Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) is an important emerging virus that is highly pathogenic in aged populations and is maintained with great diversity in zoonotic reservoirs. While a variety of vaccine platforms have shown efficacy in young-animal models and against homologous viral strains, vaccine efficacy has not been thoroughly evaluated using highly pathogenic variants that replicate the acute end stage lung disease phenotypes seen during the human epidemic. Using an adjuvanted and an unadjuvanted doubleinactivated SARS-CoV (DIV) vaccine, we demonstrate an eosinophilic immunopathology in aged mice comparable to that seen in mice immunized with the SARS nucleocapsid protein, and poor protection against a nonlethal heterologous challenge. In young and 1-year-old animals, we demonstrate that adjuvanted DIV vaccine provides protection against lethal disease in young animals following homologous and heterologous challenge, although enhanced immune pathology and eosinophilia are evident following heterologous challenge. In the absence of alum, DIV vaccine performed poorly in young animals challenged with lethal homologous or heterologous strains. In contrast, DIV vaccines (both adjuvanted and unadjuvanted) performed poorly in aged-animal models. Importantly, aged animals displayed increased eosinophilic immune pathology in the lungs and were not protected against significant virus replication. These data raise significant concerns regarding DIV vaccine safety and highlight the need for additional studies of the molecular mechanisms governing DIV-induced eosinophilia and vaccine failure, especially in the more vulnerable aged-animal models of human disease.

Background Although the three vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) that have received emergency use authorization in the United States are highly effective, breakthrough infections are occurring. Data are needed on the serial use of homologous boosters (same as the primary vaccine) and heterologous boosters (different from the primary vaccine) in fully vaccinated recipients. Methods In this phase 1–2, open-label clinical trial conducted at 10 sites in the United States, adults who had completed a Covid-19 vaccine regimen at least 12 weeks earlier and had no reported history of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection received a booster injection with one of three vaccines: mRNA-1273 (Moderna) at a dose of 100 μg, Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson–Janssen) at a dose of 5×10 10 virus particles, or BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) at a dose of 30 μg. The primary end points were safety, reactogenicity, and humoral immunogenicity on trial days 15 and 29. Results Of the 458 participants who were enrolled in the trial, 154 received mRNA-1273, 150 received Ad26.COV2.S, and 153 received BNT162b2 as booster vaccines; 1 participant did not receive the assigned vaccine. Reactogenicity was similar to that reported for the primary series. More than half the recipients reported having injection-site pain, malaise, headache, or myalgia. For all combinations, antibody neutralizing titers against a SARS-CoV-2 D614G pseudovirus increased by a factor of 4 to 73, and binding titers increased by a factor of 5 to 55. Homologous boosters increased neutralizing antibody titers by a factor of 4 to 20, whereas heterologous boosters increased titers by a factor of 6 to 73. Spike-specific T-cell responses increased in all but the homologous Ad26.COV2.S-boosted subgroup. CD8+ T-cell levels were more durable in the Ad26.COV2.S-primed recipients, and heterologous boosting with the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine substantially increased spike-specific CD8+ T cells in the mRNA vaccine recipients. Conclusions Homologous and heterologous booster vaccines had an acceptable safety profile and were immunogenic in adults who had completed a primary Covid-19 vaccine regimen at least 12 weeks earlier. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; DMID 21-0012 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04889209 .)

Clinical trials have ruled out a role of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19, but it has been hypothesized that hydroxychloroquine's activity against SARS-CoV-2 in the laboratory suggests a role in prevention. This randomized controlled trial tests hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike (S) glycoprotein of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) is a major target of protective immunity in vivo. Although a large number of neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) have been developed, it remains unclear if a single RBD-targeting nAb or two in combination can prevent neutralization escape and, if not, attenuate viral virulence in vivo. In this study, we used a large panel of human nAbs against an epitope that overlaps the interface between the RBD and its receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), to assess their cross-neutralization activities against a panel of human and zoonotic SARS-CoVs and neutralization escape mutants. We also investigated the neutralization escape profiles of these nAbs and evaluated their effects on receptor binding and virus fitness in vitro and in mice. We found that some nAbs had great potency and breadth in neutralizing multiple viral strains, including neutralization escape viruses derived from other nAbs; however, no single nAb or combination of two blocked neutralization escape. Interestingly, in mice the neutralization escape mutant viruses showed either attenuation (Urbani background) or increased virulence (GD03 background) consistent with the different binding affinities between their RBDs and the mouse ACE2. We conclude that using either single nAbs or dual nAb combinations to target a SARS-CoV RBD epitope that shows plasticity may have limitations for preventing neutralization escape during in vivo immunotherapy. However, RBD-directed nAbs may be useful for providing broad neutralization and prevention of escape variants when combined with other nAbs that target a second conserved epitope with less plasticity and more structural constraint. IMPORTANCEThe emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in 2002 and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in 2012 has resulted in severe human respiratory disease with high death rates. Their zoonotic origins highlight the likelihood of reemergence or further evolution into novel human coronavirus pathogens. Broadly neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) that prevent infection of related viruses represent an important immunostrategy for combating coronavirus infections; however, for this strategy to succeed, it is essential to uncover nAb-mediated escape pathways and to pioneer strategies that prevent escape. Here, we used SARS-CoV as a research model and examined the escape pathways of broad nAbs that target the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the virus. We found that neither single nAbs nor two nAbs in combination blocked escape. Our results suggest that targeting conserved regions with less plasticity and more structural constraint rather than the SARS-CoV RBD-like region(s) should have broader utility for antibody-based immunotherapy.

No abstract