may both prevent and treat the disease, are already underway and could produce signs of efficacy in the next few months, perhaps ahead of vaccine trials. “If you were going to put your money down, you would bet that you get the answer with the monoclonal before you get the answer with a vaccine,” says Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

“Antibodies have the potential to be an important bridge until the vaccine is available,” says Ajay Nirula, a vice president at Eli Lilly, one of several large companies investing in them. Likely to be more effective than remdesivir and dexamethasone, the repurposed drugs shown to help against COVID-19, antibodies could protect the highest risk health care workers from becoming infected while also lessening the severity of the disease in hospitalized patients. But producing monoclonals typically involves using bioreactors to grow hamster or mouse cells engineered to carry genes that make the proteins. On 15 July, Lilly, AbCellera, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, and Amgen jointly asked the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) whether they could share information about manufacturing their monoclonals without violating antitrust laws “to expand and expedite production.”

Soon after the pandemic began, researchers in industry and academia began to identify, design, tweak, and conduct lab tests of monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Most bind to and “neutralize” the viral surface protein, or spike, that initiates an infection. On 29 May, Lilly, working with AbCellera, launched the first human study of a monoclonal antibody—a phase I trial testing its safety and tolerability in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Other safety trials followed, from Lilly’s Chinese partner Junshi Biosciences and Regeneron, which developed a cocktail of three monoclonals that works against Ebola.

Regeneron is now testing the efficacy of its COVID-19 cocktail, which combines a spike antibody from a person who recovered and one from a mouse given the spike protein, in three large-scale, placebo-controlled trials. A prevention trial run in coordination with NIAID’s COVID-19 Prevention Trials Network (CoVPN), an arm of the Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed, will recruit 2000 people who live in a house with a confirmed COVID-19 case. One treatment study run by the company aims to enroll nearly 2600 hospitalized people with severe COVID-19, whereas another, about half that size, will test the antibodies in infected people with mild or moderate symptoms. Lilly has launched its own trials, including a phase III, placebo-controlled study in 2400 residents or staff of long-term care facilities, run with the help of CoVPN.

“We should be able to see an efficacy signal very quickly” from these trials, says Amy Jenkins, who heads the Pandemic Prevention Platform (P3) program at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which for 2 years has invested in speeding the development of monoclonal antibodies. Although Jenkins hesitates to make a firm prediction, she says the November-December time frame is “realistic and conservative.” That is likely earlier than any vaccine will prove safe and effective, researchers predict. “I would be reluctant to say [that] would be any earlier than the end of the year,” Fauci said at a press conference about the launch of NIAID’s first COVID-19 efficacy vaccine trial on 27 July.

Regeneron’s Christos Kyratsous notes that vaccine trials must wait a few weeks for a person’s immune system to develop appropriate responses to shots and further weeks for “the event”—a chance exposure to SARS-CoV-2. This means those trials require time and many people. In contrast, for the antibody treatment trials, “your event has already happened,” Kyratsous says. And in the prevention studies, the household contacts of COVID-19 cases will be much more likely to be exposed than people who typically join a vaccine efficacy study.

Immunologist Dennis Burton, whose group at Scripps Research has isolated highly potent monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 that it hopes to move into human studies (Science, 15 June, DOI: 10.1126/science.abc8511), says he is optimistic that monoclonals will protect people from infection for months with a single shot. “It’s much easier to take care of a few incoming virus particles than to try and resolve or cure an ongoing infection.” The same logic holds for treatment. “Hit the virus hard and early,” Burton says.

Kyratsous says even if monoclonal antibodies don’t beat vaccines to the finish line, they still might have a role to play against COVID-19. “We’re going to need both approaches in the long run,” Kyratsous suggests. Vaccines are rarely 100% effective, and many people may decline a vaccine or skip immunization for other reasons. What’s more, he notes, the elderly or people who are immune compromised may not mount robust immune responses after being vaccinated.

