Summary Background We used the RNActive® technology platform (CureVac N.V., Tübingen, Germany) to prepare CVnCoV, a COVID-19 vaccine containing sequence-optimized mRNA coding for a stabilized form of SARS-CoV‑2 spike (S) protein encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles (LNP). Methods This is an interim analysis of a dosage escalation phase 1 study in healthy 18–60-year-old volunteers in Hannover, Munich and Tübingen, Germany, and Ghent, Belgium. After giving 2 intramuscular doses of CVnCoV or placebo 28 days apart we assessed solicited local and systemic adverse events (AE) for 7 days and unsolicited AEs for 28 days after each vaccination. Immunogenicity was measured as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV‑2 S‑protein and receptor binding domain (RBD), and SARS-CoV‑2 neutralizing titers (MN50). Results In 245 volunteers who received 2 CVnCoV vaccinations (2 μg, n = 47, 4 μg, n = 48, 6 μg, n = 46, 8 μg, n = 44, 12 μg, n = 28) or placebo (n = 32) there were no vaccine-related serious AEs. Dosage-dependent increases in frequency and severity of solicited systemic AEs, and to a lesser extent local AEs, were mainly mild or moderate and transient in duration. Dosage-dependent increases in IgG antibodies to S‑protein and RBD and MN50 were evident in all groups 2 weeks after the second dose when 100% (23/23) seroconverted to S‑protein or RBD, and 83% (19/23) seroconverted for MN50 in the 12 μg group. Responses to 12 μg were comparable to those observed in convalescent sera from known COVID-19 patients. Conclusion In this study 2 CVnCoV doses were safe, with acceptable reactogenicity and 12 μg dosages elicited levels of immune responses that overlapped those observed in convalescent sera.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose In the wake of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, support in clinical trials by students of human medicine and related disciplines has become of even greater importance than in pre-pandemic times. Documentation in clinical trials adheres to the principles of Good Clinical Practice (GCP), and healthcare professionals involved in the conduct of clinical trials—including students—are obliged to perform documentation in accordance with GCP principles. Unprecedented challenges have arisen with regard to the appropriate training of students as training courses in presence had largely to be suspended due to social-distancing regulations during the heyday of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, novel training formats and self-study training materials for students working in clinical trials are urgently warranted. Methods To overcome this shortcoming and to define a common quality standard, an interdisciplinary, multiprofessional (physicians, study nurses, medical students), and binational (Germany, The Netherlands) expert panel convened and devised the Students’ guide to documentation in clinical trials. Results Following a brief description of the different roles in clinical trials (e.g., sponsor, (principal) investigator, monitor) and an introduction into the principles of GCP, the documentation of adverse events, concomitant medication, medical history, and quality control are comprehensively discussed. The Guide concludes with a trilingual medical dictionary (English, German, Dutch) and with recommendations of pertinent literature for further reading. Conclusion Serving both as textbook for self-training and as (quick-) reference work for the daily routine, the Guide has specifically been designed to complement, but not to replace practical training courses for students. While primarily addressed at students of human medicine and related disciplines, the Guide can also be of high relevance and utility to other healthcare professionals involved in the conduct of clinical trials.