Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health.

Background: Western (WEEV), eastern (EEEV), and Venezuelan (VEEV) equine encephalitis viruses are mosquito-borne pathogens classified as potential biological warfare agents for which there are currently no approved human vaccines or therapies. We aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of an investigational trivalent virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine, western, eastern, and Venezuelan equine encephalitis (WEVEE) VLP, composed of WEEV, EEEV, and VEEV VLPs. Methods: The WEVEE VLP vaccine was evaluated in a phase 1, randomised, open-label, dose-escalation trial at the Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center at Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. Eligible participants were healthy adults aged 18–50 years with no previous vaccination history with an investigational alphavirus vaccine. Participants were assigned to a dose group of 6 μg, 30 μg, or 60 μg vaccine product and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive the WEVEE VLP vaccine with or without aluminium hydroxide suspension (alum) adjuvant by intramuscular injection at study day 0 and at week 8. The primary outcomes were the safety and tolerability of the vaccine (assessed in all participants who received at least one administration of study product) and the secondary outcome was immune response measured as neutralising titres by plaque reduction neutralisation test (PRNT) 4 weeks after the second vaccination. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03879603. Findings: Between April 2, 2019, and June 13, 2019, 30 trial participants were enrolled (mean age 32 years, range 21–48; 16 [53%] female participants and 14 [47%] male participants). Six groups of five participants each received 6 μg, 30 μg, or 60 μg vaccine doses with or without adjuvant, and all 30 participants completed study follow-up. Vaccinations were safe and well tolerated. The most frequently reported symptoms were mild injection-site pain and tenderness (22 [73%] of 30) and malaise (15 [50%] of 30). Dose-dependent differences in the frequency of pain and tenderness were found between the 6 μg, 30 μg, and 60 μg groups (p=0·0217). No significant differences were observed between dosing groups for any other reactogenicity symptom. Two adverse events (mild elevated blood pressure and moderate asymptomatic neutropenia) were assessed as possibly related to the study product in one trial participant (60 μg dose with alum); both resolved without clinical sequelae. 4 weeks after second vaccine administration, neutralising antibodies were induced in all study groups with the highest response seen against all three vaccine antigens in the 30 μg plus alum group (PRNT80 geometric mean titre for EEEV 60·8, 95% CI 29·9–124·0; for VEEV 111·5, 49·8–249·8; and for WEEV 187·9, 90·0–392·2). Finally, 4 weeks after second vaccine administration, for all doses, the majority of trial participants developed an immune response to all three vaccine components (24 [83%] of 29 for EEEV; 26 [90%] of 29 for VEEV; 27 [93%] of 29 for WEEV; and 22 [76%] of 29 for EEEV, VEEV, and WEEV combined). Interpretation: The favourable safety profile and neutralising antibody responses, along with pressing public health need, support further evaluation of the WEVEE VLP vaccine in advanced-phase clinical trials.

Background: The Zika virus epidemic and associated congenital infections have prompted rapid vaccine development. We assessed two new DNA vaccines expressing premembrane and envelope Zika virus structural proteins. Methods: We did two phase 1, randomised, open-label trials involving healthy adult volunteers. The VRC 319 trial, done in three centres, assessed plasmid VRC5288 (Zika virus and Japanese encephalitis virus chimera), and the VRC 320, done in one centre, assessed plasmid VRC5283 (wild-type Zika virus). Eligible participants were aged 18–35 years in VRC19 and 18–50 years in VRC 320. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 by a computer-generated randomisation schedule prepared by the study statistician. All participants received intramuscular injection of 4 mg vaccine. In VRC 319 participants were assigned to receive vaccinations via needle and syringe at 0 and 8 weeks, 0 and 12 weeks, 0, 4, and 8 weeks, or 0, 4, and 20 weeks. In VRC 320 participants were assigned to receive vaccinations at 0, 4, and 8 weeks via single-dose needle and syringe injection in one deltoid or split-dose needle and syringe or needle-free injection with the Stratis device (Pharmajet, Golden, CO, USA) in each deltoid. Both trials followed up volunteers for 24 months for the primary endpoint of safety, assessed as local and systemic reactogenicity in the 7 days after each vaccination and all adverse events in the 28 days after each vaccination. The secondary endpoint in both trials was immunogenicity 4 weeks after last vaccination. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02840487 and NCT02996461. Findings: VRC 319 enrolled 80 participants (20 in each group), and VRC 320 enrolled 45 participants (15 in each group). One participant in VRC 319 and two in VRC 320 withdrew after one dose of vaccine, but were included in the safety analyses. Both vaccines were safe and well tolerated. All local and systemic symptoms were mild to moderate. In both studies, pain and tenderness at the injection site was the most frequent local symptoms (37 [46%] of 80 participants in VRC 319 and 36 [80%] of 45 in VRC 320) and malaise and headache were the most frequent systemic symptoms (22 [27%] and 18 [22%], respectively, in VRC 319 and 17 [38%] and 15 [33%], respectively, in VRC 320). For VRC5283, 14 of 14 (100%) participants who received split-dose vaccinations by needle-free injection had detectable positive antibody responses, and the geometric mean titre of 304 was the highest across all groups in both trials. Interpretation: VRC5283 was well tolerated and has advanced to phase 2 efficacy testing.