Supplies of monoclonal antibodies may be limited, however, in part because of modest investment. Operation Warp Speed, for example, has committed $8 billion to six different COVID-19 vaccines; for monoclonals, the government has invested about $750 million, much of it in Regeneron, which will produce somewhere between 70,000 and 300,000 doses before it even has efficacy data. Lilly says it will have 100,000 doses by the end of the year.

But no one knows how far those doses would stretch, says Janet Woodcock, who is on leave from the Food and Drug Administration to lead Warp Speed’s therapeutic effort. If the antibodies work, a study from the Duke University Margolis Center for Health Policy estimates the United States alone could require nearly 40 million doses next year for prevention and treatment. “Unlike with vaccines, it is hard to project the number of treatment courses that will be available,” Woodcock says. Prevention, which would be a single intramuscular shot, requires less product than the intravenous infusions used in treatment, she notes, but the amount needed depends on a person’s weight.

Although how to prioritize vaccine distribution has already sparked extensive debate, no such discussion has yet taken place about monoclonal antibodies. But DOJ acknowledged the supply concerns on 23 July, giving the six companies that had petitioned it the green light to share production information.

Regeneron is not part of that group, yet Kyratsous is optimistic about meeting the need. “The good thing with some of these biologics is you can ramp up production fairly fast,” he says. Nirula agrees. “If we have success in these clinical trials, we will have a lot of drug available,” he says.

The cost of monoclonals, especially for the higher doses needed for treatment, could split the world into the haves and have-nots. “It’s unlikely that that treatment will get down to a price point in the near future that it would be easily affordable globally,” says Seth Berkley, who leads Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and heads an international COVID-19 vaccine effort.

Jenkins says a key aim of the P3 project, which has provided four groups with $96 million in seed money, has been to develop monoclonal antibodies that can be made by the body itself, instead of in large fermentation tanks. The idea, which has not yet been tested in humans for COVID-19, is to inject people with DNA or messenger RNA that encodes a desired antibody, allowing their own cells to make it. “We think we can bring down the cost of monoclonal antibodies,” Jenkins says.

Regardless of cost, evidence that monoclonals work as preventives could benefit everyone by giving vaccinemakers a clear sign that antibodies against the surface protein of SARS-CoV-2 are enough to protect a person. This, in turn, could provide a strong indicator for evaluating the worth of a candidate vaccine short of actual efficacy data. “It will be earthshaking to the vaccine field in a positive way,” says Myron Cohen of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, who leads testing of monoclonal antibodies for CoVPN. “It provides a thousand opportunities to move forward faster.”


Functional SARS-CoV-2-specific immune memory persists after mild COVID-19

Lauren B. Rodda1,6, Jason Netland1,6, Laila Shehata1,7, Kurt B. Pruner1,7, Peter A. Morawski2,7, 4

Chris Thouvenel3, Kennidy K. Takehara1, Julie Eggenberger4, Emily Hemann4, Hayley R. 5

Waterman2, Mitchell L. Fahning2, Yu Chen3, Jennifer Rathe4, Caleb Stokes4, Samuel Wrenn5, 6

Brooke Fiala5, Lauren Carter5, Jessica A. Hamerman1,2, Neil P. King5, Michael Gale Jr4, Daniel 7

J. Campbell1,2, David Rawlings1,3, Marion Pepper1,8

The recently emerged SARS-CoV-2 virus is currently causing a global pandemic and
continue to rise. The majority of infected individuals experience mildly
coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but it is unknown whether this can induce
immune memory that might contribute to herd immunity. Thus, we performed
longitudinal assessment of individuals recovered from mildly symptomatic COVID-19
determine if they develop and sustain immunological memory against the virus. We
that recovered individuals developed SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibody and
plasma, as well as virus-specific memory B and T cells that not only persisted, but in
cases increased numerically over three months following symptom onset. Furthermore,
SARS-CoV-2-specific memory lymphocytes exhibited characteristics associated with
antiviral immunity: memory T cells secreted IFN-γ and expanded upon antigen re-
encounter, while memory B cells expressed receptors capable of neutralizing virus when
expressed as antibodies. These findings demonstrate that mild COVID-19 elicits memory
lymphocytes that persist and display functional hallmarks associated with antiviral
protective immunity.
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-57112/v1.pdf

