No abstract

Background At interim analysis in a phase 3, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial, the mRNA-1273 vaccine showed 94.1% efficacy in preventing coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). After emergency use of the vaccine was authorized, the protocol was amended to include an open-label phase. Final analyses of efficacy and safety data from the blinded phase of the trial are reported. Methods We enrolled volunteers who were at high risk for Covid-19 or its complications; participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive two intramuscular injections of mRNA-1273 (100 μg) or placebo, 28 days apart, at 99 centers across the United States. The primary end point was prevention of Covid-19 illness with onset at least 14 days after the second injection in participants who had not previously been infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The data cutoff date was March 26, 2021. Results The trial enrolled 30,415 participants; 15,209 were assigned to receive the mRNA-1273 vaccine, and 15,206 to receive placebo. More than 96% of participants received both injections, 2.3% had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline, and the median follow-up was 5.3 months in the blinded phase. Vaccine efficacy in preventing Covid-19 illness was 93.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.0 to 94.8), with 55 confirmed cases in the mRNA-1273 group (9.6 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 7.2 to 12.5) and 744 in the placebo group (136.6 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 127.0 to 146.8). The efficacy in preventing severe disease was 98.2% (95% CI, 92.8 to 99.6), with 2 cases in the mRNA-1273 group and 106 in the placebo group, and the efficacy in preventing asymptomatic infection starting 14 days after the second injection was 63.0% (95% CI, 56.6 to 68.5), with 214 cases in the mRNA-1273 group and 498 in the placebo group. Vaccine efficacy was consistent across ethnic and racial groups, age groups, and participants with coexisting conditions. No safety concerns were identified. Conclusions The mRNA-1273 vaccine continued to be efficacious in preventing Covid-19 illness and severe disease at more than 5 months, with an acceptable safety profile, and protection against asymptomatic infection was observed. (Funded by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; COVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04470427 .)

Objectives This study evaluated the effects of three class-sparing antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens on endothelial function in HIV-infected subjects participating in a randomized trial. Background Endothelial dysfunction has been observed in patients receiving ART for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Methods This was a prospective, multicenter study of treatment-naïve subjects who were randomly assigned to receive a protease inhibitor-sparing regimen of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) + efavirenz, a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing regimen of NRTIs + lopinavir/ritonavir, or a NRTI-sparing regimen of efavirenz + lopinavir/ritonavir. NRTIs were lamivudine + stavudine, zidovudine, or tenofovir. Brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD) was determined by B-mode ultrasound before starting on ART, then after 4 and 24 weeks. Results There were 82 subjects (median age 35 years, 91% men, 54% white). Baseline CD4 cell counts and plasma HIV RNA values were 245 cells/mm3 and 4.8 log10 copies/ml, respectively. At baseline, FMD was 3.68% (interquartile range 1.98 – 5.51%). After 4 and 24 weeks of ART, plasma HIV RNA decreased by 2.1 and 3.0 log10 copies/mL, respectively. FMD increased by 0.74% (−0.62 – +2.74, p=0.003) and 1.48% (−0.20 – +4.30%, p< 0.001), respectively, with similar changes in each arm (pKW>0.600). The decrease in plasma HIV RNA at 24 weeks was associated with greater FMD (rs=− 0.30, p=0.017). Conclusions Among treatment-naïve individuals with HIV, three different ART regimens rapidly improved endothelial function. Benefits were similar for all ART regimens, appeared quickly, and persisted at 24 weeks. Condensed Abstract Among 82 treatment-naïve HIV-infected subjects participating in a prospective, multicenter study of three class-sparing antiretroviral therapy regimens, flow-mediated dilation of the brachial artery improved after 4 (+0.74%, p=0.003) and 24 weeks (+1.48%, p< 0.001), with similar changes in each arm (pKW>0.600).

Background Non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase (NNRTI) inhibitor-based antiretroviral therapy is not suitable for all treatment-naïve HIV-infected persons. Objective Perform a rigorous evaluation of three NNRTI-sparing initial antiretroviral regimens to demonstrate equivalence for virologic efficacy and tolerability. Design Phase-III, 1:1:1 randomized, open label, >96 week study. Setting Fifty-seven sites in United States and Puerto Rico. Patients Treatment naïve, ≥18 years, HIV-1 RNA >1000 copies/mL, no nucleoside reverse transcriptase or protease inhibitor resistance. Intervention Atazanavir 300 mg with ritonavir 100 mg, daily; or raltegravir 400 mg twice daily; or darunavir 800 mg with ritonavir 100 mg, daily; plus emtricitabine 200 mg + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg daily. Measurements Virologic failure defined as confirmed HIV-1 RNA >1000 copies/mL between 16 and 24 weeks, or >200 copies/mL at or after 24 weeks; tolerability failure defined as discontinuation of atazanavir, raltegravir or darunavir for toxicity. A secondary endpoint was a combination of virologic efficacy and tolerability. Results Among 1,809 participants all pairwise comparisons of incidence of virologic failure over 96-weeks demonstrated equivalence within ±10%. Raltegravir and ritonavir-boosted darunavir were equivalent for tolerability, whereas ritonavir-boosted atazanavir resulted in a 12.7% and a 9.2% higher incidence of tolerability discontinuation than raltegravir and ritonavir-boosted darunavir respectively, primarily due to hyperbilirubinemia. For combined virologic efficacy and tolerability ritonavir-boosted darunavir was superior to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir, and raltegravir was superior to both protease inhibitors. Antiretroviral resistance at time of virologic failure was rare but more likely with raltegravir. Limitations Open label; ritonavir not provided Conclusions Over 2 years all three regimens attain high and equivalent rates of virologic control. Regimens containing raltegravir or ritonavir-boosted darunavir have superior tolerability compared to the ritonavir-boosted atazanavir regimen. Primary Funding Source National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases