BACKGROUND Preexposure prophylaxis with antiretroviral drugs has been effective in the prevention of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in some trials but not in others. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned 2120 HIV-negative women in Kenya, South Africa, and Tanzania to receive either a combination of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine (TDF–FTC) or placebo once daily. The primary objective was to assess the effectiveness of TDF–FTC in preventing HIV acquisition and to evaluate safety. RESULTS HIV infections occurred in 33 women in the TDF–FTC group (incidence rate, 4.7 per 100 person-years) and in 35 in the placebo group (incidence rate, 5.0 per 100 person-years), for an estimated hazard ratio in the TDF-FTC group of 0.94 (95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 1.52; P = 0.81). The proportions of women with nausea, vomiting, or elevated alanine aminotransferase levels were significantly higher in the TDF–FTC group (P = 0.04, P<0.001, and P = 0.03, respectively). Rates of drug discontinuation because of hepatic or renal abnormalities were higher in the TDF–FTC group (4.7%) than in the placebo group (3.0%, P = 0.051). Less than 40% of the HIV-uninfected women in the TDF–FTC group had evidence of recent pill use at visits that were matched to the HIV-infection window for women with seroconversion. The study was stopped early, on April 18, 2011, because of lack of efficacy. CONCLUSIONS Prophylaxis with TDF–FTC did not significantly reduce the rate of HIV infection and was associated with increased rates of side effects, as compared with placebo. Despite substantial counseling efforts, drug adherence appeared to be low. (Supported by the U.S. Agency for International Development and others; FEM-PrEP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00625404.)

Background Assessment of the safety and efficacy of vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in different populations is essential, as is investigation of the efficacy of the vaccines against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including the B.1.351 (501Y.V2) variant first identified in South Africa. Methods We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial to assess the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) in people not infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in South Africa. Participants 18 to less than 65 years of age were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses of vaccine containing 5×10 10 viral particles or placebo (0.9% sodium chloride solution) 21 to 35 days apart. Serum samples obtained from 25 participants after the second dose were tested by pseudovirus and live-virus neutralization assays against the original D614G virus and the B.1.351 variant. The primary end points were safety and efficacy of the vaccine against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic coronavirus 2019 illness (Covid-19) more than 14 days after the second dose. Results Between June 24 and November 9, 2020, we enrolled 2026 HIV-negative adults (median age, 30 years); 1010 and 1011 participants received at least one dose of placebo or vaccine, respectively. Both the pseudovirus and the live-virus neutralization assays showed greater resistance to the B.1.351 variant in serum samples obtained from vaccine recipients than in samples from placebo recipients. In the primary end-point analysis, mild-to-moderate Covid-19 developed in 23 of 717 placebo recipients (3.2%) and in 19 of 750 vaccine recipients (2.5%), for an efficacy of 21.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], −49.9 to 59.8). Among the 42 participants with Covid-19, 39 cases (92.9%) were caused by the B.1.351 variant; vaccine efficacy against this variant, analyzed as a secondary end point, was 10.4% (95% CI, −76.8 to 54.8). The incidence of serious adverse events was balanced between the vaccine and placebo groups. Conclusions A two-dose regimen of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine did not show protection against mild-to-moderate Covid-19 due to the B.1.351 variant. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04444674 ; Pan African Clinical Trials Registry number, PACTR202006922165132 ).

Background The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4–12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. Methods We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials—one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)—and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 10 10 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 10 10 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). Findings Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more t...

BACKGROUNDResults of an earlier analysis of a trial of the M72/AS01 E candidate vaccine against Mycobacterium tuberculosis showed that in infected adults, the vaccine provided 54.0% protection against active pulmonary tuberculosis disease, without evident safety concerns. We now report the results of the 3-year final analysis of efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity. METHODSFrom August 2014 through November 2015, we enrolled adults 18 to 50 years of age with M. tuberculosis infection (defined by positive results on interferon-γ release assay) without evidence of active tuberculosis disease at centers in Kenya, South Africa, and Zambia. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses of either M72/AS01 E or placebo, administered 1 month apart. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of M72/AS01 E to prevent active pulmonary tuberculosis disease according to the first case definition (bacteriologically confirmed pulmonary tuberculosis not associated with human immunodeficiency virus infection). Participants were followed for 3 years after the second dose. Participants with clinical suspicion of tuberculosis provided sputum samples for polymerase-chain-reaction assay, mycobacterial culture, or both. Humoral and cell-mediated immune responses were evaluated until month 36 in a subgroup of 300 participants. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of M72/AS01 E or placebo. RESULTSA total of 3575 participants underwent randomization, of whom 3573 received at least one dose of M72/AS01 E or placebo, and 3330 received both planned doses. Among the 3289 participants in the according-to-protocol efficacy cohort, 13 of the 1626 participants in the M72/AS01 E group, as compared with 26 of the 1663 participants in the placebo group, had cases of tuberculosis that met the first case definition (incidence, 0.3 vs. 0.6 cases per 100 person-years). The vaccine efficacy at month 36 was 49.7% (90% confidence interval [CI], 12.1 to 71.2; 95% CI, 2.1 to 74.2). Among participants in the M72/AS01 E group, the concentrations of M72-specific antibodies and the frequencies of M72-specific CD4+ T cells increased after the first dose and were sustained throughout the follow-up period. Serious adverse events, potential immune-mediated diseases, and deaths occurred with similar frequencies in the two groups. CONCLUSIONSAmong adults infected with M. tuberculosis, vaccination with M72/AS01 E elicited an immune response and provided protection against progression to pulmonary tuberculosis disease for at least 3 years. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals and Aeras; Clini-calTrials.gov number, NCT01755598.

Background:A tuberculosis vaccine to interrupt transmission is urgently needed. We assessed the safety and efficacy of the candidate tuberculosis vaccine, M72/AS01E, against progression to bacteriologically-confirmed active pulmonary tuberculosis disease in adults with latent Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) infection. Methods:In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial conducted in Kenya, South Africa and Zambia, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-negative adults aged 18-50 years with latent Mtb infection (positive by interferon-gamma release assay) were randomized (1:1) to receive two doses of either M72/AS01E or placebo intramuscularly on days 0 and 30. Clinical suspicion of tuberculosis was confirmed from sputum using a polymerase chain reaction test and/or mycobacterial culture. Results:This paper reports the primary analysis, conducted after a mean follow-up of 2.3 years. 1786 participants received M72/AS01E and 1787 received placebo. In the vaccine group, 10 cases met the primary case definition (bacteriologically-confirmed active pulmonary tuberculosis confirmed prior to treatment, not associated with HIV infection) versus 22 cases in the placebo group (0.3 vs. 0.6 cases per 100 person-years, respectively): vaccine efficacy 54.0% (90% confidence interval 13.9-75.4; 95%CI 2.9-78.2; p=0.04). Solicited and unsolicited adverse events within 7 days post-injection were more frequent among M72/AS01E recipients (91.2%) than placebo recipients (68.9%), the difference attributed mainly to injection site reactions and flu-like symptoms. Serious adverse events, potential immune-mediated diseases and deaths occurred with similar low frequencies between groups. Conclusions:M72/AS01E was associated with a clinically acceptable safety profile and provided 54.0% protection for Mtb-infected adults against active pulmonary tuberculosis disease.