Robust T cell immunity in convalescents with asymptomatic or mild COVID

Highlights


  • 1.Acute phase SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells display an activated cytotoxic phenotype
  • 2.Broad and polyfunctional SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses in convalescent phase
  • 3.Detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses also in seronegative individuals

Summary


SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T cells will likely prove critical for long-term immune protection against COVID-19. We here systematically mapped the functional and phenotypic landscape of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses in unexposed individuals, exposed family members, and individuals with acute or convalescent COVID-19. Acute phase SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells displayed a highly activated cytotoxic phenotype that correlated with various clinical markers of disease severity, whereas convalescent phase SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were polyfunctional and displayed a stem-like memory phenotype. Importantly, SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were detectable in antibody-seronegative exposed family members and convalescent individuals with a history of asymptomatic and mild COVID-19. Our collective dataset shows that SARS-CoV-2 elicits robust, broad and highly functional memory T cell responses, suggesting that natural exposure or infection may prevent recurrent episodes of severe COVID-19.






Identification




CM Life Sciences readies $350M IPO

Blank check company CM Life Sciences (CMLF) has filed a preliminary prospectus for a $350M IPO of 35M units at $10 per unit.

Each unit consists of one Class A common share and 1/3 of a five-year warrant to purchase one Class A share at $11.50.


Does Metformin Reduce Risk for Death in COVID-19?

Accumulating observational data suggest that metformin use in patients with type 2 diabetes might reduce the risk for death from COVID-19, but the randomized trials needed to prove this are unlikely to be carried out, according to experts.

The latest results, which are not yet peer reviewed, were published online July 31. The study was conducted by Andrew B. Crouse, PhD, of the Hugh Kaul Precision Medicine Institute, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and colleagues.

The researchers found that among more than 600 patients with diabetes and COVID-19, use of metformin was associated with a nearly 70% reduction in mortality after adjustment for multiple confounders.

Data from four previous studies that also show a reduction in mortality among metformin users compared to nonusers were summarized in a “mini review” by André J. Scheen, MD, PhD, published August 1 in Diabetes and Metabolism.

Scheen, of the Division of Diabetes, Nutrition, and Metabolic Disorders and the Division of Clinical Pharmacology at Liège University, Liège, Belgium, discusses possible mechanisms behind this observation.

“Because metformin exerts various effects beyond its glucose-lowering action, among which are anti-inflammatory effects, it may be speculated that this biguanide might positively influence the prognosis of patients with [type 2 diabetes] hospitalized for COVID-19,” he says.

“However, given the potential confounders inherently found in observational studies, caution is required before drawing any firm conclusions in the absence of randomized controlled trials,” Scheen writes.

Indeed, when asked to comment, endocrinologist Kasia Lipska, MD, of Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, told Medscape Medical News: “Metformin users tend to do better in many different settings with respect to many different outcomes. To me, it is still unclear whether metformin is truly a miracle drug or whether it is simply used more often among people who are healthier and who do not have contraindications to its use.”

She added, “I don’t think we have enough data to suggest metformin use for COVID-19 mitigation at this point.”

Alabama Authors Say Confounding Effects “Unlikely”


In the retrospective analysis of electronic health records from their institution, Crouse and colleagues reviewed data from 604 patients who were confirmed to have tested positive for COVID-19 between February 25 and June 22, 2020. Of those individuals, 40% had diabetes.

Death occurred in 11% (n = 67); the odds ratio for death among those with, vs without, diabetes was 3.62 (P < .0001).

