Interim safety and immunogenicity analysis of the EuCorVac-19 COVID-19 vaccine in a Phase 3 randomized, observer-blind, immunobridging trial in the Philippines

IF 6.8 3区 医学 Q1 VIROLOGY
Jonathan F. Lovell, Kazutoyo Miura, Yeong Ok Baik, Chankyu Lee, YoungJin Choi, Howard Her, Jeong-Yoon Lee, Michelle Ylade, Roxas Lee-Llacer, Norman De Asis, Mitzi Trinidad-Aseron, Jose Manuel Ranola, Loreta Zoleta De Jesus
{"title":"Interim safety and immunogenicity analysis of the EuCorVac-19 COVID-19 vaccine in a Phase 3 randomized, observer-blind, immunobridging trial in the Philippines","authors":"Jonathan F. Lovell,&nbsp;Kazutoyo Miura,&nbsp;Yeong Ok Baik,&nbsp;Chankyu Lee,&nbsp;YoungJin Choi,&nbsp;Howard Her,&nbsp;Jeong-Yoon Lee,&nbsp;Michelle Ylade,&nbsp;Roxas Lee-Llacer,&nbsp;Norman De Asis,&nbsp;Mitzi Trinidad-Aseron,&nbsp;Jose Manuel Ranola,&nbsp;Loreta Zoleta De Jesus","doi":"10.1002/jmv.29927","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>EuCorVac-19 (ECV-19) is a recombinant receptor binding domain (RBD) COVID-19 vaccine that displays the RBD (derived from the SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan strain) on immunogenic liposomes. This study compares the safety and immunogenicity of ECV-19 to the COVISHIELD<sup>TM</sup> (CS) adenoviral-vectored vaccine. Interim analysis is presented of a randomized, observer-blind, immunobridging Phase 3 trial in the Philippines in 2600 subjects, with treatment and biospecimen collection between October 2022 and January 2023. Healthy male and female adults who received investigational vaccines were 18 years and older, and randomly assigned to ECV-19 (<i>n</i> = 2004) or CS (<i>n</i> = 596) groups. Immunization followed a two-injection, intramuscular regimen with 4 weeks between prime and boost vaccination. Safety endpoints were assessed in all participants and immunogenicity analysis was carried out in a subset (<i>n</i> = 585 in ECV-19 and <i>n</i> = 290 in CS groups). The primary immunological endpoints were superiority of neutralizing antibody response, as well as noninferiority in seroresponse rate (defined as a 4-fold increase in RBD antibody titers from baseline). After prime vaccination, ECV-19 had a lower incidence of local solicited adverse events (AEs) (12.0% vs. 15.8%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01), and solicited systemic AEs (13.1 vs. 17.4%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01) relative to CS. After the second injection, both ECV-19 and CS had lower overall solicited AEs (7.8% vs. 7.6%). For immunological assessment, 98% of participants had prior COVID-19 exposure (based on the presence of anti-nucleocapsid antibodies) at the time of the initial immunization, without differing baseline antibody levels or microneutralization (MN) titers against the Wuhan strain in the two groups. After prime vaccination, ECV-19 induced higher anti-RBD IgG relative to CS (1,464 vs. 355 BAU/mL, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) and higher neutralizing antibody response (1,303 vs. 494 MN titer, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). After boost vaccination, ECV-19 and CS maintained those levels of anti-RBD IgG (1367 vs. 344 BAU/mL, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) and neutralizing antibodies (1128 vs. 469 MN titer, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). ECV-19 also elicited antibodies that better neutralized the Omicron variant, compared to CS (763 vs. 373 MN titer, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Women displayed higher responses to both vaccines than men. The ECV-19 group had a greater seroresponse rate compared to CS (83% vs. 30%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). In summary, both ECV-19 and CS had favorable safety profiles, with ECV-19 showing diminished local and systemic solicited AE after prime immunization. ECV-19 had significantly greater immunogenicity in terms of anti-RBD IgG, neutralizing antibodies, and seroresponse rate. These data establish a relatively favorable safety and immunogenicity profile for ECV-19. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05572879).</p>","PeriodicalId":16354,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Virology","volume":"96 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Virology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmv.29927","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VIROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