CD8 T cells are a potent tool for eliminating intracellular pathogens and tumor cells. Thus, eliciting robust CD8 T-cell immunity is the basis for many vaccines under development. However, the relationship between antigen load and the magnitude of the CD8 T-cell response is not well-described in a human immune response. Here we address this issue by quantifying viral load and the CD8 T-cell response in a cohort of 80 individuals immunized with the live attenuated yellow fever vaccine (YFV-17D) by sampling peripheral blood at days 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 30, and 90. When the virus load was below a threshold (peak virus load < 225 genomes per mL, or integrated virus load < 400 genome days per mL), the magnitude of the CD8 T-cell response correlated strongly with the virus load (R2 ∼ 0.63). As the virus load increased above this threshold, the magnitude of the CD8 T-cell responses saturated. Recent advances in CD8 T-cell-based vaccines have focused on replication-incompetent or single-cycle vectors. However, these approaches deliver relatively limited amounts of antigen after immunization. Our results highlight the requirement that T-cell-based vaccines should deliver sufficient antigen during the initial period of the immune response to elicit a large number of CD8 T cells that may be needed for protection.

Zika virus (ZIKV) is an emerging mosquito-borne flavivirus of significant public health concern. ZIKV shares a high degree of sequence and structural homology compared with other flaviviruses, including dengue virus (DENV), resulting in immunological cross-reactivity. Improving our current understanding of the extent and characteristics of this immunological cross-reactivity is important, as ZIKV is presently circulating in areas that are highly endemic for dengue. To assess the magnitude and functional quality of cross-reactive immune responses between these closely related viruses, we tested acute and convalescent sera from nine Thai patients with PCR-confirmed DENV infection against ZIKV. All of the sera tested were cross-reactive with ZIKV, both in binding and in neutralization. To deconstruct the observed serum cross-reactivity in depth, we also characterized a panel of DENV-specific plasmablast-derived monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for activity against ZIKV. Nearly half of the 47 DENV-reactive mAbs studied bound to both whole ZIKV virion and ZIKV lysate, of which a subset also neutralized ZIKV. In addition, both sera and mAbs from the dengue-infected patients enhanced ZIKV infection of Fc gamma receptor (FcγR)-bearing cells in vitro. Taken together, these findings suggest that preexisting immunity to DENV may impact protective immune responses against ZIKV. In addition, the extensive cross-reactivity may have implications for ZIKV virulence and disease severity in DENV-experienced populations.

Since 2011, over 300 human cases of infection, especially in exposed children, with the influenza A H3N2 variant (H3N2v) virus that circulates in swine in the US have been reported. The structural and genetic basis for the lack of protection against H3N2v induced by vaccines containing seasonal H3N2 antigens is poorly understood. We isolated 17 human monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that neutralized H3N2v virus from subjects experimentally immunized with an H3N2v candidate vaccine. Six mAbs exhibited very potent neutralizing activity (IC50 < 200 ng/ml) against the H3N2v virus but not against current human H3N2 circulating strains. Fine epitope mapping and structural characterization of antigen-antibody complexes revealed that H3N2v specificity was attributable to amino acid polymorphisms in the 150-loop and the 190-helix antigenic sites on the hemagglutinin protein. H3N2v-specific antibodies also neutralized human H3N2 influenza strains naturally circulating between 1995 and 2005. These results reveal a high level of antigenic relatedness between the swine H3N2v virus and previously circulating human strains, consistent with the fact that early human H3 seasonal strains entered the porcine population in the 1990s and reentered the human population, where they had not been circulating, as H3N2v about a decade later. The data also explain the increased susceptibility to H3N2v viruses in young children, who lack prior exposure to human seasonal strains from the 1990s.