Individuals with diabetes accounted for >60% of all deaths. In multiple logistic regression, age 50 – 70 vs <50, male sex, and diabetes emerged as independent predictors of death.

Of the 42 patients with diabetes who died, 34 (81%) had used metformin, and eight (19%) had not, a significant difference (odds ratio 0.38; P = .0221). Insulin use, on the other hand, had no effect on mortality (P = .5728).

“In fact, with 11% [being] the mortality of metformin users, [this] was comparable to that of the general COVID-19-positive population and dramatically lower than the 23% mortality observed in subjects with diabetes and not on metformin,” the authors say.

The survival benefit observed with metformin remained after exclusion of patients with classic metformin contraindications, such as chronic kidney disease and heart failure (odds ratio, 0.17; P = .0231).

“This makes any potential confounding effects from skewing metformin users towards healthier subjects without these additional comorbidities very unlikely,” Crouse and colleagues contend.

After further analysis that controlled for other covariates (age, sex, obesity status, and hypertension), age, sex, and metformin use remained independent predictors of mortality.

For metformin, the odds ratio was 0.33 (P = .0210).

But Lipska pointed out, “Observational studies can take into account confounders that are measured. However, unmeasured confounders may still affect the conclusions of these studies…. Propensity score matching to account for the likelihood of use of metformin could be used to better account for differences between metformin users and nonusers.”

If Metformin Does Reduce COVID-19 Deaths, Multiple Mechanisms Likely


In his article, Scheen notes that several mechanisms have been proposed for the possible beneficial effect of metformin on COVID-19 outcomes, including direct improvements in glucose control, body weight, and insulin resistance; reduction in inflammation; inhibition of virus penetration via phosphorylation of ACE2; inhibition of an immune hyperactivation pathway; and neutrophil reduction. All remain theoretical, he emphasizes.

He notes that some authors have raised concerns about possible harms from the use of metformin by patients with type 2 diabetes who are hospitalized for COVID-19, particularly because of the potential risk for lactic acidosis in cases of multiple organ failure.

In Totality, Four Studies Suggest 25% Death Reduction With Metformin


Taken together, the four observational studies that Scheen reviews showed that metformin had a positive effect, with an overall 25% reduction in death (P < .00001), albeit with relatively high heterogeneity (I² = 61%).

The largest of these, from the United States, included 6256 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and involved propensity matching. A significant reduction in mortality with metformin use was seen in women but not men (odds ratio, 0.759).

The French Coronavirus-SARS-CoV-2 and Diabetes Outcomes (CORONADO) study of 1317 patients with diabetes and confirmed COVID-19 who were admitted to 53 French hospitals also showed a significant survival benefit for metformin, although the study wasn’t designed to address that issue.

In that study, the odds ratio for death on day 7 in prior metformin users compared to nonusers was 0.59. This finding lost significance but remained a trend after full adjustments (0.80).

Two smaller observational studies produced similar trends toward survival benefit with metformin.

Nonetheless, Scheen cautions: “Firm conclusions about the impact of metformin therapy can only be drawn from double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and such trials are almost impossible in the context of COVID-19.”

He adds: “Because metformin is out of patent and very inexpensive, no pharmaceutical company is likely to be interested in planning a study to demonstrate the benefits of metformin on COVID-19-related clinical outcomes.”

Lipska agrees: “RCTs are unlikely to be conducted to settle these issues. In their absence, metformin use should be based on its safety and effectiveness profile.”

Scheen concludes, however, “There are at least no negative safety indications, so there is no reason to stop metformin therapy during COVID-19 infection except in cases of severe gastrointestinal symptoms, hypoxia and/or multiple organ failure.”

Lipska has received grants from the National Institutes of Health and works under contract for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to develop publicly reported quality measures. Scheen has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

medRxiv. Published online July 31, 2020. Full text

Diabetes Metab. Published online August 1, 2020. Full text