Efficacy and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

The Risk of Allergic Reaction to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines and Recommended Evaluation and Management: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, GRADE Assessment, and International Consensus Approach.

BACKGROUND: The rapid process of research and development and lack of follow-up time post-vaccination aroused great public concern about the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccine candidates. To provide comprehensive overview of the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines by using meta-analysis technique. METHODS: English-language articles and results posted on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PMC, official regulatory websites, and post-authorization safety surveillance data were searched through June 12, 2021. Publications disclosing safety data of COVID-19 candidate vaccines in humans were included. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed to estimate the pooled incidence and the pooled rate ratio (RR) of safety outcomes of COVID-19 vaccines using different platforms. RESULTS: A total of 87 publications with safety data from clinical trials and post-authorization studies of 19 COVID-19 vaccines on 6 different platforms were included. The pooled rates of local and systemic reactions were significantly lower among inactivated vaccines (23.7%, 21.0%), protein subunit vaccines (33.0%, 22.3%), and DNA vaccines (39.5%, 29.3%), compared to RNA vaccines (89.4%, 83.3%), non-replicating vector vaccines (55.9%, 66.3%), and virus-like particle vaccines (100.0%, 78.9%). Solicited injection-site pain was the most common local reactions, and fatigue and headache were the most common systemic reactions. The frequency of vaccine-related serious adverse events was low (< 0.1%) and balanced between treatment groups. Vaccine platforms and age groups of vaccine recipients accounted for much of the heterogeneity in safety profiles between COVID-19 vaccines. Reporting rates of adverse events from post-authorization observational studies were similar to results from clinical trials. Crude reporting rates of adverse events from post-authorization safety monitoring (passive surveillance) were lower than in clinical trials and varied between countries. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence indicates that eligible COVID-19 vaccines have an acceptable short-term safety profile. Additional studies and long-term population-level surveillance are strongly encouraged to further define the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines.

/pdf/evaluation-of-the-safety-profile-of-covid-19-vaccines-a-1gy0laztu4.pdf

Evaluation of the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines: a rapid review.

Coronavirus 19 Disease (COVID-19) originating in the province of Wuhan, China in 2019, is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2), whose infection in humans causes mild or severe clinical manifestations that mainly affect the respiratory system. So far, the COVID-19 has caused more than 2 million deaths worldwide. SARS-CoV-2 contains the Spike (S) glycoprotein on its surface, which is the main target for current vaccine development because antibodies directed against this protein can neutralize the infection. Companies and academic institutions have developed vaccines based on the S glycoprotein, as well as its antigenic domains and epitopes, which have been proven effective in generating neutralizing antibodies. However, the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants could affect the effectiveness of vaccines. Here, we review the different types of vaccines designed and developed against SARS-CoV-2, placing emphasis on whether they are based on the complete S glycoprotein, its antigenic domains such as the receptor-binding domain (RBD) or short epitopes within the S glycoprotein. We also review and discuss the possible effectiveness of these vaccines against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.

/pdf/sars-cov-2-vaccines-based-on-the-spike-glycoprotein-and-h3swic7o71.pdf

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines Based on the Spike Glycoprotein and Implications of New Viral Variants.

Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) in December 2019, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the number of confirmed infections has risen to more than 242 million worldwide, with nearly 5 million deaths. Currently, nine Covid-19 vaccine candidates based on the original Wuhan-Hu-1 strain are at the forefront of vaccine research. All nine had an efficacy over 50% against symptomatic Covid-19 disease: NVX-CoV2373 (∼96%), BNT162b2 (∼95%), mRNA-1273 (∼94%), Sputnik V (∼92%), AZD1222 (∼81%), BBIBP-CorV (∼79%), Covaxin (∼78%), Ad26.CoV.S (∼66%) and CoronaVac (∼51%). However, vaccine efficacy (VE) can be jeopardised by the rapid emergence and spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) that could escape from neutralising antibodies and/or cell-mediated immunity. Rare adverse events have also been reported soon after administration of viral vector and mRNA vaccines. Although many Covid-19 vaccines have been developed, additional effective vaccines are still needed to meet the global demand. Promising Covid-19 vaccines such as WIBP-CorV, AD5-nCOV, ZyCoV-D, CVnCoV, EpiVacCorona and ZF2001 have advanced to clinical studies. This review describes the most relevant mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, discusses VE against VOCs, presents rare adverse events after Covid-19 vaccination and introduces some promising Covid-19 vaccine candidates.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/rmv.2313

Covid-19 vaccines and variants of concern: A review.

