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...

Background:Reports of posttreatment control following antiretroviral therapy (ART) have prompted the question of how common immune control of HIV infection is in the absence of ART. In contrast to adult infection, where elite controllers have been very well characterized and constitute approximately 0.5% of infections, very few data exist to address this question in paediatric infection.Methods:We describe 11 ART-naive elite controllers from 10 cohorts of HIV-infected children being followed in South Africa, Brazil, Thailand, and Europe.Results:All but one of the elite controllers (91%) are females. The median age at which control of viraemia was achieved was 6.5 years. Five of these 11 (46%) children lost control of viraemia at a median age of 12.9 years. Children who maintained control of viraemia had significantly higher absolute CD4+ cell counts in the period of elite control than those who lost viraemic control. On the basis of data available from these cohorts, the prevalence of elite controllers in paediatric infection is estimated to be 5–10-fold lower than in adults.Conclusion:Although conclusions are limited by the study design, these data suggest that, whilst paediatric elite control can be achieved, compared with adult elite controllers, this occurs rarely, and takes some years after infection to achieve. Also, loss of immune control arises in a high proportion of children and often relatively rapidly. These findings are consistent with the more potent antiviral immune responses observed in adults and in females.

Objectives To evaluate the proportion of children with lopinavir Cmin ≥1 mg/L when receiving a novel 8-hourly lopinavir/ritonavir dosing strategy during rifampicin co-treatment. Methods HIV-infected children on lopinavir/ritonavir and rifampicin were enrolled in a prospective pharmacokinetic study. Children were switched from standard-of-care lopinavir/ritonavir-4:1 with additional ritonavir (1:1 ratio) twice daily to 8-hourly lopinavir/ritonavir-4:1 using weight-banded dosing. Rifampicin was dosed at 10–20 mg/kg/day. After 2 weeks, plasma samples were collected ∼2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 h after the morning lopinavir/ritonavir-4:1 dose, ALT was obtained to assess safety and treatment was switched back to standard of care. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT01637558. Results We recruited 11 children in two weight bands: 5 (45%) were 10–13.9 kg and received 20–24 mg/kg/dose of lopinavir and 6 (55%) children weighed 6–9.9 kg and received 20–23 mg/kg/dose of lopinavir. The median age was 15 months (IQR = 12.6–28.8 months). The median (IQR) lopinavir Cmin was 3.0 (0.1–5.5) mg/L. Seven (63.6%) of the 11 children had Cmin values ≥1 mg/L. Children with a lopinavir mg/kg dose below the median 21.5 were more likely to have Cmin <1 mg/L (P = 0.02). There was a strong positive correlation between lopinavir and ritonavir concentrations. No associations were found between lopinavir AUC2–10 and age, sex, weight, nutritional status or mg/kg/dose of lopinavir. Conclusions These data do not support the use of 8-hourly lopinavir/ritonavir at studied doses. Evaluation of higher doses is needed to optimize treatment outcomes of TB and HIV in young children.

Objectives: Early infant HIV diagnosis and antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation are now implemented shortly after birth. Maintaining and monitoring ART adherence is difficult and requires frequent visits. We, therefore, investigated whether HIV antibodies and HIV-1 DNA levels are markers of cumulative viremia.Design: We conducted a cross sectional investigation at 2 years of age of HIV antibodies and HIV-1 DNA levels in a well characterized cohort of 31 children who started ART shortly after birth.Methods: HIV antibodies were measured by a combination of the Abbott ARCHITECT HIV Ag/Ab Combo and Geenius HIV 1/2 supplemental assays; and total HIV-1 DNA quantified using a sensitive quantitative PCR (qPCR) assay targeting the HIV-1 integrase gene.Results: Infant post-exposure prophylaxis consisted of zidovudine (AZT) and nevirapine (NPV) (or NVP only, in one child) within 1 day of birth, transitioning, after positive diagnosis, to three-drug ART, at a median [interquartile range (IQR)] of 7 (4-9.5) days. Twelve of 31 children had well suppressed HIV plasma viral loads (HIVVL) and the remainder periods of viremia (HIVVL > 100 copies/ml after 3 months of ART), classified as non-suppressed. At 24 months of age: 11 of 12 (92%) of well suppressed children had undetectable HIV-1 antibodies versus 3 of 19 (16%) non-suppressed children (P < 0.001) and 7 of 12 (58%) well suppressed children had undetectable HIV-1 DNA versus 3 of 19 (16%) non-suppressed children (P ¼ 0.02). Conclusion:Considering low assay costs and the high proportion of well suppressed children with undetected antibody levels at 2 years, HIV antibody levels may be a valuable marker of cumulative adherence in children who start treatment shortly after birth and could prompt adherence and viral load investigation.