Vaccine candidate tested in monkeys: Global spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to an urgent race to develop a vaccine. Gao et al. report preclinical results of an early vaccine candidate called PiCoVacc, which protected rhesus macaque monkeys against SARS-CoV-2 infection when analyzed in short-term studies. The researchers obtained multiple SARS-CoV-2 strains from 11 hospitalized patients across the world and then chemically inactivated the harmful properties of the virus. Animals were immunized with one of two vaccine doses and then inoculated with SARS-CoV-2. Those that received the lowest dose showed signs of controlling the infection, and those receiving the highest dose appeared more protected and did not have detectable viral loads in the pharynx or lungs at 7 days after infection. The next steps will be testing for safety and efficacy in humans. Science , this issue p. 77

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants and “anatomical escape” characteristics threaten the effectiveness of current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. There is an urgent need to understand the immunological mechanism of broad-spectrum respiratory tract protection to guide broader vaccines development. Here we investigate immune responses induced by an NS1-deleted influenza virus vectored intranasal COVID-19 vaccine (dNS1-RBD) which provides broad-spectrum protection against SARS-CoV-2 variants in hamsters. Intranasal delivery of dNS1-RBD induces innate immunity, trained immunity and tissue-resident memory T cells covering the upper and lower respiratory tract. It restrains the inflammatory response by suppressing early phase viral load post SARS-CoV-2 challenge and attenuating pro-inflammatory cytokine (Il6, Il1b, and Ifng) levels, thereby reducing excess immune-induced tissue injury compared with the control group. By inducing local cellular immunity and trained immunity, intranasal delivery of NS1-deleted influenza virus vectored vaccine represents a broad-spectrum COVID-19 vaccine strategy to reduce disease burden.

BACKGROUND: The top priority for the control of COVID-19 pandemic currently is the development of a vaccine. A phase 2 trial conducted to further evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of a SARS-CoV-2 inactivated vaccine (CoronaVac). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the optimal dose, immunogenicity and safety of the CoronaVac. A total of 600 healthy adults aged 18-59 years were randomly assigned to receive 2 injections of the trial vaccine at a dose of 3 μg/0.5 mL or 6 μg /0.5mL, or placebo on Day 0,14 schedule or Day 0,28 schedule. For safety evaluation, solicited and unsolicited adverse events were collected after each vaccination within 7 days and 28 days, respectively. Blood samples were taken for antibody assay. RESULTS: CoronaVac was well tolerated, and no dose-related safety concerns were observed. Most of the adverse reactions fell in the solicited category and were mild in severity. Pain at injection site was the most frequently reported symptoms. No Grade 3 adverse reaction or vaccine related SAEs were reported. CoronaVac showed good immunogenicity with the lower 3 μg dose eliciting 92.4% seroconversion under Day 0,14 schedule and 97.4% under Day 0,28 schedule. 28 days after two-dose vaccination, the Nab levels of individual schedules range from 23.8 to 65.4 among different dosage and vaccination schedules. CONCLUSIONS: Favorable safety and immunogenicity of CoronaVac was demonstrated on both schedules and both dosages, which support the conduction of phase 3 trial with optimum schedule/dosage per different scenarios.

A pseudovirion-based neutralisation assay (PBNA) has been considered the gold standard for measuring specific antibody responses against human papillomavirus (HPV). However, this assay is labor intensive and therefore very difficult to implement in large-scale studies. Previous studies have evaluated the agreement between virus-like particle (VLP)-based ELISA and PBNA for measuring HPV vaccine-induced antibodies. However, the concordance of these assays to detect antibodies induced by natural infection has not yet been fully elucidated. In this study, the results of an Escherichia coli (E. coli)-expressed VLP-based ELISA were found to be highly concordant with those of a baculovirus-expressed VLP-based ELISA (r = 0.96 and 0.97 for HPV-16 and HPV-18) when detecing HPV vaccine induced antibodies and the concordance was medium (r = 0.68 and 0.68 for HPV-16 and HPV-18) when assessing natural infection induced antibodies. The results of the E. coli expressed VLP-based ELISA correlated well with those of the PBNA when testing 1020 post-vaccination human sera collected at one month after vaccination with the E. coli expressed VLP-based bivalent HPV vaccine (r = 0.83 and 0.81 for HPV-16 and HPV-18). The agreement and correlation were moderate (kappa < 0.3 for both HPV types 16 and 18, r = 0.59 and 0.68 for HPV-16 and HPV-18, respectively) when assessing 1600 serum samples from unvaccinated women of age 18–25 years. In conclusion, the VLP-based ELISA is an acceptable surrogate for the neutralizing antibody assay in measuring vaccine responses. However, the use of the VLP-based ELISA in epidemiological studies should be carefully considered.