EuCorVac-19 (ECV-19) is a recombinant receptor binding domain (RBD) COVID-19 vaccine that displays the RBD (derived from the SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan strain) on immunogenic liposomes. This study compares the safety and immunogenicity of ECV-19 to the COVISHIELDTM (CS) adenoviral-vectored vaccine. Interim analysis is presented of a randomized, observer-blind, immunobridging Phase 3 trial in the Philippines in 2600 subjects, with treatment and biospecimen collection between October 2022 and January 2023. Healthy male and female adults who received investigational vaccines were 18 years and older, and randomly assigned to ECV-19 (n = 2004) or CS (n = 596) groups. Immunization followed a two-injection, intramuscular regimen with 4 weeks between prime and boost vaccination. Safety endpoints were assessed in all participants and immunogenicity analysis was carried out in a subset (n = 585 in ECV-19 and n = 290 in CS groups). The primary immunological endpoints were superiority of neutralizing antibody response, as well as noninferiority in seroresponse rate (defined as a 4-fold increase in RBD antibody titers from baseline). After prime vaccination, ECV-19 had a lower incidence of local solicited adverse events (AEs) (12.0% vs. 15.8%, p < 0.01), and solicited systemic AEs (13.1 vs. 17.4%, p < 0.01) relative to CS. After the second injection, both ECV-19 and CS had lower overall solicited AEs (7.8% vs. 7.6%). For immunological assessment, 98% of participants had prior COVID-19 exposure (based on the presence of anti-nucleocapsid antibodies) at the time of the initial immunization, without differing baseline antibody levels or microneutralization (MN) titers against the Wuhan strain in the two groups. After prime vaccination, ECV-19 induced higher anti-RBD IgG relative to CS (1,464 vs. 355 BAU/mL, p < 0.001) and higher neutralizing antibody response (1,303 vs. 494 MN titer, p < 0.001). After boost vaccination, ECV-19 and CS maintained those levels of anti-RBD IgG (1367 vs. 344 BAU/mL, p < 0.001) and neutralizing antibodies (1128 vs. 469 MN titer, p < 0.001). ECV-19 also elicited antibodies that better neutralized the Omicron variant, compared to CS (763 vs. 373 MN titer, p < 0.001). Women displayed higher responses to both vaccines than men. The ECV-19 group had a greater seroresponse rate compared to CS (83% vs. 30%, p < 0.001). In summary, both ECV-19 and CS had favorable safety profiles, with ECV-19 showing diminished local and systemic solicited AE after prime immunization. ECV-19 had significantly greater immunogenicity in terms of anti-RBD IgG, neutralizing antibodies, and seroresponse rate. These data establish a relatively favorable safety and immunogenicity profile for ECV-19. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05572879).

菲律宾 EuCorVac-19 COVID-19 疫苗 3 期随机、观察盲法免疫桥接试验的中期安全性和免疫原性分析
EuCorVac-19(ECV-19)是一种重组受体结合域(RBD)COVID-19疫苗,其免疫原性脂质体上显示了RBD(来源于SARS-CoV-2武汉株)。这项研究比较了 ECV-19 与 COVISHIELDTM (CS) 腺病毒载体疫苗的安全性和免疫原性。该研究对在菲律宾进行的一项随机、观察盲、免疫桥接的 3 期试验进行了中期分析,共有 2600 名受试者参加,治疗和生物样本采集时间为 2022 年 10 月至 2023 年 1 月。接种研究疫苗的健康男性和女性成人年龄在 18 岁及以上,随机分配到 ECV-19 组(n = 2004)或 CS 组(n = 596)。免疫接种采用两次肌肉注射的方案,两次接种之间的间隔时间为 4 周。对所有参与者进行了安全性终点评估,并对部分参与者(ECV-19 组 585 人,CS 组 290 人)进行了免疫原性分析。主要免疫学终点是中和抗体反应的优越性以及血清反应率的非劣效性(定义为 RBD 抗体滴度比基线增加 4 倍)。初次接种后,ECV-19 的局部诱发不良事件 (AE) 发生率(12.0% 对 15.8%,p < 0.01)和诱发全身不良事件发生率(13.1% 对 17.4%,p < 0.01)均低于 CS。第二次注射后,ECV-19和CS的总招致AE较低(7.8% vs. 7.6%)。在免疫学评估方面,98%的参与者在初次免疫时曾接触过COVID-19(基于抗核头壳抗体的存在),两组的基线抗体水平或针对武汉毒株的微中和(MN)滴度没有差异。初次接种后,相对于 CS,ECV-19 诱导了更高的抗 RBD IgG(1,464 对 355 BAU/mL,p <0.001)和更高的中和抗体反应(1,303 对 494 MN 滴度,p <0.001)。加强免疫后,ECV-19 和 CS 能维持较高水平的抗 RBD IgG(1367 vs. 344 BAU/mL,p <0.001)和中和抗体(1128 vs. 469 MN 滴度,p <0.001)。与 CS 相比,ECV-19 也能产生更好的中和 Omicron 变种的抗体(763 对 373 MN 滴度,p < 0.001)。女性对两种疫苗的反应均高于男性。与 CS 相比,ECV-19 组的血清反应率更高(83% 对 30%,p < 0.001)。总之,ECV-19和CS都具有良好的安全性,ECV-19在初次免疫后的局部和全身诱发性AE减少。就抗 RBD IgG、中和抗体和血清反应率而言,ECV-19 的免疫原性明显更高。这些数据表明,ECV-19 具有相对良好的安全性和免疫原性。该试验已在 ClinicalTrials.gov 上注册(NCT05572879)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Virology
Journal of Medical Virology 医学-病毒学
CiteScore
23.20
自引率
2.40%
发文量
777
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Medical Virology focuses on publishing original scientific papers on both basic and applied research related to viruses that affect humans. The journal publishes reports covering a wide range of topics, including the characterization, diagnosis, epidemiology, immunology, and pathogenesis of human virus infections. It also includes studies on virus morphology, genetics, replication, and interactions with host cells. The intended readership of the journal includes virologists, microbiologists, immunologists, infectious disease specialists, diagnostic laboratory technologists, epidemiologists, hematologists, and cell biologists. The Journal of Medical Virology is indexed and abstracted in various databases, including Abstracts in Anthropology (Sage), CABI, AgBiotech News & Information, National Agricultural Library, Biological Abstracts, Embase, Global Health, Web of Science, Veterinary Bulletin, and others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信