Summary Background Although several COVID-19 vaccines have been developed so far, they will not be sufficient to meet the global demand. Development of a wider range of vaccines, with different mechanisms of action, could help control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 globally. We developed a protein subunit vaccine against COVID-19 using a dimeric form of the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein as the antigen. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of this vaccine, ZF2001, and determine the appropriate dose and schedule for an efficacy study. Methods We did two randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 and phase 2 trials. Phase 1 was done at two university hospitals in Chongqing and Beijing, China, and phase 2 was done at the Hunan Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Xiangtan, China. Healthy adults aged 18–59 years, without a history of SARS-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 infection, an RT-PCR-positive test result for SARS-CoV-2, a history of contact with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 cases, and severe allergies to any component of the vaccine were eligible for enrolment. In phase 1, participants were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to receive three doses of the vaccine (25 μg or 50 μg) or placebo intramuscularly, 30 days apart. In phase 2, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1) to receive the vaccine (25 μg or 50 μg) or placebo intramuscularly, 30 days apart, in either a two-dose schedule or a three-dose schedule. Investigators, participants, and the laboratory team were masked to group allocation. For phase 1, the primary outcome was safety, measured by the occurrence of adverse events and serious adverse events. For phase 2, the primary outcome was safety and immunogenicity (the seroconversion rate and the magnitude, in geometric mean titres [GMTs], of SARS-CoV-2-neutralising antibodies). Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat and per-protocol basis. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04445194 and NCT04466085 ) and participant follow-up is ongoing. Findings Between June 22 and July 3, 2020, 50 participants were enrolled into the phase 1 trial and randomly assigned to receive three doses of placebo (n=10), the 25 μg vaccine (n=20), or the 50 μg vaccine (n=20). The mean age of participants was 32·6 (SD 9·4) years. Between July 12 and July 17, 2020, 900 participants were enrolled into the phase 2 trial and randomly assigned to receive two doses of placebo (n=150), 25 μg vaccine (n=150), or 50 μg vaccine (n=150), or three doses of placebo (n=150), 25 μg vaccine (n=150), or 50 μg vaccine (n=150). The mean age of participants was 43·5 (SD 9·2) years. In both phase 1 and phase 2, adverse events reported within 30 days after vaccination were mild or moderate (grade 1 or 2) in most cases (phase 1: six [60%] of ten participants in the placebo group, 14 [70%] of 20 in the 25 μg group, and 18 [90%] of 20 in the 50 μg group; phase 2: 37 [25%] of 150 in the two-dose placebo group, 43 [29%] of 150 in the two-dose 25 μg group, 50 [33%] of 150 in the two-dose 50 μg group, 47 [31%] of 150 in the three-dose placebo group, 72 [48%] of 150 in the three-dose 25 μg group, and 65 [43%] of 150 in the three-dose 50 μg group). In phase 1, two (10%) grade 3 or worse adverse events were reported in the 50 μg group. In phase 2, grade 3 or worse adverse events were reported by 18 participants (four [3%] in the two-dose 25 μg vaccine group, two [1%] in the two-dose 50 μg vaccine group, two [1%] in the three-dose placebo group, four [3%] in the three-dose 25 μg vaccine group, and six [4%] in the three-dose 50 μg vaccine group), and 11 were considered vaccine related (two [1%] in the two-dose 25 μg vaccine group, one [1%] in the two-dose 50 μg vaccine group, one [1%] in the three-dose placebo group, two [1%] in the three-dose 25 μg vaccine group, and five [3%] in the three-dose 50 μg vaccine group); seven participants reported serious adverse events (one [1%] in the two-dose 25 μg vaccine group, one [1%] in the two-dose 50 μg vaccine group, two [1%] in the three-dose placebo group, one [1%] in the three-dose 25 μg vaccine group, and two [1%] in the three-dose 50 μg vaccine group), but none was considered vaccine related. In phase 2, on the two-dose schedule, seroconversion rates of neutralising antibodies 14 days after the second dose were 76% (114 of 150 participants) in the 25 μg group and 72% (108 of 150) in the 50 μg group; on the three-dose schedule, seroconversion rates of neutralising antibodies 14 days after the third dose were 97% (143 of 148 participants) in the 25 μg group and 93% (138 of 148) in the 50 μg group. In the two-dose groups in phase 2, the SARS-CoV-2-neutralising GMTs 14 days after the second dose were 17·7 (95% CI 13·6–23·1) in the 25 μg group and 14·1 (10·8–18·3) in the 50 μg group. In the three-dose groups in phase 2, the SARS-CoV-2-neutralising GMTs 14 days after the third dose were 102·5 (95% CI 81·8–128·5) in the 25 μg group and 69·1 (53·0–90·0) in the 50 μg group. Interpretation The protein subunit vaccine ZF2001 appears to be well tolerated and immunogenic. The safety and immunogenicity data from the phase 1 and 2 trials support the use of the 25 μg dose in a three-dose schedule in an ongoing phase 3 trial for large-scale evaluation of ZF2001's safety and efficacy. Funding National Program on Key Research Project of China, National Science and Technology Major Projects of Drug Discovery, Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and Anhui Zhifei Longcom Biopharmaceutical. Translation For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Safety and immunogenicity of a recombinant tandem-repeat dimeric RBD-based protein subunit vaccine (ZF2001) against COVID-19 in adults: two randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 and 2 trials.