Human papillomavirus virus (HPV) vaccines aim to provide durable protection and are ideal to study the association of cellular with humoral responses. We assessed the duration and characteristics of immune responses provided by the quadrivalent HPV (4vHPV) vaccine in healthy female adults with or without prior exposure with type 16 and 18 HPV. In a prospective cohort, vaccine naïve females received three doses of 4vHPV vaccine and were followed for two years to assess cellular (intracellular cytokine staining, proliferation and B cell ELISpot assays) and humoral (multiplex L1/L2 viral-like particles (VLP) and M4 ELISAs) responses. Frequencies of vaccine-specific CD4+ T cells correlated with antibody responses. Higher HPV antibody titers were found at all time points in participants previously exposed to HPV, except for anti-HPV-18 at Day 187 (one week post the third vaccination). Retrospective cohorts enrolled females who had previously received two or three 4vHPV doses and tested antibody titers by M4 ELISA and pseudovirion neutralization assay along with memory B cells (MBCs). Almost all women enrolled in a retrospective cohort with two prior doses and all women enrolled in a retrospective cohort with three prior doses had sustained antibody and memory responses. Our findings indicate that HPV vaccination induces a long-lasting, robust cellular and humoral immune responses.

Background: Anti-HIV-1 broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) have been developed as potential agents for prevention of HIV-1 infection. The HIV Vaccine Trials Network and the HIV Prevention Trials Network are conducting the Antibody Mediated Prevention (AMP) trials to assess whether, and how, intravenous infusion of the anti-CD4 binding site bnAb, VRC01, prevents HIV-1 infection. These are the first test-of-concept studies to assess HIV-1 bnAb prevention efficacy in humans. Methods: The AMP trials are two parallel phase 2b HIV-1 prevention efficacy trials conducted in two cohorts: 2700 HIV-uninfected men and transgender persons who have sex with men in the United States, Peru, Brazil, and Switzerland; and 1500 HIV-uninfected sexually active women in seven countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Participants are randomized 1:1:1 to receive an intravenous infusion of 10 mg/kg VRC01, 30 mg/kg VRC01, or a control preparation every 8 weeks for a total of 10 infusions. Each trial is designed (1) to assess overall prevention efficacy (PE) pooled over the two VRC01 dose groups vs. control and (2) to assess VRC01 dose and laboratory markers as correlates of protection (CoPs) against overall and genotype- and phenotype-specific infection. Results: Each AMP trial is designed to have 90% power to detect PE > 0% if PE is ≥ 60%. The AMP trials are also designed to identify VRC01 properties (i.e., concentration and effector functions) that correlate with protection and to provide insight into mechanistic CoPs. CoPs are assessed using data from breakthrough HIV-1 infections, including genetic sequences and sensitivities to VRC01-mediated neutralization and Fc effector functions. Conclusions: The AMP trials test whether VRC01 can prevent HIV-1 infection in two study populations. If affirmative, they will provide information for estimating the optimal dosage of VRC01 (or subsequent derivatives) and identify threshold levels of neutralization and Fc effector functions associated with high-level protection, setting a benchmark for future vaccine evaluation and constituting a bridge to other bnAb approaches for HIV-1 prevention.

