PreprintCited by 625SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesAnimal Virus Infections Studies

Preliminary Efficacy of the NVX-CoV2373 Covid-19 Vaccine Against the B.1.351 Variant

Open access
Shinde, Vivek, Bhikha, Sutika, Hoosain, Zaheer, Archary, Moherndran, Bhorat, Qasim, Fairlie, Lee, Lalloo, Umesh, Masilela, Mduduzi S. L. +42 more·2021·New England Journal of Medicine

Preprint — published as 10.1056/nejmoa2103055 · Paper page

Abstract

Background: The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants threatens progress toward control of the Covid-19 pandemic. Evaluation of Covid-19 vaccine efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 variants is urgently needed to inform vaccine development and use. Methods: In this phase 2a/b, multicenter, randomized, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled trial in South Africa, healthy human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-negative adults (18 to 84 years) or medically stable people living with HIV (PLWH) (18 to 84 years) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses, administered 21 days apart, of either NVX-CoV2373 nanoparticle vaccine (5 µg recombinant spike protein with 50 µg Matrix-M1 adjuvant) or placebo. The primary endpoints were safety and vaccine efficacy ≥7 days following the second dose against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic Covid-19 in previously SARS-CoV-2 uninfected participants. Results: A total of 4387 participants were randomized and dosed at least once, 2199 with NVX-CoV2373 and 2188 with placebo. Approximately 30% of participants were seropositive at baseline. Among 2684 baseline seronegative participants (94% HIV-negative; 6% PLWH), there were 15 and 29 predominantly mild to moderate Covid-19 cases in NVX-CoV2373 and placebo recipients, respectively; vaccine efficacy was 49.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.1 to 72.8). Efficacy in HIV-negative participants was 60.1% (95% CI: 19.9 to 80.1), and did not differ by baseline serostatus. Of the primary endpoint cases with available whole genome sequencing, 38 (92.7%) of 41 were the B.1.351 variant. Post-hoc vaccine efficacy against B.1.351 was 51.0% (95% CI: - 0.6 to 76.2) in HIV-negative participants. Among placebo recipients, the incidence of symptomatic Covid-19 was similar in baseline seronegative vs baseline seropositive participants during the first 2 months of follow-up (5.3% vs 5.2%). Preliminary local and systemic reactogenicity were primarily mild to moderate and transient, and higher with NVX-CoV2373; serious adverse events were rare in both groups. Conclusions: The NVX-CoV2373 vaccine was efficacious in preventing Covid-19, which was predominantly mild to moderate and due to the B.1.351 variant, while evidence of prior infection with the presumptive original SARS-CoV-2 did not confer protection against probable B.1.351 disease. (Funded by Novavax, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04533399 )

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/2021.02.25.21252477

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a South Africa vaccine trial, there was no difference in infection rate between seropositive and seronegative placebo participants, 5.2% versus 5.3%, suggesting no protective effect of previous infection.

    “This study found no difference in infection rate between individuals who were seropositive and those who were seronegative (5.2% compared with 5.3%), suggesting that there was no protective effect of previous infection (preprint data, not yet peer reviewed)56.”
  • High transmission of the B.1.351 variant, which has reduced susceptibility to immune sera from patients infected with ancestral strains, may partly explain the South Africa trial findings.

    “However, high levels of transmission of the B.1.351 variant of SARS-CoV-2, which has reduced susceptibility to immune sera from patients infected with ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strains, were occurring at the time of this trial, which may in part explain these findings.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Zou G. A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data Am J Epidemiol 2004;159:7026. Baseline seronegative 44 15/1357 (1.1) (0.6, 1.8) 29/1327 (2.2) (1.5, 3.1) 49.4% ‡ (6.1, 72.8) Baseline seropositive 19 6/500 (1.2) (0.4, 2.6) 13/514 (2.5) (1.4, 4.3) 52.6% (-23.8, 81.8) Regardless of baseline serostatus 63 21/1857 (1.1) (0.7, 1.7) 42/1841 (2.3) (1.6, 3.1) 50.4% (16.6, 70.5) Participants Without HIV Baseline seronegative 38 11/1281 (0.90) (0.43, 1.5) 27/1255 (2.2) (1.4, 3.1) 60.1% (19.9, 80.1) Baseline seropositive 19 6/467 (1.29) (0.47, 2.8) 13/484 (2.7) (1.4, 4.5) 52.2% (-24.8, 81.7) Regardless of baseline serostatus 57 17/1748 (0.97) (0.57, 1.6) 40/1739 (2.3) (1.6, 3.1) 57.7% (25.7, 75.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shinde, V., Bhikha, S., Hoosain, Z., Archary, M., Bhorat, Q., Fairlie, L., Lalloo, U., Masilela, M. S. L., Moodley, D., Hanley, S., Fouche, L., Louw, C., Tameris, M., Singh, N., Goga, A., Dheda, K., Grobbelaar, C., Kruger, G., Carrim-Ganey, N., Baillie, V., de Oliveira, T., Koen, A. L., Lombaard, J. J., Mngqibisa, R., Bhorat, A. E., Benadé, G., Lalloo, N., Pitsi, A., Vollgraaff, P.-L., Luabeya, A., Esmail, A., Petrick, F. G., Jose, A. O., Foulkes, S., Ahmed, K., Thombrayil, A., Fries, L., Cloney-Clark, S., Zhu, M., Bennett, C., Albert, G., Faust, E., Plested, J. S., Robertson, A., Neal, S., Cho, I., Glenn, G. M., Dubovsky, F., Madhi, S. A., & for the 2019nCoV-501 Study Group
Affiliations
  • Novavax (United States) (US)
  • South African Medical Research Council (ZA)
  • University of the Free State (ZA)
  • University of KwaZulu-Natal (ZA)
  • University of the Witwatersrand (ZA)
  • Setshaba Research Centre (ZA)
  • Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (ZA)
  • University of Pretoria (ZA)
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • Clinical Trial Center Maastricht (NL)
Corresponding author
Shinde, Vivek
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2021-03-03
Volume
384
Issue
20
Pages
1899-1909
ISSN
0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3157709232
Cited by
625
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 97 · 2022: 229 · 2021: 221 · 2020: 2
FWCI
47.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • UpSpace Institutional Repository (University of Pretoria) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Pfizer
  • Sanofi
  • Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
  • Novavax
  • Novo Nordisk
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (UM1AI069469)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Virus Infections Studies
Keywords
NVX-CoV2373, COVID-19 vaccines, vaccine efficacy, nanoparticle vaccine, HIV-infected adults, HIV-negative individuals, neutralizing antibodies, CD4+ T cell responses, reactogenicity, South Africa, Omicron variant
MeSH terms
Immunogenicity, Vaccine, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 Vaccines, COVID-19 Serological Testing, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Double-Blind Method, HIV Seropositivity, Humans, Middle Aged, South Africa, HIV Seronegativity, Young Adult, Antibodies, Neutralizing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review