Summary Background A safe and effective coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine is urgently needed to control the ongoing pandemic. Although progress has been made recently with several candidates reporting positive efficacy results, COVID-19 vaccines developed so far cannot meet the global vaccine demand. We developed a protein subunit vaccine against COVID-19, using dimeric form of receptor-binding domain (RBD) as the antigen. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of this vaccine in humans and determine the appropriate dose and schedule for an efficacy study. Methods We did two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 and 2 trials for an RBD-based protein subunit vaccine, ZF2001. In phase 1 study, 50 healthy adults aged 18-59 years were enrolled and randomly allocated to three groups to receive three doses of vaccine (25 μg or 50 μg RBD-dimer, with adjuvant) or placebo (adjuvant-only) intramuscularly, 30 days apart. In phase 2 study, 900 healthy adults aged 18-59 years were enrolled and randomly allocated to six groups to receive vaccine (25 μg or 50 μg RBD-dimer, with adjuvant) or placebo (adjuvant-only) intramuscularly, with the former 3 groups given two doses and the latter 3 groups given three doses, 30 days apart. For phase 1 trial, the primary outcome was safety, as measured by the occurrence of adverse events and serious adverse events. The secondary outcome was immunogenicity as measured by the seroconversion rate and magnitude of antigen-binding antibodies, neutralizing antibodies and T-cell cytokine production. For phase 2 trial, the primary outcome included both safety and immunogenicity. These trials are registered with ClinicaTrials.gov, NCT04445194 and NCT04466085. Findings Between June 22 and September 15, 2020, 50 participants were enrolled to the phase 1 study (mean age 32.6 years) and 900 participants were enrolled to phase 2 study (mean age 43.5 years), to receive vaccine or placebo with a two-dose or three-dose schedule. For both trials, local and systemic adverse reactions were absent or mild in most participants. There were no serious adverse events related to vaccine in either trial. After three doses, neutralizing antibodies were detected in all participants receiving either 25 μg or 50 μg dose of vaccine in phase 1 study, and in 97% (the 25 μg group) and 93% (the 50 μg group) of participants, respectively, in phase 2 study. The SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing geometric mean titres (GMTs) were 94.5 for the 25 μg group and 117.8 for the 50 μg group in phase 1, and 102.5 for the 25 μg group and 69.1 for the 50 μg group in phase 2, exceeding the level of a panel of COVID-19 convalescent samples (GMT, 51). Vaccine induced balanced TH1 and TH2 responses. The 50 μg group did not show enhanced immunogenicity compared with the 25 μg group. Interpretation The protein subunit vaccine ZF2001 is well-tolerated and immunogenic. The safety and immunogenicity data from phase 1 and 2 trials for ZF2001 support the use of 25 μg vaccine dose with three-dose schedule to an ongoing phase 3 large-scale evaluation for safety and efficacy. Funding National Program on Key Research Project of China, National Science and Technology Major Projects of Drug Discovery, Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and Anhui Zhifei Longcom Biopharmaceutical.

/pdf/safety-and-immunogenicity-of-a-recombinant-tandem-repeat-5fivedhcv7.pdf

Safety and immunogenicity of a recombinant tandem-repeat dimeric RBD protein vaccine against COVID-19 in adults: pooled analysis of two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 and 2 trials

Shufang Meng

Papers

Safety and immunogenicity of a recombinant tandem-repeat dimeric RBD-based protein subunit vaccine (ZF2001) against COVID-19 in adults: two randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 and 2 trials.

Safety and immunogenicity of a recombinant tandem-repeat dimeric RBD protein vaccine against COVID-19 in adults: pooled analysis of two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 and 2 trials