Background Bioinformatically designed mosaic antigens increase the breadth of HIV vaccine-elicited immunity. This study compared the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a newly developed, tetravalent Ad26 vaccine with the previously tested trivalent formulation. Methods This randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 1/2a study (TRAVERSE) was done at 11 centres in the USA and one centre in Rwanda. Eligible participants were adults aged 18 to 50 years, who were HIV-uninfected, healthy at screening based on their medical history and a physical examination including laboratory assessment and vital sign measurements, and at low risk of HIV infection in the opinion of study staff, who applied a uniform definition of low-risk guidelines that was aligned across sites. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio to tetravalent and trivalent groups. Participants in tetravalent and trivalent groups were then further randomly assigned at a 5:1 ratio to adenovirus 26 (Ad26)-vectored vaccine and placebo subgroups. Randomisation was stratified by region (USA and Rwanda) and based on a computer-generated schedule using randomly permuted blocks prepared under the sponsor's supervision. We masked participants and investigators to treatment allocation throughout the study. On day 0, participants received a first injection of tetravalent vaccine (Ad26.Mos4.HIV or placebo) or trivalent vaccine (Ad26.Mos.HIV or placebo), and those injections were repeated 12 weeks later. At week 24, vaccine groups received a third dose of tetravalent or trivalent together with clade C gp140, and this was repeated at week 48, with placebos again administered to the placebo group. All study vaccines and placebo were administered by intramuscular injection in the deltoid muscle. We assessed adverse events in all participants who received at least one study injection (full analysis set) and Env-specific binding antibodies in all participants who received at least the first three vaccinations according to the protocol-specified vaccination schedule, had at least one measured post-dose blood sample collected, and were not diagnosed with HIV during the study (per-protocol set). This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02788045. Findings Of 201 participants who were enrolled and randomly assigned, 198 received the first vaccination: 110 were in the tetravalent group, 55 in the trivalent group, and 33 in the placebo group. Overall, 185 (93%) completed two scheduled vaccinations per protocol, 180 (91%) completed three, and 164 (83%) completed four. Solicited, self-limiting local, systemic reactogenicity and unsolicited adverse events were similar in vaccine groups and higher than in placebo groups. All participants in the per-protocol set developed clade C Env binding antibodies after the second vaccination, with higher total IgG titres after the tetravalent vaccine than after the trivalent vaccine (10 413 EU/mL, 95% CI 7284–14 886 in the tetravalent group compared with 5494 EU/mL, 3759–8029 in the trivalent group). Titres further increased after the third and fourth vaccinations, persisting at least through week 72. Other immune responses were also higher with the tetravalent vaccine, including the magnitude and breadth of binding antibodies against a cross-clade panel of Env antigens, and the magnitude of IFNγ ELISPOT responses (median 521 SFU/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells [PBMCs] in the tetravalent group and median 282 SFU/106 PBMCs in the trivalent group after the fourth vaccination) and Env-specific CD4+ T-cell response rates after the third and fourth vaccinations. No interference by pre-existing Ad26 immunity was identified. Interpretation The tetravalent vaccine regimen was generally safe, well-tolerated, and found to elicit higher immune responses than the trivalent regimen. Regimens that use this tetravalent vaccine component are being advanced into field trials to assess efficacy against HIV-1 infection.

Background Tularemia is caused by Francisella tularensis, a gram-negative bacterium that has been weaponized as an aerosol. For protection of personnel conducting biodefense research, the United States Army required clinical evaluation of a new lot of tularemia live vaccine strain manufactured in accordance with Current Good Manufacturing Practices. Methods A phase 2 randomized clinical trial compared the new lot (DVC-LVS) to the existing vaccine that has been in use for decades (USAMRIID-LVS). The vaccines were delivered by scarification to 228 participants. Safety, reactogenicity, take and/or antibody levels were assessed on days 0, 1, 2, 8, 14, 28, 56, and 180. Principal Results Both vaccines were safe and had acceptable reactogenicity profiles during six months of follow-up. There were no serious or grade 3 and 4 laboratory adverse events. Moderate systemic reactogenicity (mostly headache or feeling tired) was reported by ∼23% of participants receiving either vaccine. Injection site reactogenicity was mostly mild itchiness and pain. The frequencies of vaccine take skin reactions were 73% (95% CI, 64, 81) for DVC-LVS and 80% (95% CI, 71, 87) for USAMRIID-LVS. The 90% CI for the difference in proportions was −6.9% (−16.4, 2.6). The rates of seroconversion measured by microagglutination assay on days 28 or 56 were 94% (95% CI, 88, 98; n = 98/104) for DVC-LVS and 94% (95% CI, 87, 97; n = 103/110) for USAMRIID-LVS (p = 1.00). Day 14 sera revealed more rapid seroconversion for DVC-LVS relative to USAMRIID-LVS: 82% (95% CI, 73, 89) versus 55% (95% CI, 45, 65), respectively (p < 0.0001). Major conclusions The DVC-LVS vaccine had similar safety, reactogenicity, take and antibody responses compared to the older USAMRIID vaccine, and was superior for early (day 14) antibody production. Vaccination take was not a sensitive surrogate for seroconversion in a multi-center study where personnel at five research clinics performed assessments. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01150695